ClockworkZion wrote:

 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.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 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.

 Jidmah wrote:

 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.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 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.

Spending points on units just to fill out slots kind of kills the whole "you can just play the cool models you like" narrative they're selling doesn't it? Csm players spend points for "regular dudes" to fill their slots, loyalist players spend points for seven and a half foot transhuman killing machines to fill theirs. And the regular dudes are getting a more punitive price hike. Yeah, sounds fair.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 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.

Spending points on units just to fill out slots kind of kills the whole "you can just play the cool models you like" narrative they're selling doesn't it? Csm players spend points for "regular dudes" to fill their slots, loyalist players spend points for seven and a half foot transhuman killing machines to fill theirs. And the regular dudes are getting a more punitive price hike. Yeah, sounds fair.

There is always the conspiratorial option that they're trying to phase out Cultists since they never got a full kit and the points hike is just another nail in the coffin.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 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.

Spending points on units just to fill out slots kind of kills the whole "you can just play the cool models you like" narrative they're selling doesn't it? Csm players spend points for "regular dudes" to fill their slots, loyalist players spend points for seven and a half foot transhuman killing machines to fill theirs. And the regular dudes are getting a more punitive price hike. Yeah, sounds fair.

There is always the conspiratorial option that they're trying to phase out Cultists since they never got a full kit and the points hike is just another nail in the coffin.

If that were their goal it would be better served by making csm a better option than they currently are.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Well the next update is about to go live, so I guess we'll find out what fresh hell we'll all be arguing about today in a few mins.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So far this is all very high-level vaguebooking.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Well the next update is about to go live, so I guess we'll find out what fresh hell we'll all be arguing about today in a few mins.

If there was ever a quote that summed up dakka, it's this one

I hate to say it, but I'm cautiously optimistic for 9th. At the bare minimum, having so many rules baked into our codexes at least means we're not going to have to deal with as much shenanigans as the previous editions did where rules like fleet or zealot completely changed how units worked overnight.

Well see how misplaced that optimism is of course. Not everything in 2020 can suck... Right?

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Jesus how many weeks are they going to try to drag out things over streams like this. What a bore

- notes by Joe#0064 on the Warhammer 40K Discord.

===== RULES =====

- the studio has discussed the matter, and worked to codify to sizes properly; taking into account Kill Team (sub-500PTs) and Apocalypse (post-3000PTs) as well.

- more plans for Kill Team in the future.

- in the past, the studio wrote missions that "worked" for whatever size game you were playing; with this edition, they've tried to tailor the experiences more around specific point values this time around. Each size generally looks at "different" aspects of war in the Warhammer 40,000 Universe, but they are still representative of that core experience.

- game sizes are; Combat Patrol (500PTs), Incursion (1000PTs), Strike Force (2000PTs), Onslaught (3000PTs).

- there's a roughly expected length of time for each size, however it varies on a case-by-case basis. As examples, Combat Patrol is about 1hr, Incursion 2hrs, Strike Force 3hrs, Onslaught 4hrs.

- ultimately, the aim was to make the new rules accessible for both new and old players, and avoid leaving people in "daunting" situations; i.e. feeling they have to spend a year painting a 2000PTs army if the player ever wants to play with other people. Removing the barriers, in effect.

- "minimum-size boards" are mentioned in the rulebooks - it doesn't strictly matter what size you're playing on if you keep above those minimums.

- everything (stratgems, Command Points, etc) scales a little more smoothly with different game sizes this edition.

- the internet has over-analysed the changes, and done so incorrectly. As an example, Stu's Space Marine army has lost a total of one squad from the entire army due to the new point changes.

- 2000PTs will likely remain "the main stay" of the community, but Stu is hopeful we'll start seeing more 1000PTs events moving forward; less time-consuming to start, and more enticing to new players.

- you can still play games at other points values; the new system doesn't lock you out of playing 1500PTs, 1750PTs (like a weirdo - Joe), etc. The Inquisition won't boot in your door and tell you you're player 40k wrong.

- Stu's favourite changes; accessibility for new people and the opportunity to start armies he wouldn't have in the past, as previous editions the game wasn't really designed in mind with people that wanted to play smaller games.

 Imateria wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Jesus how many weeks are they going to try to drag out things over streams like this. What a bore

The entire month, we already know this.

the internet has over-analysed the changes, and done so incorrectly.

