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.

Yea i can see transports that can rock offensive weaponry becoming very popular in 9th.

Maybe if Land Raiders (and a few other choice vehicles) get their "Assault Vehicle" role back, then that would help improve them overall./

 Latro_ wrote:
Anyone already looking at their lists to try and scale down detachments? here is my ork list:

Spoiler:

2000pt Orks (Standard Army) - 13CP
Battalion <Deathskullz> <Dread Waagh 1cp>
Warboss (Power Klaw, Squig, Kombi-Skorcha) 95
Big Mek <WL> Big Killa Boss (Shokk Attack Gun <Relic&gt 80
30 Shoota Boyz (3x BS, 3x TBombz, Nob, Killsaw) 240
30 Shoota Boyz (3x BS, 3x TBombz, Nob, Killsaw) 240
30 Slugga Boyz (3x TBombz, Nob, Killsaw) 225
2 Deffkoptas (Kopta Rokkits, Bigbomms) 88
2 Deffkoptas (Kopta Rokkits, Bigbomms) 88
2 Deffkoptas (Kopta Rokkits, Bigbomms) 88
15 Lootas 255

Battalion <Deathskullz>
Weirdboy (Da jump) 62
Weirdboy (Maniacal Seizure) 62
10 Grots 30
10 Grots 30
10 Grots 30
10 Grots 30

Spearhead <Cheeky Zoggerz>
Big Mek (KFF, Grot Oiler) 59
3 Mekguns (Smasha guns) 99
3 Mekguns (Smasha guns) 99
3 Mekguns (Smasha guns) 99

Its proving very tricky. Across all my armies the two things that are standing out are:
Battalion is 3 HQ - its really hard to get these HQ that you nomrally rely on a bit back into the list.
Heavy support is also proving to be a big one, most armies i have (not just orks) are on the 4-6 heavy support front, looks like spear heads are gonna have to be a purchase for me or stick at dual bata if spear heads cost more. Prob is all this leaves ye down on CP.

All a bit early with the points changes etc, but interesting exercise at the minute

Find room for some elites and go brigade? That and with points costs going up you'll have to cut something out anyway.

Ice_can wrote:
Adding a codex definataly should have a CP cost attached to it otherwise Drukari or Tau for example that have structural limitations in their codex that means they effectively need to take multiple detachments are going to end up playing with the same CP as Soup.

That isn't fair or balanced, 2 subfactions should should cost your second detachment, dipping into a second codex shoukd cost even more

Guard plus knight's, Spacemarine Soup, Deathwatch plus guard.

Full agreement. It already grants an advantage to factions that can write viable single-detachment armies, if those that need two are paying the same to do so as a craftworld and DE force, or Knights and Loyal 32 and whatever, then they're just get humped twice over.

I really like the principle, but on the info we have I think it really harms some armies (at least until they get new codices with their own doctrines and super doctrines or substantially rewritten CTs).

Cut them down is a wasted opportunity. Falling back from teo grots is more of a worry than turning your back on the Swarmlord or Jain Zar? Maybe there's more to come to keep folks pinned.

Dudeface wrote:

 Latro_ wrote:
Anyone already looking at their lists to try and scale down detachments? here is my ork list:

Spoiler:

2000pt Orks (Standard Army) - 13CP
Battalion <Deathskullz> <Dread Waagh 1cp>
Warboss (Power Klaw, Squig, Kombi-Skorcha) 95
Big Mek <WL> Big Killa Boss (Shokk Attack Gun <Relic&gt 80
30 Shoota Boyz (3x BS, 3x TBombz, Nob, Killsaw) 240
30 Shoota Boyz (3x BS, 3x TBombz, Nob, Killsaw) 240
30 Slugga Boyz (3x TBombz, Nob, Killsaw) 225
2 Deffkoptas (Kopta Rokkits, Bigbomms) 88
2 Deffkoptas (Kopta Rokkits, Bigbomms) 88
2 Deffkoptas (Kopta Rokkits, Bigbomms) 88
15 Lootas 255

