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.

 greyknight12 wrote:

 McMagnus Mindbullets wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Awesome, thank you for explaining that. So I just learned that our 6+++ applies to any wounds in the psyker phase, not just psychic wounds. So that is fun.

Interesting.
Are there any ways to take damage that aren't from MW in the psychic phase? Off the top of my head I can't think of any

Only one I can think of is the Grey Knight psychic power that enables a unit to move and shoot in the psychic phase. But the rule explicitly says “mortal wound in the psychic phase”.

I've had quite a few vehicles pop in the psyker phase. Those count. Also, certain armies have shooting that does mortal wounds that can be triggered in the psyker phase. Also if a psyker pops and goes all perils of the warp, that counts.

So did anyone see the buffs/changes to heavy flamers and melee weapons? Power swords are now S+1, and Power fists are now Sx2 AP3 D2. Heavy Flamers are now 12", and Chain fists are now Sx2 AP4 D3

If this goes over to Custodes, I expect Sword and board to be hella good now. Slight nerf to Aquilons, but I'll take it for Primaris munching.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/520309463773872128/742428329726181416/117339812_1673503712814279_2417494953602935008_n.png

Making an assumption that Custodian statlines will change based on Marine changes is quite premature.

Yes, you are right, but signs point to the shields applying, and if they universally apply the SS rules, then is it unreasonable to dream the swords would go that way as well?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, Heavy Flamer is a pretty universal weapon type. Almost every race/faction has one. Just dreaming here, but Telemon with 12" fist flamers?

Aquilon power fists have always been AP-4 while everyone else’s were AP-3. We had more of a chainfist profile.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

Also, Heavy Flamer is a pretty universal weapon type. Almost every race/faction has one. Just dreaming here, but Telemon with 12" fist flamers?

Oh how beautiful that would be.

Some very very interesting changes here. Never thought that they'd change the stats of some of the basic weapons.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So did anyone see the buffs/changes to heavy flamers and melee weapons? Power swords are now S+1, and Power fists are now Sx2 AP3 D2. Heavy Flamers are now 12", and Chain fists are now Sx2 AP4 D3

If this goes over to Custodes, I expect Sword and board to be hella good now. Slight nerf to Aquilons, but I'll take it for Primaris munching.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/520309463773872128/742428329726181416/117339812_1673503712814279_2417494953602935008_n.png

It'll be years before these changes filter to us

What Shield Hosts are everyone taking? Looking through them, there's nothing there I'd particularly want to take over the codex WTs and relics. I've just been going Solar Watch since their Stratagem is free and really bloody strong; in a game where CP and stratagems can make or break a game, a free strat that is basically just -1CP from your opponant per turn is great.

Opinions?

 mrhappyface wrote:
What Shield Hosts are everyone taking? Looking through them, there's nothing there I'd particularly want to take over the codex WTs and relics. I've just been going Solar Watch since their Stratagem is free and really bloody strong; in a game where CP and stratagems can make or break a game, a free strat that is basically just -1CP from your opponant per turn is great.

Opinions?

Shadowkeepers is arguably the strongest, because of the grim responsibility strat. It's a very strong defensive buff on top of the other already very good defensive strats we got in psychic awakening.

I personally like dread host the best, because I like to play a terminator captain with the relic axe. Also the dread host strat is very strong in my opinion especially when you combine it with a dreadnought (telemon) which has been buffed with the eternal penitent strat to give re roll charges. So when said dreadnought comes into play from deepstrike, it can charge with 3d6 drop the lowest dice and reroll those 3d6, which boosts the chance to make the charge from deepstrike considerably.
Dread host is objectively not the most competitive shield host though, because due to the smaller board size in 9th it has become easier to screen deepstriking unit out.

Tiberias wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:
What Shield Hosts are everyone taking? Looking through them, there's nothing there I'd particularly want to take over the codex WTs and relics. I've just been going Solar Watch since their Stratagem is free and really bloody strong; in a game where CP and stratagems can make or break a game, a free strat that is basically just -1CP from your opponant per turn is great.

Opinions?

Shadowkeepers is arguably the strongest, because of the grim responsibility strat. It's a very strong defensive buff on top of the other already very good defensive strats we got in psychic awakening.

I personally like dread host the best, because I like to play a terminator captain with the relic axe. Also the dread host strat is very strong in my opinion especially when you combine it with a dreadnought (telemon) which has been buffed with the eternal penitent strat to give re roll charges. So when said dreadnought comes into play from deepstrike, it can charge with 3d6 drop the lowest dice and reroll those 3d6, which boosts the chance to make the charge from deepstrike considerably.
Dread host is objectively not the most competitive shield host though, because due to the smaller board size in 9th it has become easier to screen deepstriking unit out.

