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.

Honestly, the points increase is just confusing the crap out of everyone. I think maybe Engine War just got delayed too long, and this is damage control?

 Suzuteo wrote:
Honestly, the points increase is just confusing the crap out of everyone. I think maybe Engine War just got delayed too long, and this is damage control?

Eh the corona isn't reason for point increase which was decided on months ago.

The point increasing in itself is long due. As a bare minimum gives more granularity(went too far for this...) and maybe even reduce models and quicken games though players can ruin that one.

Pts increase game wide is an irrelevance for speeding up or alowing down the game. just as nothing stopped you playing 1500pts if you wanted a faster game now nothing stops you playing 2500 or 3000pts in 9th if you want a slower game. To's have not always followed GW's lead when it comes to tournaments look at 1850pts in 7th.

And 3000pts was one of there recommended levels if the cultist increase is anything to go by that might be equivalent to 2000 pts now. But its too little data to say for sure

Personally I think the increase to cultists is indicative of a push to take actually useful impactful units instead. Cp is no longer tied to list construction so there's no real need for cultists. They don't do anything other than body barrier and sit on objectives.

Especially in an army that isn't based on large numbers. If we saw that kind of increase in a termagaunt then that's more indicative imo. Though maybe they want tyranids to use more warriors? There are so many unknown factors.

tneva82 wrote:

 deffrekka wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/03/warhammer-40000-matched-play-points-and-an-appgw-homepage-post-1/

Intercessors have gone up 3ppm and cultists by 1ppm?

Cultists 2ppm.

And as for weapons...For weapons to be non free it would have to be option. If model just has weapons it's 0 and wargear is included in cost. Shadowsword volcano cannon is 0 pts...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 deffrekka wrote:
Makes me kind of glad I didnt preorder EW too tbh, with the pts section becoming invalidated and a possible FAQ to fix/clarify some parts of the book, id rather hold off on spending £19.99 just right now same with the new units.

Waiting til July/August is ok with me, I have no tournaments to go to anyway and neither will anyone else (unless your playing on TTS) with 9th starting and the globial pandemic.

So you don't need stratagems etc?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

yukishiro1 wrote:
I am 95% sure 9th would already be out right now without the pandemic.

9th will release as soon as they have the new starter box ready to ship. That's the hold-up, the rules are clearly already finalized and ready to go, and printing up the books doesn't take long. But they won't want to release the rules alone before they're ready to release the boxed set that contains the rules plus the new models, because that would dampen the appetite for that set.

I doubt. Pariah would have been june release. You expected them to release 9th ed BEFORE last PA? July was likely the release month always. They just REALLY rushed it putting 3 months releases to 1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

yukishiro1 wrote:
Yeah, it's a very weird choice of things to advertise, especially with them implying that big units are disfavored in the newer edition, not buffed. It's hard to see what could justify such a big price increase for cultists relative to intercessors - unless they really are doing something very weird and charging a TON for the weapon.

Maybe you see why when you realize playtesters they use have during 8th ed made tournament rules that favour elites and discourages hordes...They have the style of game they want to play.

My mistake I thought Cultists were 5ppm, an honest mistake for someone who has no real interest in CSM at all. As for needing stratagems... I wont be needing them until I play the game and I wont be playing a game until after lockdown is well and truly finised. Rushing to buy a book isnt my priority right now, ask me 2-3 months ago and I would of jumped at the gun to get a limted edition version like every other codex ive owned even past 8th's life cycle.

I am not going to buy the book until I know what the new edition will do, what will change and if I even carry on playing this army or move to an army more suited to 9ths ethos until Admech get a new Codex. It may sound extreme to some but 8th left a very bad taste in my mouth numerous times with me taking a break from it. Not owning the book as soon as it drops isnt a bad thing and if by chance the book gets some hefty FAQ changes, id rather buy the digital enhanced version. Ive impuled bought a lot of things throughout my Warhammer life and lockdown has changed that for me where I no longer feel the urge to buy something just because its for my favourite army, have my 25k of Orkz to prove that point for me, when am I ever gonna use 5 of each plane, 3 stompas, etc, etc.