Battalion <Deathskullz>
Weirdboy (Da jump) 62
Weirdboy (Maniacal Seizure) 62
10 Grots 30
10 Grots 30
10 Grots 30
10 Grots 30

Spearhead <Cheeky Zoggerz>
Big Mek (KFF, Grot Oiler) 59
3 Mekguns (Smasha guns) 99
3 Mekguns (Smasha guns) 99
3 Mekguns (Smasha guns) 99

Its proving very tricky. Across all my armies the two things that are standing out are:
Battalion is 3 HQ - its really hard to get these HQ that you nomrally rely on a bit back into the list.
Heavy support is also proving to be a big one, most armies i have (not just orks) are on the 4-6 heavy support front, looks like spear heads are gonna have to be a purchase for me or stick at dual bata if spear heads cost more. Prob is all this leaves ye down on CP.

All a bit early with the points changes etc, but interesting exercise at the minute

Find room for some elites and go brigade? That and with points costs going up you'll have to cut something out anyway.

I'm thinking with the pts hikes i'm gonna cut the characters across lists and the odd unit here like excess troops so:



10 Grots removed
combined 3x3 mek to a 4 and a 5
removed weird boy
removed big mek with kff

shaves off 150pts which is pushing the 10% price hike, prob need to drop more

I would have liked to see something similar to overwatch for fall backs.
You can make CC attacks against the unit, that falls back, hitting on 6s, wounding normally, etc...

The stratagem seems to work not really good, if used for a character / single model, trying to hurt a unit that falls back. On the other hand, mortal wounds deny you any saving throw (except the FnP, that some armies can not get).
But at least it's a step in the right direction, I think. Melee armies need a tool against those fall back moves.

Dudeface wrote:
Find room for some elites and go brigade?

My problem with Brigades are the additional compulsory Troops requirements. I'm one of those people who doesn't like bringing a min-sized unit of Rippers to fulfil a "troop tax", so avoided Brigades as I didn't want to bring more and more and more Gaunts.

Plus FA in a lot of armies just sucks, and I don't want to have to bring Gargoyles or Raveners.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Find room for some elites and go brigade?

My problem with Brigades are the additional compulsory Troops requirements. I'm one of those people who doesn't like bringing a min-sized unit of Rippers to fulfil a "troop tax", so avoided Brigades as I didn't want to bring more and more and more Gaunts.

Plus FA in a lot of armies just sucks, and I don't want to have to bring Gargoyles or Raveners.

Unfortunately without the new points costs we are straight up lacking in formation ti be able to do more than guess yet.
GW have said they have increased points across the bored, rebalanced point's, increased them by an avarage of 10% and apparently blast weapons are seeing quite the increase in points.

None of which makes any sense or lines up with the 17% on intercessors and 50% on cultists so Not even sure GW knows what the points changes Realy are or mean.

In terms of hitting as units fall back, IMO they should bring back a version of the crossfire rule and run them down rules.

Firstly, if your unit if falling back in the direction of an enemy troop, they should take mortal wounds on a 4+ for the crossfire rule, with the amount of dice rolled being for the unit performing the crossfire, not the unit falling back, as you shouldn't be falling back int he direction of the enemy really. I like this as it boosts tactical and strategic play, you can set traps and other BS like falling back towards an objective can be stopped.

Secondly, I think the attacking unit should have a chance to catch and run down units again with the 6+ mortal wound per chasing unit being applied, which gives a hard conundrum for the falling back player to make, do they attempt the fall back knowing they could still be caught? Up side is for the player falling back, if it's 10 intercessors chasing down 20 cultists, you no longer have 20 rolls to contend with, just 10.

As a balance to this, I think trapping units should no longer be an option, so you cannot lock units in combat, but with the inclusion of run them down and crossfire, you may think twice about falling back, as you could take damage and/or actually not escape combat in the end.