I would disagree. I would say Dread Host and Shadowkeepr are about tied. The -1S helps in some matchups but in, say, a Death Guard matchup (another very competitive faction), it doesn't do much for you. Most Death Guard lists will be striking at S7 or S8 (Blightlords + PBC's). Against your infantry, lowering that by 1 doesn't change anything. The weapons they have where it does matter already aren't that scary. Against Space Marines, however, the -1S might be very good. So it's a bit match-up dependent.

Dread Host might not be competitive if your goal is to land and immediately earn back their points by destroying a big, juicy, target, but it is good for objective flipping. You land, kill a sub 100 point chaff unit and immediately flip an objective. That can do a lot for primary scoring. Most reserves have an issue because they land T2, can't really charge and thus don't affect the game until T3 when it's more than half-over. Dread Host gets around that. You're safe from T1 shooting and having an effect T2.

Audustum wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:
What Shield Hosts are everyone taking? Looking through them, there's nothing there I'd particularly want to take over the codex WTs and relics. I've just been going Solar Watch since their Stratagem is free and really bloody strong; in a game where CP and stratagems can make or break a game, a free strat that is basically just -1CP from your opponant per turn is great.

Opinions?

Shadowkeepers is arguably the strongest, because of the grim responsibility strat. It's a very strong defensive buff on top of the other already very good defensive strats we got in psychic awakening.

I personally like dread host the best, because I like to play a terminator captain with the relic axe. Also the dread host strat is very strong in my opinion especially when you combine it with a dreadnought (telemon) which has been buffed with the eternal penitent strat to give re roll charges. So when said dreadnought comes into play from deepstrike, it can charge with 3d6 drop the lowest dice and reroll those 3d6, which boosts the chance to make the charge from deepstrike considerably.
Dread host is objectively not the most competitive shield host though, because due to the smaller board size in 9th it has become easier to screen deepstriking unit out.

I would disagree. I would say Dread Host and Shadowkeepr are about tied. The -1S helps in some matchups but in, say, a Death Guard matchup (another very competitive faction), it doesn't do much for you. Most Death Guard lists will be striking at S7 or S8 (Blightlords + PBC's). Against your infantry, lowering that by 1 doesn't change anything. The weapons they have where it does matter already aren't that scary. Against Space Marines, however, the -1S might be very good. So it's a bit match-up dependent.

Dread Host might not be competitive if your goal is to land and immediately earn back their points by destroying a big, juicy, target, but it is good for objective flipping. You land, kill a sub 100 point chaff unit and immediately flip an objective. That can do a lot for primary scoring. Most reserves have an issue because they land T2, can't really charge and thus don't affect the game until T3 when it's more than half-over. Dread Host gets around that. You're safe from T1 shooting and having an effect T2.

Thats a fair point about getting onto crucial objectives with the dread host deepstrike. I hadn't considered that when I wrote my initial reply. So yeah, you can't really go wrong with either of them, just consider your matchups.

I would like to recommend a new tactics thread be started. While a lot of the army hasn’t changed (even with PA and 9th), I feel like the new edition merits a new thread. Any takers?

 mrhappyface wrote:
What Shield Hosts are everyone taking? Looking through them, there's nothing there I'd particularly want to take over the codex WTs and relics. I've just been going Solar Watch since their Stratagem is free and really bloody strong; in a game where CP and stratagems can make or break a game, a free strat that is basically just -1CP from your opponant per turn is great.

Opinions?

All the Hosts are good, it's mostly about what appeals to you the most. Shadowkeepers are probably the best, Dread Host is good, but I'm in the camp that believes it's more of a trap. The deepstrike isn't as reliable as it appears, the WLT is ok, but we don't have that many attacks, so the exploding 6s are. not as great. The relic axe is neat, but you have to take a footcaptain, so it depends.
Aquilan shield is probably better than many people give it credit for and Emissaries feel like they will be better than they appear on paper. Solar Watch is obviously a great one too.
I played against SM recently and the Shadowkeepers strat did a lot of work to be honest. They are probably worth it just for that alone. I tried the wlt against TS before and if you want to make Unstoppable Destroyer character hunter, it can be a lot of fun If you can't decide, safest bet in my opinion are Shadowkeepers.