Yes rules always change, but id rather purchase something that I know will actually suit and last a somewhat long time in the new edition. Luckily my gaming group has a joint "library" of sorts where we donate or chip in for books so we all have access to them together.

@ octovol

Body barriers that sit on objectives are useful. Sitting on objectives wins games. Without them games devolve into alpha vs alpha and the role to go first wins.

 Suzuteo wrote:
Honestly, the points increase is just confusing the crap out of everyone. I think maybe Engine War just got delayed too long, and this is damage control?

My biggest issue has always been the transparancy with GW, they are a lot better now, but if Engine War was realised on schedule without Coronavirus throwing the whole world into chaos, we wouldnt even know that 3 months letter those pts would be invalidated. We would have rumours of a new edition but nothing concrete. Reminds me of when I bought my Wood Elf army book and no less than a month later AGE OF SIGMAR! in no way shape or form is this close to that scope and severity but it still devalues the PA book somewhat. If they did the something like DND Beyond where you could buy sections of the books like datasheets, warlord traits, stratagems on a digital format, that would be so much better. We already have to pay for stuff we dont need like Chaos Daemons, Chaos Knights and to some extent if youd dont use Imperial Knights, them also. Whilst we do get the lions share of book space and content, your £25 that is equal in value as a Codex isnt all that equal to begin with.

Im fine with things going up in pts, as CA was getting a little silly with the constant pts drops feeling like nothing actually changed as everyone got them. Hopefully the new pts will be more balanced and reflective of what a model can do in the wider view of things. Haing my Grot pay the same amount of pts as a Conscript always infuriated me, a Grot should be the cheapest model in the game! But I digress

Octovol wrote:
Personally I think the increase to cultists is indicative of a push to take actually useful impactful units instead. Cp is no longer tied to list construction so there's no real need for cultists. They don't do anything other than body barrier and sit on objectives.

Especially in an army that isn't based on large numbers. If we saw that kind of increase in a termagaunt then that's more indicative imo. Though maybe they want tyranids to use more warriors? There are so many unknown factors.

I don't understand this. This is basically saying "GW deliberately made cultists terrible because they don't want anybody to use them because they're trash." Deliberately making models in their range terrible so that nobody uses them is not something GW has ever embraced in the past, and I don't see why they would do so now, as it makes zero sense from a business perspective.

I think what he is saying is more in line with the camp who believes GW wants to slightly alter their IP to focus on more elite units, monsters, vehicles, etc and move away from horde units.

yukishiro1 wrote:

Octovol wrote:
Personally I think the increase to cultists is indicative of a push to take actually useful impactful units instead. Cp is no longer tied to list construction so there's no real need for cultists. They don't do anything other than body barrier and sit on objectives.

Especially in an army that isn't based on large numbers. If we saw that kind of increase in a termagaunt then that's more indicative imo. Though maybe they want tyranids to use more warriors? There are so many unknown factors.

I don't understand this. This is basically saying "GW deliberately made cultists terrible because they don't want anybody to use them because they're trash." Deliberately making models in their range terrible so that nobody uses them is not something GW has ever embraced in the past, and I don't see why they would do so now, as it makes zero sense from a business perspective.

it makes every sense from a business perspective - make cultist terrible make CSM better and all the players with cultists and no CSM buy CSM

Only if you think your customers are addicted morons who will happily go along with you abusing their trust that way...

....oh wait.

I am liking this new pay for detachment system they just teased. It makes a lot more sense. My main drawback in 8th as a person who always included knight in my army was running out of CP before getting to use anything good. I'm excited to start with 11 (Im assuming superheavy will still be one?) and regenerating.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/04/taking-command-of-your-pointsgw-homepage-post-1/?fbclid=IwAR0soDJESPxrdCQlmy6foUKAudiXUT9HXAmHM2Qh9p4xsotpBmLZih-5LUw

I have the feeling Skitarii will be low priority and especially enginseers might lose all meaning

To clarify, I have three thoughts:

1) Engine War was delayed by coronavirus. We were supposed to have many more weeks to play with the new toys and rules before 9E dropped.