An up side to this is, large units are encouraged for the purposes of performing crossfire and run them down.

Ice_can wrote:
None of which makes any sense or lines up with the 17% on intercessors and 50% on cultists so Not even sure GW knows what the points changes Realy are or mean.

Well given GW's approach to everything is always "change the entire system without thinking through how this impacts individual units", it wouldn't be the first time.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
None of which makes any sense or lines up with the 17% on intercessors and 50% on cultists so Not even sure GW knows what the points changes Realy are or mean.

Well given GW's approach to everything is always "change the entire system without thinking through how this impacts individual units", it wouldn't be the first time.

I for one am a bit anxious, if the cultists relative hike is normal for chaff units, and there were alot of them that didn't work, then chaff armies get fethed hard.
And i am for one sick of not beeing able to field my r&h.

Ice_can wrote:Adding a codex definataly should have a CP cost attached to it otherwise Drukari or Tau for example that have structural limitations in their codex that means they effectively need to take multiple detachments are going to end up playing with the same CP as Soup.

That isn't fair or balanced, 2 subfactions should should cost your second detachment, dipping into a second codex shoukd cost even more

Guard plus knight's, Spacemarine Soup, Deathwatch plus guard.

That's pretty much baked into the system already with the first detachment being practically free and latter costing CPs
And I don't know about drukari, but tau manages just fine in 1 battalion. Heck, i'd create the second battalion ONLY to generate CP.
The commander limit still sucks, but honestly a commander is just a more efficient crisis suit anyway. (except coldstars, they actually give something special. they are also a great fun ruiner for the opponent)

Ice_can wrote:Adding a codex definataly should have a CP cost attached to it otherwise Drukari or Tau for example that have structural limitations in their codex that means they effectively need to take multiple detachments are going to end up playing with the same CP as Soup.

That isn't fair or balanced, 2 subfactions should should cost your second detachment, dipping into a second codex shoukd cost even more

Guard plus knight's, Spacemarine Soup, Deathwatch plus guard.

tneva82 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Adding a codex definataly should have a CP cost attached to it otherwise Drukari or Tau for example that have structural limitations in their codex that means they effectively need to take multiple detachments are going to end up playing with the same CP as Soup.

That isn't fair or balanced, 2 subfactions should should cost your second detachment, dipping into a second codex shoukd cost even more

Guard plus knight's, Spacemarine Soup, Deathwatch plus guard.

You can be fairly sure drukhari and tau commanders gets day 1 errata.

Assuming they were honest about PA being written with 9th in mind, not going to happen
FSE got explicit rule change to allow two commanders per detachment. that would not need to exist had they intended to remove the commander limit.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Spoiler:

Ice_can wrote:Adding a codex definataly should have a CP cost attached to it otherwise Drukari or Tau for example that have structural limitations in their codex that means they effectively need to take multiple detachments are going to end up playing with the same CP as Soup.

That isn't fair or balanced, 2 subfactions should should cost your second detachment, dipping into a second codex shoukd cost even more

Guard plus knight's, Spacemarine Soup, Deathwatch plus guard.

That's pretty much baked into the system already with the first detachment being practically free and latter costing CPs
And I don't know about drukari, but tau manages just fine in 1 battalion. Heck, i'd create the second battalion ONLY to generate CP.
The commander limit still sucks, but honestly a commander is just a more efficient crisis suit anyway. (except coldstars, they actually give something special. they are also a great fun ruiner for the opponent)

tneva82 wrote:

Spoiler:

Ice_can wrote:
Adding a codex definataly should have a CP cost attached to it otherwise Drukari or Tau for example that have structural limitations in their codex that means they effectively need to take multiple detachments are going to end up playing with the same CP as Soup.

That isn't fair or balanced, 2 subfactions should should cost your second detachment, dipping into a second codex shoukd cost even more

Guard plus knight's, Spacemarine Soup, Deathwatch plus guard.

