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.

my god what a blob of text that is....



to me this sounds like cover in general is a -1 to hit now except barricades. Great, so now orks hit on a 6+ 90% of the time. Thanks GW.
Literally anything that isnt a simple barricade falls under this description.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
my god what a blob of text that is....

Spoiler:

to me this sounds like cover in general is a -1 to hit now except barricades. Great, so now orks hit on a 6+ 90% of the time. Thanks GW.
Literally anything that isnt a simple barricade falls under this description.

You have to define what dense cover is. I imagine this is more like "forest" areas.

It definitely makes me hope that some sort of amendment is made to DDD, because it's a double whammy of negative modifiers capping right at the minimum effectiveness against Orks, plus everyone else always hitting on 6s too - and now that minimum will be frequently available to all armies regardless of codex or composition.

Maybe if we didn't have to confirm the free shots, though that would make More Dakka absurdly good.

Fair, i forgot they are defining tags not universal rules.
The way they word them is ticking me off. Normally when it isnt a universal, static rule they say "Units with this rule..." or something similar. No such verbage on these terrain features so they sound like all terrain gets it if it meets the height requirement
Not even going to comment about the "and then" followed by "also this" followed by "by the way this" format. Its so confusing to read....

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Fair, i forgot they are defining tags not universal rules.
The way they word them is ticking me off. Normally when it isnt a universal, static rule they say "Units with this rule..." or something similar. No such verbage on these terrain features so they sound like all terrain gets it if it meets the height requirement
Not even going to comment about the "and then" followed by "also this" followed by "by the way this" format. Its so confusing to read....

On the call, they reference like fences and forests. Basically stuff you think might make it harder to target, but does not realistically stop a bolter round.

Edit: I will say, quite sadly, they think this will help hordes out.

Oh guys, removing Chapter Master would do far more to help hordes than anything else.

Nothing will help hordes until they both A) remove the "unit wholly within" restriction and B) deny the benefit to small squads.

Every single rule they put out will apply to 5man squads and be much easier to benefit from. And going from 3+ to 2+ is a muuuuch bigger deal than 6+ to 5+

They still worded it saying that if a random boy is not obstructed by the forest then bam no -1 to hit or +1 save for you.

Getting -1 to hit for orks vehicles will be silly easy now. SJD will be so much better than scrapjets in 9th

wouldnt the vehicle limitation still apply of not benefiting from cover unless the model is physically covered by so much?

 Jidmah wrote:
Getting -1 to hit for orks vehicles will be silly easy now. SJD will be so much better than scrapjets in 9th

Largely depends how common dense terrain is.

I usually fight in city ruins, which I don't even know would feature a single "dense" terrain feature. It seems like if it gives light cover (+1 armour) it doesn't give -1 to hit.

In their own examples, ruins are *not* dense terrain. I think this largely applies to forests and stuff.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/11/terrain-rules-and-line-of-sightgw-homepage-post-1/

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Nothing will help hordes until they both A) remove the "unit wholly within" restriction and B) deny the benefit to small squads.

Every single rule they put out will apply to 5man squads and be much easier to benefit from. And going from 3+ to 2+ is a muuuuch bigger deal than 6+ to 5+

They still worded it saying that if a random boy is not obstructed by the forest then bam no -1 to hit or +1 save for you.

Wholly within has been removed fro a lot of these terrain rules. It’s now per model...

However this still doesn’t benefit hordes.. you still can’t hide large squads behind dense terrain.. some will be visible and not obscured by terrain

Thats not what i get from this.
"...unless you can draw straight lines, 1mm in thickness to every part of at least one model's base [or hull]..."

That tells me that if that random boy in the back isnt obstructed by the forest, none of them are. Its not AS bad as its drawing sight instead of being on the terrain now, but its still pretty dumb that all it takes is 1 model out of 30 to deny cover to the unit.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Thats not what i get from this.
"...unless you can draw straight lines, 1mm in thickness to every part of at least one model's base [or hull]..."

That tells me that if that random boy in the back isnt obstructed by the forest, none of them are. Its not AS bad as its drawing sight instead of being on the terrain now, but its still pretty dumb that all it takes is 1 model out of 30 to deny cover to the unit.

This thing confuses me beyond anything I've seen from GW. And this speaks volumes.

Do that means that we draw LoS base to base in 9th??


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I guess you would do the same as for the KFF, for the cover, as per the first dude dies without save, than you start to use cover.

The problem with modifier is that one dude now feth up that unit for a whole shooting sequence

 Emicrania wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I guess you would do the same as for the KFF, for the cover, as per the first dude dies without save, than you start to use cover.