2000PTs will likely remain "the main stay" of the community, but Stu is hopeful we'll start seeing more 1000PTs events moving forward; less time-consuming to start, and more enticing to new players.

you can still play games at other points values; the new system doesn't lock you out of playing 1500PTs, 1750PTs (like a weirdo - Joe), etc. The Inquisition won't boot in your door and tell you you're player 40k wrong.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
5*17=85
5*20=100
100-85=15

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

No. No they did not.

Fair enough. No math before caffeine for me then.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Tune in tomorrow where they describe how the first part of the shooting phase - selecting targets - works in 9th Ed. The rest of the shooting phase will be discussed once a week over the next month.

 Ravajaxe wrote:
So, I have listened to the today's video Twitch stream, and there have not been much previewed.


The design team wanted to make the game more accessible. Get rid of entry barriers.
A select number of missions will be available for different game sizes.
They put recommanded minimum board sizes for each game type.
All measurements will be made from middle of the board.
The Combat Patrol missions will match the small kill team board.
The team wanted to give an idea of game durations :
combat patrol (500 points) - >1 h
incursion (1000 points) - > 2 h
strike force (2000 points) - > 3h
onslaught (3000 points) - > 4h.
They wanted to insure stratagem importance scale with the game size, thus given the command points table.

Stu' Black said about internet comments, that people overestimate the point cost readjustments.
Is 3000 points the old 2000 points ? - > No.
They are hopeful we will see more 1000 points cost event in the new edition.
But people can absolutely continue to still play 1750 points if they want.
Common language and common structure are the key.

Best change about game sizes ? - > Add more fresh people to the hobby.
Give opportunities to start new projects, new armies. and play them while they are not completed, something you were not able to do before.
-------------------------

So that's it for today.
Next week will continue to have a daily video like these.

 xttz wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
5*17=85
5*20=100
100-85=15

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

No. No they did not.

Fair enough. No math before caffeine for me then.

Well to be fair, we don't know the final cost of Intercessors, only that the base cost has gone back to 20pts. Their main weapon options could have been changed just as substantially as Cultists for the same reason.

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
So, I have listened to the today's video Twitch stream, and there have not been much previewed.


The design team wanted to make the game more accessible. Get rid of entry barriers.
A select number of missions will be available for different game sizes.
They put recommanded minimum board sizes for each game type.
All measurements will be made from middle of the board.
The Combat Patrol missions will match the small kill team board.
The team wanted to give an idea of game durations :
combat patrol (500 points) - >1 h
incursion (1000 points) - > 2 h
strike force (2000 points) - > 3h
onslaught (3000 points) - > 4h.
They wanted to insure stratagem importance scale with the game size, thus given the command points table.

Stu' Black said about internet comments, that people overestimate the point cost readjustments.
Is 3000 points the old 2000 points ? - > No.
They are hopeful we will see more 1000 points cost event in the new edition.
But people can absolutely continue to still play 1750 points if they want.
Common language and common structure are the key.

Best change about game sizes ? - > Add more fresh people to the hobby.
Give opportunities to start new projects, new armies. and play them while they are not completed, something you were not able to do before.
-------------------------

So that's it for today.
Next week will continue to have a daily video like these.

Just as clarification, I believe they said that 500 points (patrol) would be played on 2 kill team boards side by side (so the boards in Moon Base Klasius would support 2 patrol games).

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Spoiler:

 xttz wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
5*17=85
5*20=100
100-85=15

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

No. No they did not.

Fair enough. No math before caffeine for me then.

Well to be fair, we don't know the final cost of Intercessors, only that the base cost has gone back to 20pts. Their main weapon options could have been changed just as substantially as Cultists for the same reason.

True.

We can guess armies are going to lose a squad of Space Marines though, so about ~200pts of a current 2k army I guess?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
5*17=85
5*20=100
100-85=15

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

No. No they did not.

Fair enough. No math before caffeine for me then.

Well to be fair, we don't know the final cost of Intercessors, only that the base cost has gone back to 20pts. Their main weapon options could have been changed just as substantially as Cultists for the same reason.

True.

We can guess armies are going to lose a squad of Space Marines though, so about ~200pts of a current 2k army I guess?

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 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