You can be fairly sure drukhari and tau commanders gets day 1 errata.

Assuming they were honest about PA being written with 9th in mind, not going to happen
FSE got explicit rule change to allow two commanders per detachment. that would not need to exist had they intended to remove the commander limit.

Tau don't function well in 1 battalion the limit on HQ's is killer, Commanders aren't more efficent Crisis suits they are actually functional Crisis suits, that units hasn't worked yet in 8th, closest it has got is 1 FSE boosted unit on a CP binge.
Not to mention if the changes to charictor targeting are true coldstars will start being very quick kills.

Can anyone confirm what a dude said on the "cut them down is a laugh" thread, about enemy units being able falling back « Through » your tripoiting models in 9th Ed ? I wasn’t able to find anything on this

 Latro_ wrote:
Anyone already looking at their lists to try and scale down detachments? here is my ork list:

Spoiler:

2000pt Orks (Standard Army) - 13CP
Battalion <Deathskullz> <Dread Waagh 1cp>
Warboss (Power Klaw, Squig, Kombi-Skorcha) 95
Big Mek <WL> Big Killa Boss (Shokk Attack Gun <Relic&gt 80
30 Shoota Boyz (3x BS, 3x TBombz, Nob, Killsaw) 240
30 Shoota Boyz (3x BS, 3x TBombz, Nob, Killsaw) 240
30 Slugga Boyz (3x TBombz, Nob, Killsaw) 225
2 Deffkoptas (Kopta Rokkits, Bigbomms) 88
2 Deffkoptas (Kopta Rokkits, Bigbomms) 88
2 Deffkoptas (Kopta Rokkits, Bigbomms) 88
15 Lootas 255

Battalion <Deathskullz>
Weirdboy (Da jump) 62
Weirdboy (Maniacal Seizure) 62
10 Grots 30
10 Grots 30
10 Grots 30
10 Grots 30

Spearhead <Cheeky Zoggerz>
Big Mek (KFF, Grot Oiler) 59
3 Mekguns (Smasha guns) 99
3 Mekguns (Smasha guns) 99
3 Mekguns (Smasha guns) 99

Its proving very tricky. Across all my armies the two things that are standing out are:
Battalion is 3 HQ - its really hard to get these HQ that you nomrally rely on a bit back into the list.
Heavy support is also proving to be a big one, most armies i have (not just orks) are on the 4-6 heavy support front, looks like spear heads are gonna have to be a purchase for me or stick at dual bata if spear heads cost more. Prob is all this leaves ye down on CP.

All a bit early with the points changes etc, but interesting exercise at the minute

Without going into detail, the main issue is probably trying to fit an 8th edition army into 9th edition. There is a good chance that you might not want some of those models in 9th, but others have become much more valuable. I can see especially the SSAG and gretchin getting a lot less airtime in 9th, but that is mostly speculation at this time.
The new way to build an army is just a new puzzle to solve, eventually, new builds and best practices for building your armies will emerge.

My problem with the accross the board price points rise is that, as always, it fails to address the actual problems of relative unit costs.

Let's take the worst case scenario based on the information at hand and say that horde units are going to be easier to kill with blast weapons going up buy 50%.

So Cultists, Guardsmen, Gaunts, Orks/Gretchin. If there are others I'm forgetting let me know.

So let's look at Gaunts. Termagants are 4 points per model. People take them over Hormagaunts as we know that Hormies are not worth 6 points each.

"But Hormagaunts are 5 points each?"

Find me a Tyranid player alive who doesn't take Adrenal Glands on Hormies. As I said, they're 6 points each.

So say things go up 50%, and Termagants are now worth 6 points each... and H-Gaunts are now 9 each? If they weren't worth it at 6, they're certainly not worth it at 9. Now I'm still bringing Termagants, just less of them.