So it might be some time until we get our 9th Ed codex, but with the multimelta change let's assume for a second that GW is going to reevaluate our weapon profiles. What would you like to see?
Here would be my wishlist for our bog standard infantry weapons:

Sentinel blade: S user; AP - 3; D D3
Abilities: everytime the user fights, he can make d3 additional attacks with this weapon.

Guardian Spear:
Two profiles: each time the bearer fights he has to choose which weapon profile he uses

Profile 1
S user; AP - 2; D D3
Abilities: each time the bearer fights, count every attack the makes as 2 attacks

Profile2
S +2; AP - 3; D 2


Castellan Axe:
S +3; AP - 2; D 2
Abilities: in a turn in which the bearer has successfully charged, change the weapon profile to S x2; AP - 2; D D3+1

I think that would offer some interesting choices.

I would also give our standard guard units the following abilities to make them more interesting:
-when this unit still contains at least 3 custodian guard with storm shields, improve the save characteristic of this unit by 1 (not including invulnerable saves)
-when this unit still contains at least 3 custodian guard with guardian spears the unit always fights first in the fight phase, even if it was charged (when the enemy unit has the same ability the charging unit fights first)

Yeah, there is no way GW makes us more powerful than their beloved Primaris. Give up on the multiple profiles. I'd settle for just the +1s on our swords, and our axes to be like hammers. x2 strength with flat 4 damage. Give them some small benefit for the cost over the damn spears whixch get +1 to wound.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Yeah, there is no way GW makes us more powerful than their beloved Primaris. Give up on the multiple profiles. I'd settle for just the +1s on our swords, and our axes to be like hammers. x2 strength with flat 4 damage. Give them some small benefit for the cost over the damn spears whixch get +1 to wound.

Why not change the profiles in a more interesting way? It would give our boys their super elite status back and actually make them somewhat scary in a fight. I haven't given up hope that GW might do something interesting for once with our profiles.

Tiberias wrote:
So it might be some time until we get our 9th Ed codex, but with the multimelta change let's assume for a second that GW is going to reevaluate our weapon profiles. What would you like to see?
Here would be my wishlist for our bog standard infantry weapons:

Sentinel blade: S user; AP - 3; D D3
Abilities: everytime the user fights, he can make d3 additional attacks with this weapon.

Guardian Spear:
Two profiles: each time the bearer fights he has to choose which weapon profile he uses

Profile 1
S user; AP - 2; D D3
Abilities: each time the bearer fights, count every attack the makes as 2 attacks

Profile2
S +2; AP - 3; D 2


Castellan Axe:
S +3; AP - 2; D 2
Abilities: in a turn in which the bearer has successfully charged, change the weapon profile to S x2; AP - 2; D D3+1

I think that would offer some interesting choices.

I would also give our standard guard units the following abilities to make them more interesting:
-when this unit still contains at least 3 custodian guard with storm shields, improve the save characteristic of this unit by 1 (not including invulnerable saves)
-when this unit still contains at least 3 custodian guard with guardian spears the unit always fights first in the fight phase, even if it was charged (when the enemy unit has the same ability the charging unit fights first)

realisticly i expect

spears:
shooting 30" -1AP 2dmg (marine bolters go to 30" if the leaks are correct)
melee +1S -3AP 2dmg +1 attack

sentinel blade:
shooting 12" 0AP 1dmg
melee +1S -3AP 2dmg

axe:
shooting 30" -1AP 2dmg
melee +3S -2 2dmg

it's really hard to increase the stats on the axe without making the relic axe useless. But the relics will probably also change.

 nordsturmking wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
So it might be some time until we get our 9th Ed codex, but with the multimelta change let's assume for a second that GW is going to reevaluate our weapon profiles. What would you like to see?
Here would be my wishlist for our bog standard infantry weapons:

Sentinel blade: S user; AP - 3; D D3
Abilities: everytime the user fights, he can make d3 additional attacks with this weapon.

Guardian Spear:
Two profiles: each time the bearer fights he has to choose which weapon profile he uses

Profile 1
S user; AP - 2; D D3
Abilities: each time the bearer fights, count every attack the makes as 2 attacks

Profile2
S +2; AP - 3; D 2


Castellan Axe:
S +3; AP - 2; D 2
Abilities: in a turn in which the bearer has successfully charged, change the weapon profile to S x2; AP - 2; D D3+1

I think that would offer some interesting choices.

