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.

6+ will not be a horde. Also, if blast weapons get max shots against hordes and hordes WERE 6+ this stratagem would be redundant and completely useless. If anything it confirms that the number is notably higher. Also note that another ability later on references 11+ yet people don't seem to be lending that much weight.

I'm hoping the Knight Valiant's Conflagration Cannon is a blast weapon.18 auto hits against whatever they define a "horde" would almost make up for the ridiculousness that is the Thundercoil Harpoon...

If anything over 5 models is going to be a "horde", and we're going to see lots of "max shots" and other such abilities using that metric, 9E is going to be the mother of all MSU editions. I know we've seen that previously with a couple things before (though it appears to have been dropped from some, like Demo cannons), but I'm hoping that stratagem is just a poorly thought out one-off, not an indicator of trends to come, the further spiking of lethality is really unproductive, though maybe actual terrain rules will help.

Maybe it's just my perception, but there are so many Imperial Knight special rules that are all about them getting closer to the enemy/stuck into combat quicker/better at close combat, and very few to do with shooting.

 Kanluwen wrote:
$60 for Pteraxii is stupid. It's just stupid.
It's Electropriests level of stupid. I have zero Electropriests and it looks like I will have zero Pteraxii.

You're complaining about prices? Jeez... they must be bad then.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Fingers crossed, "6 or more" isn't what we're considering Hordes in the new edition.

Ain't that the truth...

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
6+ will not be a horde. Also, if blast weapons get max shots against hordes and hordes WERE 6+ this stratagem would be redundant and completely useless. If anything it confirms that the number is notably higher. Also note that another ability later on references 11+ yet people don't seem to be lending that much weight.

Not really. You assume helverin autocanon be blast weapon. Odds are it won't get max shots in 9th ed vs even 30 boyz. Not blast weapon.

Just because I don't constantly whine about prices does not mean I always think they're reasonable.

 Vaktathi wrote:
If anything over 5 models is going to be a "horde", and we're going to see lots of "max shots" and other such abilities using that metric, 9E is going to be the mother of all MSU editions. I know we've seen that previously with a couple things before (though it appears to have been dropped from some, like Demo cannons), but I'm hoping that stratagem is just a poorly thought out one-off, not an indicator of trends to come, the further spiking of lethality is really unproductive, though maybe actual terrain rules will help.

Again it's stratagem that can be used on one model in the army per phase and costs CP. Those are by definition expected to be more powerful than common ability that multiple units and weapons can use for free. I wouldn't pay too much attention to that 6+ model thing on that.

One of the new "build your own house" options calls out 11+ models and is described as good for crushing hordes, so that seems way more likely than 6+. Granted, that's in the warcom description, not the actual ability, but still.

Alternatively, the 2d3 goes to 6 thing could be indicative of max shots being granted when shooting at a target that meets or exceeds the potential shot cap. So d6 flamers trigger on 6+ models, d3 plasma cannons on 3+, etc.. I don't think it's super likely, but there's always the chance that they wanted to up the dakka while not absolutely plastering single/small units. It does feel weird when a lone guy gets hit six times from a flamer or similar weapon that is ostensibly about saturating an area, not lasering down single targets.

tneva82 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
If anything over 5 models is going to be a "horde", and we're going to see lots of "max shots" and other such abilities using that metric, 9E is going to be the mother of all MSU editions. I know we've seen that previously with a couple things before (though it appears to have been dropped from some, like Demo cannons), but I'm hoping that stratagem is just a poorly thought out one-off, not an indicator of trends to come, the further spiking of lethality is really unproductive, though maybe actual terrain rules will help.

Again it's stratagem that can be used on one model in the army per phase and costs CP. Those are by definition expected to be more powerful than common ability that multiple units and weapons can use for free. I wouldn't pay too much attention to that 6+ model thing on that.

Except that there is already a precedence with the Harlequin PA update. It seems that there will be some weapons/abilities etc that work on 6+ models. I now do think that horde will be the 11+ grouping, so this is something between the 2.

 bullyboy wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
If anything over 5 models is going to be a "horde", and we're going to see lots of "max shots" and other such abilities using that metric, 9E is going to be the mother of all MSU editions. I know we've seen that previously with a couple things before (though it appears to have been dropped from some, like Demo cannons), but I'm hoping that stratagem is just a poorly thought out one-off, not an indicator of trends to come, the further spiking of lethality is really unproductive, though maybe actual terrain rules will help.

Again it's stratagem that can be used on one model in the army per phase and costs CP. Those are by definition expected to be more powerful than common ability that multiple units and weapons can use for free. I wouldn't pay too much attention to that 6+ model thing on that.

Except that there is already a precedence with the Harlequin PA update. It seems that there will be some weapons/abilities etc that work on 6+ models. I now do think that horde will be the 11+ grouping, so this is something between the 2.

The death jester one? Special ability that replaces other ability of a specific model. Again hardly same as common ability for multiple weapons in probably every single army.