They haven't increased granularity here. They've just made a unit that wasn't worth its current cost cost more. The net result will just be Tyranid players waiting for an FAQ or new Codex to come out to fix the problem we've been waiting for them to fix and that they made worse with the start of a new edition.

And a new Tyranid Codex means there's a chance that Cruddace might get a third attempt at fething us over again.

 Argive wrote:



2. Those thrall guys seem quite unique but uniform.. Maybe cheap chaff troops to replace scouts that are not servitors? _

Oh, so Chapter Serfs then?
I mean, it would be cool if Chapter Serfs were in the game, but they've been popping up in Space Marine artwork for years now and have yet to make an appearance on the table.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Argive wrote:



2. Those thrall guys seem quite unique but uniform.. Maybe cheap chaff troops to replace scouts that are not servitors? _

Oh, so Chapter Serfs then?
I mean, it would be cool if Chapter Serfs were in the game, but they've been popping up in Space Marine artwork for years now and have yet to make an appearance on the table.

Chapter serfs are so much more interesting to me that the array of godawafukl designs had to suffer in the last decade - from Centurions to the Mini-aircraft....bloody awful crowbarred in crap

 BoomWolf wrote:

That's pretty much baked into the system already with the first detachment being practically free and latter costing CPs
And I don't know about drukari, but tau manages just fine in 1 battalion. Heck, i'd create the second battalion ONLY to generate CP.
The commander limit still sucks, but honestly a commander is just a more efficient crisis suit anyway. (except coldstars, they actually give something special. they are also a great fun ruiner for the opponent)


Assuming they were honest about PA being written with 9th in mind, not going to happen
FSE got explicit rule change to allow two commanders per detachment. that would not need to exist had they intended to remove the commander limit.

a) you don't add battalions to generate CP
b) gw says lots of things. Only small part of it is true. Marine and sister codex also supposedly 9th ed in mind yet it has buff for staying mono which makes no sense when core rules already reward it. Marine codex 1 was 9th ed compliant codex. Marine codex mark 2 is 8th ed codex.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
My problem with the accross the board price points rise is that, as always, it fails to address the actual problems of relative unit costs.

Let's take the worst case scenario based on the information at hand and say that horde units are going to be easier to kill with blast weapons going up buy 50%.

So Cultists, Guardsmen, Gaunts, Orks/Gretchin. If there are others I'm forgetting let me know.

So let's look at Gaunts. Termagants are 4 points per model. People take them over Hormagaunts as we know that Hormies are not worth 6 points each.

"But Hormagaunts are 5 points each?"

Find me a Tyranid player alive who doesn't take Adrenal Glands on Hormies. As I said, they're 6 points each.

So say things go up 50%, and Termagants are now worth 6 points each... and H-Gaunts are now 9 each? If they weren't worth it at 6, they're certainly not worth it at 9. Now I'm still bringing Termagants, just less of them.

They haven't increased granularity here. They've just made a unit that wasn't worth its current cost cost more. The net result will just be Tyranid players waiting for an FAQ or new Codex to come out to fix the problem we've been waiting for them to fix and that they made worse with the start of a new edition.

And a new Tyranid Codex means there's a chance that Cruddace might get a third attempt at fething us over again.

I'm sure you mean 5th chance, we've already had the 5th, 6th, 8th ed codexes plus Blood of Baal.

Or you can be an optimist and assume that everything was rebalanced, just around a higher points baseline.

 greyknight12 wrote:
Or you can be an optimist and assume that everything was rebalanced, just around a higher points baseline.

They've been fething it up for 30 years but this time will be different

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
None of which makes any sense or lines up with the 17% on intercessors and 50% on cultists so Not even sure GW knows what the points changes Realy are or mean.

Well given GW's approach to everything is always "change the entire system without thinking through how this impacts individual units", it wouldn't be the first time.

When they did the initial stream they said points changes would be tied to their performance in the new edition. Time will tell if they managed to get close or not.