2) 9E seems to be an attempt to reduce the disparity between matched and narrative play. They want to make match play less mechanical and narrative more organized.

3) 9E also seems to be an attempt to align the expectations of matched play with those of TOs. You can already see it in the objectives and how they are increasing points across the board. I expect that ITC will just be adopting 9E straight out of the book.

That being said, I think we do need the points increase. My army has gotten so big that it cannot even fit inside my Hefty container anymore. And games feel way longer than they did during the Index days for sure. I could finish all 6 rounds easily in those days. Now, it's usually 4-5 rounds.

we have good warlord traits now enginseers are still good buff carriers and are still the cheap option


Automatically Appended Next Post:

VirtualJiva wrote:
I am liking this new pay for detachment system they just teased. It makes a lot more sense. My main drawback in 8th as a person who always included knight in my army was running out of CP before getting to use anything good. I'm excited to start with 11 (Im assuming superheavy will still be one?) and regenerating.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/04/taking-command-of-your-pointsgw-homepage-post-1/?fbclid=IwAR0soDJESPxrdCQlmy6foUKAudiXUT9HXAmHM2Qh9p4xsotpBmLZih-5LUw

nope its pretty terrible - not for mono mechanicus but any army currently running two battallions or a brigade is currently looking at a cp loss - anyone running 3 specialist detatchments that didnt gain much cp could be looking at a gain this ironically encourages multifaction specilist soup



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Suzuteo wrote:
To clarify, I have three thoughts:

1) Engine War was delayed by coronavirus. We were supposed to have many more weeks to play with the new toys and rules before 9E dropped.

2) 9E seems to be an attempt to reduce the disparity between matched and narrative play. They want to make match play less mechanical and narrative more organized.

3) 9E also seems to be an attempt to align the expectations of matched play with those of TOs. You can already see it in the objectives and how they are increasing points across the board. I expect that ITC will just be adopting 9E straight out of the book.

That being said, I think we do need the points increase. My army has gotten so big that it cannot even fit inside my Hefty container anymore. And games feel way longer than they did during the Index days for sure. I could finish all 6 rounds easily in those days. Now, it's usually 4-5 rounds.

1) they teased it since sep no credit for the delay

2) and as usual they fail - sure these changes alter things singnificantly but the matched lists will be just as mechanical and less fluffy given brigades are less encouraged by cp and you are equally punished for taking a second in faction detatchment as a second faction

3) maybe but ITC are a minority of tournaments and very america centered aligned with those TO's doesnt mean all

It may require less entries to fill the requirements for a detachment though, since the points will go up, and the slots stay the same as far as I can see. I'm glad points are going up because no way in hell I'm paying 65€ for a Skorpius that I need twice at least, who costs less than 5% of a 2000 pts list.



I hope this is not the only fix to melee armies, because that's a pretty sad stratagem xD

 Aaranis wrote:
It may require less entries to fill the requirements for a detachment though, since the points will go up, and the slots stay the same as far as I can see. I'm glad points are going up because no way in hell I'm paying 65€ for a Skorpius that I need twice at least, who costs less than 5% of a 2000 pts list.



I hope this is not the only fix to melee armies, because that's a pretty sad stratagem xD

Dont Dark Eldar Helions have a similar stratagem? That no one ever uses because helions suck and so does the stratagem... I dont think id ever use this strat unless im suer desperate and clutching at straws!

Eviscerating Fly-by, not the same but still trash for a fishing for 6s MW strat.