The problem with modifier is that one dude now feth up that unit for a whole shooting sequence

That's the problem, yeah. i think it's going to be very difficult to use terrain with large units to gain any benefits, as a single model can screw up the whole thing.

that more than anything I think bodes for the death of green tide. Terrain sounds super cool and important -- but why wouldn't I just use 10 nobs instead, so I can actual hide / obscure / defend terrain?

Anybody online is stating that is gonna be the edition of elite armies and veichle. A welcome change, but id still like to be able to bring some boyz for fluff and obssec

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Thats not what i get from this.
"...unless you can draw straight lines, 1mm in thickness to every part of at least one model's base [or hull]..."

That tells me that if that random boy in the back isnt obstructed by the forest, none of them are. Its not AS bad as its drawing sight instead of being on the terrain now, but its still pretty dumb that all it takes is 1 model out of 30 to deny cover to the unit.

To be fair the way the sequence order of shooting goes I think they have to do terrain based neg hit modifiers per unit not per model...
Or it will slow the game immensely as you roll to hit per each model.


However the plus save terrain cover is specifically now per model. Which is easier to roll and not slow down the game as much.

This is why I said above while neg hit is great for units like SSAG... it’s virtually pointless for large blobs as it is nearly impossible to get the entire unit behind the terrain.

 Emicrania wrote:
Anybody online is stating that is gonna be the edition of elite armies and veichle. A welcome change, but id still like to be able to bring some boyz for fluff and obssec

Hordes may still have a place simply because they bucked the meta. In 8th they were strong because knights, marines and the like made everyone loadup on anti tank weapons, which were just a drop in the pond for an ork mob. If all armies get more elite and people take less anti infantry weapons then the blast rule could be a decent balancing mechanic. But, again this is all hinging on those point increases and how the meta develops.

cody.d. wrote:

 Emicrania wrote:
Anybody online is stating that is gonna be the edition of elite armies and veichle. A welcome change, but id still like to be able to bring some boyz for fluff and obssec

Hordes may still have a place simply because they bucked the meta. In 8th they were strong because knights, marines and the like made everyone loadup on anti tank weapons, which were just a drop in the pond for an ork mob. If all armies get more elite and people take less anti infantry weapons then the blast rule could be a decent balancing mechanic. But, again this is all hinging on those point increases and how the meta develops.

Problem is that a lot of weapons that will end up with Blast keyword are excellent anti-tank and anti-elite as well. So they'll still be taken, and won't be nearly as wasteful against hordes as they used to be. As an extreme example, take Plasma Culverin Kataphron Destroyers. They're going to be a popular choice, as any marine unit that runs 6-10 models will be getting 15 plasma shots, minimum, coming at them from 5 Destroyers. Faced with a mob of Boyz, they'll happily fire their max 30 shots instead - that's half of a full mob gone.

Though if the blast effect comes with an increase in price (Which it in theory should) that has a solid chance of keeping it a positive exchange for the ork boyz. But again, this all depends on points, what will go up, by how much? What will become cheaper and more expensive by comparison. We have to wait a few weeks for 9th to come out to be able to confirm if hordes are dead or possibly still a viable option.

Dense terrain won't be too common IMHO, I also read it as being forests and such (which I don't see very often°.

And if SM players start trying to put many forests on tables which previously didn't have them, or try to sneak other types of similar terrain, I just won't let them do it. I'll ask them to limit the number of such terrains.

Small SM squads, havocs and such, really do seem to me like the typical units which will benefit most.

Oh well, business as usual innit ?

In fairness, whilst we feel that we need the cover more than the elite armies, it does make more sense for 5 guys to hide than 30.

What's the bets that camo cloaks will go to always counts as being in obscuring terrain?

I am really looking forward to some variety in terrain, I think 9th will be a lot more fun and interesting to play than 8th was, taking specifics of armies aside. the missions seem to have more depth, and the terrain more flavour, and as a result, we can use different taktiks to "just kill 'em all" in the games.

 some bloke wrote:
In fairness, whilst we feel that we need the cover more than the elite armies, it does make more sense for 5 guys to hide than 30.

What's the bets that camo cloaks will go to always counts as being in obscuring terrain?

I am really looking forward to some variety in terrain, I think 9th will be a lot more fun and interesting to play than 8th was, taking specifics of armies aside. the missions seem to have more depth, and the terrain more flavour, and as a result, we can use different taktiks to "just kill 'em all" in the games.

Of course it does make more sense for 5 guys to hide than 30. Anyway I will stop whinging about this as I think GW will bring stuff in during the edition to help with units (hordes or others, perhaps <18 wound models will also struggle in the 9th meta). To sell some horde plastic crack if for anything else...