I'm pretty confident that 9th will not be balanced out of the gate. Changing points for every single unit without the feedback of the entire community will result in imbalances. These will get corrected eventually but not for awhile. 8th has had points changed constantly to try and get as close to balanced as possible, so it's unlikely that GW and their playtesters have played enough games with enough variables to properly cost every unit in the game. Impossible.
It would be prudent to expect this outcome initially, and have a little patience for that first change. It will be interesting to see which new unit(s) will be the "king" of early 9th edition.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
None of which makes any sense or lines up with the 17% on intercessors and 50% on cultists so Not even sure GW knows what the points changes Realy are or mean.

Well given GW's approach to everything is always "change the entire system without thinking through how this impacts individual units", it wouldn't be the first time.

When they did the initial stream they said points changes would be tied to their performance in the new edition. Time will tell if they managed to get close or not.

I wonder how good cultists performed to warrant a 50 % increase and intercissors to just warant a 17 % even though we all know that the same rules as now apply to them.
or did they pull the same as last time with their initial testers beeing forced to play predetermined lists?

Not Online!!! wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
None of which makes any sense or lines up with the 17% on intercessors and 50% on cultists so Not even sure GW knows what the points changes Realy are or mean.

Well given GW's approach to everything is always "change the entire system without thinking through how this impacts individual units", it wouldn't be the first time.

When they did the initial stream they said points changes would be tied to their performance in the new edition. Time will tell if they managed to get close or not.

I wonder how good cultists performed to warrant a 50 % increase and intercissors to just warant a 17 % even though we all know that the same rules as now apply to them.
or did they pull the same as last time with their initial testers beeing forced to play predetermined lists?

Based on the fact they both jumped 20 points for a MSU, the points changes may be more unit based than model base.

As mentioned elsewhere, just being a model physically present on the board is of benefit, whether your squishy or tough.

Cultists and other cheapo chaffe are either charge blockers, or backfield objective campers. Both uses have an impact on the battle beyond their kill ratio. For instance, whether they’re 3pts or 6pts each, they can still prevent something big and nasty getting to your more useful units. Whether they’re 2pts or 6pts, they can still bag you VPs just for sitting around picking their noses on an objective.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
As mentioned elsewhere, just being a model physically present on the board is of benefit, whether your squishy or tough.

Cultists and other cheapo chaffe are either charge blockers, or backfield objective campers. Both uses have an impact on the battle beyond their kill ratio. For instance, whether they’re 3pts or 6pts each, they can still prevent something big and nasty getting to your more useful units. Whether they’re 2pts or 6pts, they can still bag you VPs just for sitting around picking their noses on an objective.

They also fill troops slots cheaply allowing for more points to be aimed at the good stuff for CSM while not losing CP to non-core detachments, and them taking actions to score is less of a negative as it is for CSM or something like Chaos Terminators to do so.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
None of which makes any sense or lines up with the 17% on intercessors and 50% on cultists so Not even sure GW knows what the points changes Realy are or mean.

Well given GW's approach to everything is always "change the entire system without thinking through how this impacts individual units", it wouldn't be the first time.

When they did the initial stream they said points changes would be tied to their performance in the new edition. Time will tell if they managed to get close or not.

I wonder how good cultists performed to warrant a 50 % increase and intercissors to just warant a 17 % even though we all know that the same rules as now apply to them.
or did they pull the same as last time with their initial testers beeing forced to play predetermined lists?

Based on the fact they both jumped 20 points for a MSU, the points changes may be more unit based than model base.

5*17=85
5*20=100
100-85=15

10*4=40
10*6=60
60-40=20

No. No they did not.

 greyknight12 wrote:
Or you can be an optimist and assume that everything was rebalanced, just around a higher points baseline.

Being realistic, neither them nor us can foresee what impact a change of this magnitude will have on every unit in the game. It will take them at least a couple of iterations to get it right.