U02dah4 wrote:

VirtualJiva wrote:
I am liking this new pay for detachment system they just teased. It makes a lot more sense. My main drawback in 8th as a person who always included knight in my army was running out of CP before getting to use anything good. I'm excited to start with 11 (Im assuming superheavy will still be one?) and regenerating.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/04/taking-command-of-your-pointsgw-homepage-post-1/?fbclid=IwAR0soDJESPxrdCQlmy6foUKAudiXUT9HXAmHM2Qh9p4xsotpBmLZih-5LUw

nope its pretty terrible - not for mono mechanicus but any army currently running two battallions or a brigade is currently looking at a cp loss - anyone running 3 specialist detatchments that didnt gain much cp could be looking at a gain this ironically encourages multifaction specilist soup

They mention that:

However, it’s worth noting that the Command points spent on a ‘core’ Detachment (Patrol, Battalion or Brigade) are refunded if it also includes your Warlord, so your first Detachment is usually free.

I think this is a good change.

It seems like there wasn't any penalty to souping after all, there was a penalty to taking more than a single detachment (or taking a single detachment of anything other than patrol, bat, or brigade), whether it's soup or not.

Which seems kinda dumb, frankly. As silly as it was that more detachments gave you more CP...more detachments costing you CP is also silly.

And that stratagem is laughably, absurdly, incredibly bad. The fact that they thought it was something good to advertise their new addition is really troubling, honestly.

 Suzuteo wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:

VirtualJiva wrote:
I am liking this new pay for detachment system they just teased. It makes a lot more sense. My main drawback in 8th as a person who always included knight in my army was running out of CP before getting to use anything good. I'm excited to start with 11 (Im assuming superheavy will still be one?) and regenerating.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/04/taking-command-of-your-pointsgw-homepage-post-1/?fbclid=IwAR0soDJESPxrdCQlmy6foUKAudiXUT9HXAmHM2Qh9p4xsotpBmLZih-5LUw

nope its pretty terrible - not for mono mechanicus but any army currently running two battallions or a brigade is currently looking at a cp loss - anyone running 3 specialist detatchments that didnt gain much cp could be looking at a gain this ironically encourages multifaction specilist soup

They mention that:

However, it’s worth noting that the Command points spent on a ‘core’ Detachment (Patrol, Battalion or Brigade) are refunded if it also includes your Warlord, so your first Detachment is usually free.

I think this is a good change.

I think its good too, I could possibly slim my army down to a single battalion anyway, I stopped taking other Imperial units and focused purely on Admech and I only ever ran dual Stygies battalions anyway.... I will pretty much have the sane of CP that only increases as the game goes on, and I also had your problem of my army being so large that I need 3 cases. Im looking at getting a magnetic tray case.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

yukishiro1 wrote:
It seems like there wasn't any penalty to souping after all, there was a penalty to taking more than a single detachment (or taking a single detachment of anything other than patrol, bat, or brigade), whether it's soup or not.

Which seems kinda dumb, frankly. As silly as it was that more detachments gave you more CP...more detachments costing you CP is also silly.

And that stratagem is laughably, absurdly, incredibly bad. The fact that they thought it was something good to advertise their new addition is really troubling, honestly.

It does make you wonder if they do infact play test everything or only core rules and datasheets. With having the "elite" playtesters for match play, how the did this pass through the net!

Is the new strat niche or situational? Absolutely - it will be used to get those last wounds on characters or vehs or slay the last model in the unit. Is it bad? Not really, you've got 50% chances to score 1 MW for each 3 models you have in the "engagement range" (sounds very AoSy btw, 1" rule is probably going away). 10 Sterylizors kissing a tank with a combat tag would deal 1-2 MWs on average.

A general stratagem like that to be kept as an additional option to spend all those free CPs we get? I'm all for it.

What sort of bizarre situation would you need to be in where you can get 10+ models within striking range of a wounded character without being able to wrap it? I mean it's theoretically possible, but that's beyond just niche. It's "when venus is in alignment with orion on the night of a full moon" level niche.

The typical valuation for 1CP MW strats is 1CP for 1d3 mortal wounds in X situation - there are literally dozens of examples of this. You need 12 models in range of the unit to make this worth the average valuation. And these 1CP for 1d3 mortal wounds strats are rarely used anyway, because the consensus is that they are poor value for CP except in very particular circumstances.