I would also give our standard guard units the following abilities to make them more interesting:
-when this unit still contains at least 3 custodian guard with storm shields, improve the save characteristic of this unit by 1 (not including invulnerable saves)
-when this unit still contains at least 3 custodian guard with guardian spears the unit always fights first in the fight phase, even if it was charged (when the enemy unit has the same ability the charging unit fights first)

realisticly i expect

spears:
shooting 30" -1AP 2dmg (marine bolters go to 30" if the leaks are correct)
melee +1S -3AP 2dmg +1 attack

sentinel blade:
shooting 12" 0AP 1dmg
melee +1S -3AP 2dmg

axe:
shooting 30" -1AP 2dmg
melee +3S -2 2dmg

it's really hard to increase the stats on the axe without making the relic axe useless. But the relics will probably also change.

In this case the blade would be waaay to strong, you would have absolutely no incentive to take a guardian spear, ever. With the blade having identical stats and the added benefit of being able to get a 3++ with a shield, the spear would just suck in comparison.

The way I set it up is so that every weapon can fulfill a certain role. Especially the guardian spear, which just isn't that good right now, but if you were to give it those two profiles it would be quite an interesting choice in my opinion because you have the flexibility of flat 2 damage with good strength, or lots of attacks with swingy damage and lower strength.

Differentiating the normal castellan axes from the relic would be easy in my opinion. In my suggestion they hit at better strength than the spear with worse AP, but on the charge they hit like a truck with S x2 and damage D3+1, which is as good as the spears flat 2 dmg with the added potential to take out a 4 wound obliterator with one swing.
The relic axe could just always be S x2; AP -3 and flat 3 dmg, not just on the charge. That is a smaller buff, but would it would still be a very reliable beatstick weapon.

Tiberias wrote:

 nordsturmking wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
So it might be some time until we get our 9th Ed codex, but with the multimelta change let's assume for a second that GW is going to reevaluate our weapon profiles. What would you like to see?
Here would be my wishlist for our bog standard infantry weapons:

Sentinel blade: S user; AP - 3; D D3
Abilities: everytime the user fights, he can make d3 additional attacks with this weapon.

Guardian Spear:
Two profiles: each time the bearer fights he has to choose which weapon profile he uses

Profile 1
S user; AP - 2; D D3
Abilities: each time the bearer fights, count every attack the makes as 2 attacks

Profile2
S +2; AP - 3; D 2


Castellan Axe:
S +3; AP - 2; D 2
Abilities: in a turn in which the bearer has successfully charged, change the weapon profile to S x2; AP - 2; D D3+1

I think that would offer some interesting choices.

I would also give our standard guard units the following abilities to make them more interesting:
-when this unit still contains at least 3 custodian guard with storm shields, improve the save characteristic of this unit by 1 (not including invulnerable saves)
-when this unit still contains at least 3 custodian guard with guardian spears the unit always fights first in the fight phase, even if it was charged (when the enemy unit has the same ability the charging unit fights first)

realisticly i expect

spears:
shooting 30" -1AP 2dmg (marine bolters go to 30" if the leaks are correct)
melee +1S -3AP 2dmg +1 attack

sentinel blade:
shooting 12" 0AP 1dmg
melee +1S -3AP 2dmg

axe:
shooting 30" -1AP 2dmg
melee +3S -2 2dmg

it's really hard to increase the stats on the axe without making the relic axe useless. But the relics will probably also change.

In this case the blade would be waaay to strong, you would have absolutely no incentive to take a guardian spear, ever. With the blade having identical stats and the added benefit of being able to get a 3++ with a shield, the spear would just suck in comparison.

The way I set it up is so that every weapon can fulfill a certain role. Especially the guardian spear, which just isn't that good right now, but if you were to give it those two profiles it would be quite an interesting choice in my opinion because you have the flexibility of flat 2 damage with good strength, or lots of attacks with swingy damage and lower strength.

Differentiating the normal castellan axes from the relic would be easy in my opinion. In my suggestion they hit at better strength than the spear with worse AP, but on the charge they hit like a truck with S x2 and damage D3+1, which is as good as the spears flat 2 dmg with the added potential to take out a 4 wound obliterator with one swing.
The relic axe could just always be S x2; AP -3 and flat 3 dmg, not just on the charge. That is a smaller buff, but would it would still be a very reliable beatstick weapon.

The changes you are proposing would be nice but they are not going to happen. I think the changes i posted are more likely to happen.
The real issue with the stats inflation is, if they to it codex by codex armys will drop down in the power ranking. custodes for example will become mid tier or low tier but armies that are weak now will become unplayble.

Ended up running my Custodes using the Shadowkeeper Shield Host vs Marines at 1750 yesterday.