Strategic reserves and morale today.

Morale is very interesting. Keep your gak around a Warboss kids.

Morale? i dont see any morale information.

Reserves feels super expensive to use imo. Wonder if it will even be a thing at all instead of just Tellyporting eveyrthing.
1cp per 9pl (1-9, 10-19, etc) is quite pricy. Also the hype over coming in from reserves into combat is only if the enemy is hugging your table edge. I dont think ive ever had that problem.

It's on the live chat.

Basically, if you fail a morale check, you automatically lose 1 model.

In addition, you roll d6 for each model remaining -- on a 1, that model runs away. If they are under half strength, you subtract 1 for the roll.

Basically, morale is way less all or nothing, and each failed morale check has a chance of being quite significant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Morale? i dont see any morale information.

Reserves feels super expensive to use imo. Wonder if it will even be a thing at all instead of just Tellyporting eveyrthing.

Well it's interesting. You could reserve 3 30 man grot squads for 1 CP (edit: my bad, 30 grots is for 4 PL lol. Well you could do 4 20 man squads, and 1 10 man squad... 90 infiltrating grots for 1 CP baby)

I think it has uses.

I wonder how it affects for stuff like transports, though, because THAT could get expensive.

Each model remaining? thats weird. There has to be more to that, off hand that sounds really bad.

Also i doubt transports factor whats inside them for it, the current rules that look for PL for such effects specifically dont. One of the very few reasons to even use transports.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Each model remaining? thats weird. There has to be more to that, off hand that sounds really bad.

Given we have breakin' heads and Mob rule, I honestly think this is nothing but net for us.

So losing 20 boys without anything nearby in a 30 man squad doesn't means you basically automatically have the last 10 run away. Now 4 models run away on average.

Means the enemy actually has to wipe out units to guarantee stuff, and failing a morale check always has a cost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Counter charging in our edge is a thing, too.

You can setup closer than 9” from our battlefield zone edge.

I think we can cover our asses against stuff like BA better

Saw the rules, yeah its pretty lackluster now but still a threat.

Auto-pass on a 1 was MASSIVELY needed, grots can actually pass morale now and a 30man boy blob that got butchered but still remains can actually still stick around w/o burning cp.

It feels like morale of any sort is equally as likely as before to pick off 1-3 extra models, but extremely rarely more than that. Boyz will still have mob rule, and you only suffer if you fail so its not sneakily picking off boyz in a 20+ blob either. Even if you lose 25 boyz out of 30, you could either roll a 1 and lose no extra or just lose 1 boy since the remaining 4 didnt roll a 1.

Its nowhere near as important as before, as now not even big squads are going to truely suffer from it, but small squads still wont really give a damn since its D6+Deaths > Leadership to fail in the first place still.

I think the only units that are going to really care are the high wound models, like killakanz or grot tanks. They wont run away in droves but they can still lose an entire moderately expensive model just as easily as they can lose a single random ass grot. Keeping a boss or "Follow Me Ladz" mek around such units are still mandatory imo.

 Vineheart01 wrote:


I think the only units that are going to really care are the high wound models, like killakanz or grot tanks. They wont run away in droves but they can still lose an entire moderately expensive model just as easily as they can lose a single random ass grot. Keeping a boss or "Follow Me Ladz" mek around such units are still mandatory imo.

Warboss is as mandatory as ever. Which is fine, because you should be taking Da Biggest Boss (Or Ghaz) anyway.

This seems unequivocally good. The rolls matter, and there's no "well your unit is 100% guaranteed dead to morale, so I'll ignore it" anymore. It's now up to luck, as it should be. It also means smaller units of boys aren't necessarily just auto hosed to morale, either, if they happen to be isolated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry, quick aside.

Tempormental Shock Drive in 9th means a Shock Jump Dragsta could escape close combat...

Damn, Dragstas are looking like tricky pieces of gak.

I might be clinical, but I'm still waiting to see where is the feth up that will make eldar and SM dominate another edition.

But so far so good. Let's see those points increase and than let's go mental with list writing.

My bet is preorder the 18th, release 25th, leaks in a couple of weeks top.

just dawned on me that its actually possible for marines to fail morale now.
5man squad loses 3 dudes, thats less than half their numbers remaining so they get an additional -1 penalty.
Its still a 50-50 die roll and they can freely reroll it, but its a lot better than a third chance (or 1/6 if ultras).
I may actually see a marine player fail leadership for once. Even 10man hellblasters have never, ever failed LD for me.