The more specific ability the better it needs to be. This one isn't extra free rule. It replaces existing rule. It needs to be decent enough to be worth it. Simply getting common ability for that model wouldn't be all that awesome.

tneva82 wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
If anything over 5 models is going to be a "horde", and we're going to see lots of "max shots" and other such abilities using that metric, 9E is going to be the mother of all MSU editions. I know we've seen that previously with a couple things before (though it appears to have been dropped from some, like Demo cannons), but I'm hoping that stratagem is just a poorly thought out one-off, not an indicator of trends to come, the further spiking of lethality is really unproductive, though maybe actual terrain rules will help.

Again it's stratagem that can be used on one model in the army per phase and costs CP. Those are by definition expected to be more powerful than common ability that multiple units and weapons can use for free. I wouldn't pay too much attention to that 6+ model thing on that.

Except that there is already a precedence with the Harlequin PA update. It seems that there will be some weapons/abilities etc that work on 6+ models. I now do think that horde will be the 11+ grouping, so this is something between the 2.

The death jester one? Special ability that replaces other ability of a specific model. Again hardly same as common ability for multiple weapons in probably every single army.

The more specific ability the better it needs to be. This one isn't extra free rule. It replaces existing rule. It needs to be decent enough to be worth it. Simply getting common ability for that model wouldn't be all that awesome.

No, the point being that GW using 6+ for certain weapon attributes is not just an arbitrary number. It looks like it will be a common theme.

tneva82 wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
6+ will not be a horde. Also, if blast weapons get max shots against hordes and hordes WERE 6+ this stratagem would be redundant and completely useless. If anything it confirms that the number is notably higher. Also note that another ability later on references 11+ yet people don't seem to be lending that much weight.

Not really. You assume helverin autocanon be blast weapon. Odds are it won't get max shots in 9th ed vs even 30 boyz. Not blast weapon.

Regardless, 6+ will not be the divider for a 'horde' unit. If there are multiple levels then maybe there will be a 6-10 'mid-range' but if things get divided into horde and not-horde then 6 will not be the line.

Did GW even use word 'horde' when talking about the new blast rule? Didn't they just talk about 'larger units' or something like that?

Better get ready for the 6 or more horde everyone. MSU is the new way, as if it wasn't already the current way.

 Crimson wrote:
Did GW even use word 'horde' when talking about the new blast rule? Didn't they just talk about 'larger units' or something like that?

They did, in fact, use the term "horde". They did not reference what the number was and annoyingly they did not give us any ideas from the Q&A on Tuesday. Just that Blast weapons are going to get more 'guaranteed hits' versus a 'horde'.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Better get ready for the 6 or more horde everyone. MSU is the new way, as if it wasn't already the current way.

Right? And then on top of that they mention more focus on morale. So all I hear is goodbye guardsmen, if 10+ is their definition of horde, at least maybe my tank company will be more viable and my AdMech army seems to have gotten a decent power-up.

 Colonel Cross wrote:

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Better get ready for the 6 or more horde everyone. MSU is the new way, as if it wasn't already the current way.

Right? And then on top of that they mention more focus on morale. So all I hear is goodbye guardsmen, if 10+ is their definition of horde, at least maybe my tank company will be more viable and my AdMech army seems to have gotten a decent power-up.

Yeah if 6+ is the standard that will hurt guard armies pretty bad. At least ad mech units can choose to run less than 6 models in a unit. Maybe it's a sign to run all tank groups ? Yet again that wheel goes round and round doesn't it ? Oh well, good thing I have a ton of tanks and yes, Ad mech do look pretty ok. I guess we'll find out in the future, Warhammer 9th edition the Quest for more money.

10+ seems dumb. 11+ more probable.

The fixed swing on Armiger Autocannons is given since they're not ideally Infantry killers. It's a good stratagem, but would be redundant, if all other d6 weapon shots get the full 6 for free.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Better get ready for the 6 or more horde everyone. MSU is the new way, as if it wasn't already the current way.

GW already said that PA is written with 9E in mind. So why would they print a stratagem that gives you something the core rules already do for free?

I hear what you are saying but the other multiple shot stuff being commented on was blast weapons. The auto cannons aren't blast weapons, just random shots.

So this could be a sign of how the blast weapons will work, and strat is there to kind of make those auto cannons into blast weapons lite from the hail of fire. Now to me that sounds like how GW do things.Get a new mechanic then sprinkle around ways to have weapons that aren't benefiting from that change have an ability to get it, with CPs.

It sounds like the typical GW heavy handed fix to a problem. " Hey random hit weapons are too random "

GW: " Ok, well if a squad is bigger than min size, so 6+ the random blast weapon does max hits ! "

In their mind its fixing an issue, and with 6+ it'll be active a lot of the time. Which will probably mean they will jack up the points on all those kinds of weapons and I'm sure they'll find out it's too strong, then nerf or heavily change the ability but not fix the point cost rises leaving those units screwed for awhile.

