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.

The Giant unanswered question as of yet is have they changed fallback as they avoided talking about it when tripointing cameup but implied tripointing was and 8th edition thing??

That either means tripoint is just gone and you can move through enemies or it could also mean fallback has been altered in some way, if say it was now done is the charge phase for example?

 bullyboy wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Man alive there better be something real real good to incentivize taking units as a horde.

"Hordes, they're great! None of your dudes can fight, vehicles will score max hits on you automatically - enjoy those Heavy 12 Thunderfire cannons - and now you can't tie things up in melee anymore!

Hormagants, ork boyz, cultists, GSC - you just paint those things so the people you're playing against can feel cool while they make you shovel them off the board, right?"

Honestly, I will be glad to see this be the "elite" edition rather than "hordes/weight of fire" edition.

Dunno about you but i would prefer game be viable for both rather than what gw wants to sell next

yukishiro1 wrote:
The more that I think about it, if they were actually going to restrict melee to only models within 1", not within 1" of 1", they would have already said so, because it would be without a doubt the biggest single change to the rules in the entire edition. They've answered questions about melee viability several times on various streams, and if they were making such a fundamental change, I refuse to believe that even GW would not yet have mentioned it.

All this junk about what is actually relatively minor changes to vehicles that they are hyping as "the" big change in 9th would pale in comparison to the significance of melee only within 1".

I don't think they are changing which models get to fight during the fight phase, at least not to reduce it. The statement that "engagement range" is within 1" was on Warhammer Daily. Statements on Warhammer Daily are off the cuff and rarely precise statements of rules. Stu stated multiple times that Vehicles and Monster would have a -1 Hit when targeting a unit within Engagement range with no qualifications. Then the Warhammer Community article comes out and that applies only to Heavy weapons.

I suggest you take nothing they say during Warhammer Daily as the full story. It's always partly accurate, but not precisely accurate.

The wait and see tactic aint panning out to well in regard to cultists price hike.

I also think this vehicle change is typical GW behavior of over compensating for a problem. The hit penalty for moving was dumb, good change. But the firing into combat AND allowing split fire, and engagement range remaining only an inch is open season for gamesmanship.

Maybe engagement is 1" but models within 3" can fight (please god) as that would clean the system up and help hordes fight. Right now a sydonian dragoon can be 1" away and his 4 buddies can all be 1" off from his 4" base and they all fight. But if I fight more then 2 ranks deep with orks, I'm shat outta luck lol.

I predict tanks and walkers constantly grabbing people in the assault phase now. The rolls flipped, instead of infantry chasing tanks down, expect the opposite. I can shut down a full unit of lootas with my fast tank, they can't shoot me or anything else, but I can shoot them. I could do this before, but at a cost to offensive tanks generally, now there isn't much downside. This makes fliers with hover mode God like. IDK, I'll continue to hope for the best, hopefully terrain will at least curb most of the gamesmanship. Thats really what will decide how much of an improvement this edition will be. So far everything rumored has been one step forward and one step back.

Before: "Hey guys! Heavies can remain stationary while their unit moves and get no penalty!"

After: "Hey guys, now the penalty got moving and firing heavies applies only to infantry, if *any model in the unit moves*

....



Maybe they will FAQ that. Wait and see :S

Well, 9th edition seems like it's more than the "round up all errata and updated datasheets" I thought it would be and is also "throw a bunch of random, untested new rules in the mix" as well.

yukishiro1 wrote:
They're 9 points. Of course you're not going to kill a tank with one of them in one turn. If you could, it'd be pretty overpowered.

Eh we aren't talking about weapons floating in air without anybody around. At least i can't take just power klaws in my army

 JNAProductions wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Funny thing. Vehicles/monsters got buffed and at same time infantry heavy weapons got nerfed

They did not get nerfed. They are exactly the same.

I think infantry heavy weapons got a major nerf. Nobody’s discussing it here though.

8th edition heavy weapons are -1 to hit if the MODEL moves. 9th edition heavy weapons get -1 to hit if the UNIT moves (only for infantry).

Personally I think that’s a big change.

 bullyboy wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
They're 9 points. Of course you're not going to kill a tank with one of them in one turn. If you could, it'd be pretty overpowered.

yeah, was just coming on to say something similar. You shouldn't expect to kill a tank with a single powerklaw or fist etc. You need specialist tank killers to kill....say, tanks? maybe orks will just have to look at some other units in their codex than massed boyz (although I'm sure they will still have their place).

Yeah the place is standing pretty in shelf. They weren'" uber in 8th and now rule nerfs and point hikes is going to be fun combo.

tneva82 wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
They're 9 points. Of course you're not going to kill a tank with one of them in one turn. If you could, it'd be pretty overpowered.

Eh we aren't talking about weapons floating in air without anybody around. At least i can't take just power klaws in my army

Nah, only Tau have drones

yukishiro1 wrote:
Y
One of the best thing about power fists/klaws/etc is that they are usually insulated by a bunch of cheaper troops, so your chances of losing those points before they can do anything are much lower.

It also means you aren't looking at 13 pts but more like 200 pts of soft target that's one shotted instantly

Aash wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Funny thing. Vehicles/monsters got buffed and at same time infantry heavy weapons got nerfed

They did not get nerfed. They are exactly the same.

I think infantry heavy weapons got a major nerf. Nobody’s discussing it here though.

8th edition heavy weapons are -1 to hit if the MODEL moves. 9th edition heavy weapons get -1 to hit if the UNIT moves (only for infantry).

Personally I think that’s a big change.