It is "just bad," as a matter of math. There are virtually no situations where, if you have that many models capable of striking something, you wouldn't be better off using those models to wrap or move-block instead. Basically the only time it will ever even come up is if you have a ton of crappy infantry surrounding a unit with the fly keyword in the middle of the board without enough board control to move-block it from falling back. It's super, super, super niche. And even in that super niche situation...the payoff is underwhelming.

I turned two Battalions into a Battalion and a Spearhead myself.

yukishiro1 wrote:
What sort of bizarre situation would you need to be in where you can get 10+ models within striking range of a wounded character without being able to wrap it? I mean it's theoretically possible, but that's beyond just niche. It's "when venus is in alignment with orion on the night of a full moon" level niche.

The typical valuation for 1CP MW strats is 1CP for 1d3 mortal wounds in X situation - there are literally dozens of examples of this. You need 12 models in range of the unit to make this worth the average valuation. And these 1CP for 1d3 mortal wounds strats are rarely used anyway, because the consensus is that they are poor value for CP except in very particular circumstances.

It is "just bad," as a matter of math. There are virtually no situations where, if you have that many models capable of striking something, you wouldn't be better off using those models to wrap or move-block instead. Basically the only time it will ever even come up is if you have a ton of crappy infantry surrounding a unit with the fly keyword in the middle of the board without enough board control to move-block it from falling back. It's super, super, super niche. And even in that super niche situation...the payoff is underwhelming.

You want to tell me you never piled in/consolidated into a target you've not declared? Or nothing ever escaped combat because your unit whiffed, or you had to divide attacks available?

I don't get how your response relates to mine. If you can pile in or consolidate into a target you didn't declare with 10+ models, why wouldn't you just wrap it instead? If you divided attacks badly, again, why wouldn't you just wrap it during consolidation?

It's not impossible to think of situations where this is theoretically not terrible. But they're extremely few and far between. Basically: "a unit with fly that wants to fall back from you that you can't move-block that you have 12+ models in range of, that dealing a couple of MWs to would actually be useful."

If your unit whiffed, a smattering of MWs wont be solving their problems.... they are still getting blasted in the opponents turn irregardless.

Also just because we get 12+1 CP a turn doesnt mean we will get a 6 as games rarely last to turn 6, we are quite a CP intensive army, I wouldnt spare a CP for this any day of the week unless I was extremely desperate, which means im probably loosing the game anyway.

So I agree with Yukishiro 100000% its a gimmicky strat that GW is tryna show off that apparently helps combat units. Unless overwatch also changes to a similiar strat (highly unlikely) then this strat is pretty damn near pointless.

I love this.

However we've just been granted 6 FA choices and a single battalion only allows up to 3 without us then having to pay for more. Same for heavy support. 6 troops and elites is fine, but our utility balance is skewed now as the way our elite choices are set the moment we're only ever taking 3.

My mind is never gonna justify paying for a detachment when I had 13cp before. Though I guess the 1 extra cp power turn might balance that out.

I never really wanted 2 battalions though, just more heavy support and cp lol

It would still be a gimmicky pointless strat even if overwatch changes to be a similar strat. That would just make combat armies better for a different reason - not because of this strat, but because of the overwatch change.

yukishiro1 wrote:
I don't get how your response relates to mine. If you can pile in or consolidate into a target you didn't declare with 10+ models, why wouldn't you just wrap it instead? If you divided attacks badly, again, why wouldn't you just wrap it during consolidation?

It's not impossible to think of situations where this is theoretically not terrible. But they're extremely few and far between. Basically: "a unit with fly that wants to fall back from you that you can't move-block that you have 12+ models in range of, that dealing a couple of MWs to would actually be useful."

Because sometimes charge range rolled, pile-in and consolidate is not enough to wrap, just enough to tag? I know my charge rolls are lousy but am I really the only one who rolls way below the needed inches to get to really juicy targets? Besides I don't really understand why the upset on a more, let's call it, basic level - are we angry because there's a niche stratagem, we pay nothing to unlock because it's simply there, to be potentially useful to stop or finish something we didn't manage with normal means?

Ya know what would be potentially good? A leadership test to fallback. All those ld auras and psychic powers suddenly more useful.