Using a 5 man squad (3 salvo/2 Hurricane) with a shield captain (salvo) i was able to cripple a repulsor (left 1 darn wound on it.) using Archeotech munitions.

They then weathered the return fire on that flank with Emperor's Auspice and Grim Responsibility, losing 1 hurricane bike.

They're rock solid for the purposes of pinning your opponent deep in their deployment zone.

I am completely sold on the salvo launchers at this point as marines get more prevalent, with a hurricane bolt bike or two to soak damage. They were later on very useful rooting out eliminators in cover.

Got a very important question for a game I'm about to play.

Vexilla teleport homer vs alpha legion stratagem 'scrambled coordinates'

vexilla homer is used 'at the end of the phase, when you set up a teleporting ADEPTUS CUSTODES unit from reserve' obviously within 6" and 3" away from an enemy.

The AL strat is used 'simultaneously' (end of enemy movement phase, as a unit is set up) and disallows deep strike within 12".

which trumps in this interaction? I'll pop it in YMDC as well.

Seems like no deep strike within 12" means no deep strike within 12". But I wouldn't mind seeing an FAQ on this.

Yeah, I'd imagine that's a good way to make a Custodes player waste their CP

If they both happen at the same time, on your turn, sequencing should control. Your turn, your choice. You teleport homer first so the unit is already landed and then let AL's strat fizzle.

I've recently read a FAQ excerpt from 8th ed on reddit that specifically addressed this question and said that the ability inhibiting deepstrike always takes precedence.

I don't have the link to that FAQ right now, but there is definitely one that addresses this question specifically

Tiberias wrote:
I've recently read a FAQ excerpt from 8th ed on reddit that specifically addressed this question and said that the ability inhibiting deepstrike always takes precedence.

I don't have the link to that FAQ right now, but there is definitely one that addresses this question specifically

Ooo, that reminds me.

Do all the FAQs and erratas from 8th ed still count for the 9th ed core rules? Me and a mate were discussing and decided we'd continue to use the 8th ed rulings on everything.

 mrhappyface wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
I've recently read a FAQ excerpt from 8th ed on reddit that specifically addressed this question and said that the ability inhibiting deepstrike always takes precedence.

I don't have the link to that FAQ right now, but there is definitely one that addresses this question specifically

Ooo, that reminds me.

Do all the FAQs and erratas from 8th ed still count for the 9th ed core rules? Me and a mate were discussing and decided we'd continue to use the 8th ed rulings on everything.

Technically, 8th edition FAQ's are advisory. It's prooooobably how GW will rule again but it's not technically 9th so it's not technically binding.

That said, even as a fairly strong RAW-advocate, I follow the 8th FAQ's for 9th questions.

Audustum wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
I've recently read a FAQ excerpt from 8th ed on reddit that specifically addressed this question and said that the ability inhibiting deepstrike always takes precedence.

I don't have the link to that FAQ right now, but there is definitely one that addresses this question specifically

Ooo, that reminds me.

Do all the FAQs and erratas from 8th ed still count for the 9th ed core rules? Me and a mate were discussing and decided we'd continue to use the 8th ed rulings on everything.

Technically, 8th edition FAQ's are advisory. It's prooooobably how GW will rule again but it's not technically 9th so it's not technically binding.

That said, even as a fairly strong RAW-advocate, I follow the 8th FAQ's for 9th questions.

From what I know, all of the FAQ'd stuff that was done in 8th was carried over to the newer 9th edition FAQs. So therefore anything not mentioned in FAQs for books which have a 9th edition FAQ is surely not a ruling anymore.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Audustum wrote:
If they both happen at the same time, on your turn, sequencing should control. Your turn, your choice. You teleport homer first so the unit is already landed and then let AL's strat fizzle.

And in reference to this post, here is the YMDC thread which has a seemingly clear resolution. I think I will email the rules team and ask for clarification/an FAQ.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/791066.page
tl;dr alpha legion stratagem changes the 9" deepstrike to a 12" from AL units, while the vexilla homer does not state 9" anywhere therefore the teleport homer trump's (AL strategem is inapplicable)

Wow, compared to what they've previewed for changes of space marine weapons... custodes CC stuff looks like gak. Like really bad. And that makes me sad.

stratigo wrote:
Wow, compared to what they've previewed for changes of space marine weapons... custodes CC stuff looks like gak. Like really bad. And that makes me sad.

Hopefully Custodes get a similar buff in their codex. But you know what they say about Hope...