This is really more a new edition topic, but got raised from the Armiger strat but that is how I think it'll roll out anyways and that strat is there to simulate blast effect on a non blast weapon I don't think GW will nuance a like ability for varied squad sizes but I could always be wrong of course.

Given the preview also included an auto triggers on an 11+ model unit ability which is prefaced with the following line

Do your Knights like to squash hordes as if they were insignificant insects? Then choose Guardians of the Frontier.

Which is +1 attack when fighting unist containing 11 or more models.

Fairly reasonable proof for hirdes being 11 or more models.

 bullyboy wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Dunno dude.

Seems useful for obliterating a unit of anything Primaris? And for one 1 CP, when it is useful seems kinda no-brained?

Iron hand infantry oh yeah besides MSU spam is certainly in for some pain, unfortunately non iron hanfs Gravis armour the best primaris to target with those max at 6 models. I expect to se a lot og 5 gravis or 5 centurion units.

You say that like any Marine player plays anything over MSU ever.

where have you been post Codex SM 2.0? It's not all MSU...at all

Playing the game and seeing absolutely no reason to ever even consider taking anything over MSU.

...actually that's not 100% true, I've gone over MSU on Aggressors, Bikers, amd Attack Bikes.

Ice_can wrote:
Given the preview also included an auto triggers on an 11+ model unit ability which is prefaced with the following line

Do your Knights like to squash hordes as if they were insignificant insects? Then choose Guardians of the Frontier.

Which is +1 attack when fighting unist containing 11 or more models.

Fairly reasonable proof for hirdes being 11 or more models.

Fair enough, could be a two tiered approach for it. Or one could be the more often seen version. For what it's worth I hope I am wrong and 11+ is the path for the anti horde weapons as opposed to 6+ but you know what they say about hope.

Either way it's good for one half of the population, or good for the other. Looking at it with Guard colored eyes. It being easier to get max hits makes tanks amazing, but in the same breath would make 10 man troop squads feel awfully lean. Still though if that is taken into account in pricing for the models being adjusted that could lead to some questionable calls with how much work they think that ability would get on squads of 11+.

MSU may be the way to go this upcoming edition, but with extra army slots from more detachments being a hit to command instead of adding to it, i wonder how much of a balancing act things will be.

(edit) weird, confused the threads discussing that. fair enough: im vaguely intrigued to see what will come in full for both knight variants. im beginning to like them, and it seems i didn't pay them their due attention.

The Newman wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Dunno dude.

Seems useful for obliterating a unit of anything Primaris? And for one 1 CP, when it is useful seems kinda no-brained?

Iron hand infantry oh yeah besides MSU spam is certainly in for some pain, unfortunately non iron hanfs Gravis armour the best primaris to target with those max at 6 models. I expect to se a lot og 5 gravis or 5 centurion units.

You say that like any Marine player plays anything over MSU ever.

where have you been post Codex SM 2.0? It's not all MSU...at all

Playing the game and seeing absolutely no reason to ever even consider taking anything over MSU.

...actually that's not 100% true, I've gone over MSU on Aggressors, Bikers, amd Attack Bikes.

Yeah with Aggressors I've never gone over five, and with Centurions I've never gone over four.

What we have to realise is that any number they pick as the delineator between "horde" and "not-horde" is going to be arbitrary. Whether it's 11 or 21 or whatever, it's just a number plucked out of thin air.

I'd say it has to be 11, because most things come in 10 or more (or up to 10), and punishing a Guard or Marine squad for being a "horde" for simply taking their usual squad size is daffy.

I'd also say it has to be 11 because if you make it any higher, then people will just take 1 less than whatever that arbitrary number is, as most of the actual horde units (Orks, Gaunts, etc.) start at 10 and then go up from there. So if it's 20, they'll take 19. If it's 21, they'll take 20 and so on. Those units, IMO, don't work at minimum size (who is taking 10 Termagants?), so you make it 11, meaning that when someone takes a typical squad of Gaunts or Boyz they are automatically a horde. Yeah, sucks to be a Genestealer, but maybe that can be reflected in a price cut.

It's either that or force higher minimum sizes (ie. hordes are 20 and above, and Gaunts/Slugga Boys come in squads of 20-30).

Hey guys, let's move the horde stuff to its appropriate topic and keep things on target here, which is Engine War.

 xttz wrote:

GW already said that PA is written with 9E in mind.

written with 9th in mind does not mean written for 9th edition

this can be from "we had a basic idea what rough changes would be there in 9th" to "the playtest version of 9th that existed during the PA design was replaced by something different after PA was printed"

so don't put too much time into thinking how such rules might work with the next edition as everything can still be changed with a day 1 errata anyway (and GW won't tell you details as they still want you to buy the book)

edit: Mod comment so skip it

And finally, the Daemon preview >> https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/05/29/the-great-game/
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Hahahhahahahahhaaaahahaaaaaaaa JK! it's a fluff piece vaguely related to AOS