It’s a big hit for those of us old Codex adherent guys still running 10 man tacs with the special/heavy.

Normally the turn you disembark, the guy with the heavy took the -1. But after that, the rest of the squad could wheel around to snag objectives, get new units into rapid fire, etc. The heavy generally had enough range he was happy keeping his feet planted.

Will be sad to see that go.

Doctor-boom wrote:
Somebody else noticed the Important rule change hidden in the "Big gun never tire" rule:
You now declare 1 weapon target, resolve, then declare next target or same for the next weapon from the same unit and resolve. Instead of declaring all at once and having to gamble what is enough firepower to kill the last bit of your target...

Nope. Nothing in rule means that. It might be core shooting rules is changed but if not nothing in rule overrides 8th ed sequence. Maybe sequence is changed but this proves it in neither way

Okay, I did miss that. So a minor nerf for most infantry units with Heavy weapons, a much bigger one to the odd one-heavy in a unit of five/ten, like Nevelon points out.

 Stormonu wrote:
Well, 9th edition seems like it's more than the "round up all errata and updated datasheets" I thought it would be and is also "throw a bunch of random, untested new rules in the mix" as well.

They had a sizable playtesting team, but go on claiming they don't playtest.

 Nevelon wrote:

Spoiler:

Aash wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Funny thing. Vehicles/monsters got buffed and at same time infantry heavy weapons got nerfed

They did not get nerfed. They are exactly the same.

I think infantry heavy weapons got a major nerf. Nobody’s discussing it here though.

8th edition heavy weapons are -1 to hit if the MODEL moves. 9th edition heavy weapons get -1 to hit if the UNIT moves (only for infantry).

Personally I think that’s a big change.

It’s a big hit for those of us old Codex adherent guys still running 10 man tacs with the special/heavy.

Normally the turn you disembark, the guy with the heavy took the -1. But after that, the rest of the squad could wheel around to snag objectives, get new units into rapid fire, etc. The heavy generally had enough range he was happy keeping his feet planted.

Will be sad to see that go.

While I don't disagree I suspect this is GW tightening up the wording so the rule actually does what they ment it to do in 8th but just didn't actually word it to do.

It seems more like aligning RAW to RAI by the designers.

 JNAProductions wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Funny thing. Vehicles/monsters got buffed and at same time infantry heavy weapons got nerfed

They did not get nerfed. They are exactly the same.

Eh no. In 8th you got -1 if model moved. In 9th if any member of unit moves.

Read it and 8th ed rules again

JNAProductions wrote:Okay, I did miss that. So a minor nerf for most infantry units with Heavy weapons, a much bigger one to the odd one-heavy in a unit of five/ten, like Nevelon points out.

tneva82 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Funny thing. Vehicles/monsters got buffed and at same time infantry heavy weapons got nerfed

They did not get nerfed. They are exactly the same.

Eh no. In 8th you got -1 if model moved. In 9th if any member of unit moves.

Read it and 8th ed rules again

That was pointed out to me. I already acknowledged that I made a mistake.

It's likely tied into streamlining the rules and preventing any gaming around the heavy weapon guy.

On the plus side they might make infantry heavy weapons cheaper as a result.

Unless they go back to making weapons cost different amounts for different units, I don't see how. I mean I guess they will up the base cost on vehicles generally, and in a weird way that will mean that infantry heavy weapons get cheaper by comparison. But I don't think they are going back to "tactical squads take a lascannon for 15 points, but it costs 40 on a vehicle." Though I guess they did that with thunder hammers, so it's not completely impossible.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Unless they go back to making weapons cost different amounts for different units, I don't see how. I mean I guess they will up the base cost on vehicles generally, and in a weird way that will mean that infantry heavy weapons get cheaper by comparison. But I don't think they are going back to "tactical squads take a lascannon for 15 points, but it costs 40 on a vehicle." Though I guess they did that with thunder hammers, so it's not completely impossible.

Just put vehicle weapons into the vehicle wargear points lists and Bob's your uncle.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
Unless they go back to making weapons cost different amounts for different units, I don't see how. I mean I guess they will up the base cost on vehicles generally, and in a weird way that will mean that infantry heavy weapons get cheaper by comparison. But I don't think they are going back to "tactical squads take a lascannon for 15 points, but it costs 40 on a vehicle." Though I guess they did that with thunder hammers, so it's not completely impossible.

Just put vehicle weapons into the vehicle wargear points lists and Bob's your uncle.

or even on the dataslate!!

yukishiro1 wrote:
Unless they go back to making weapons cost different amounts for different units, I don't see how. I mean I guess they will up the base cost on vehicles generally, and in a weird way that will mean that infantry heavy weapons get cheaper by comparison. But I don't think they are going back to "tactical squads take a lascannon for 15 points, but it costs 40 on a vehicle." Though I guess they did that with thunder hammers, so it's not completely impossible.

A bigger issue is points costs needing to be broken down at the subfaction level. Adding power from paint makes balancing a nightmare.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
Unless they go back to making weapons cost different amounts for different units, I don't see how. I mean I guess they will up the base cost on vehicles generally, and in a weird way that will mean that infantry heavy weapons get cheaper by comparison. But I don't think they are going back to "tactical squads take a lascannon for 15 points, but it costs 40 on a vehicle." Though I guess they did that with thunder hammers, so it's not completely impossible.

Just put vehicle weapons into the vehicle wargear points lists and Bob's your uncle.

or even on the dataslate!!

No because that means a new dataslate everytime you change points costs.

Aash wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Funny thing. Vehicles/monsters got buffed and at same time infantry heavy weapons got nerfed

They did not get nerfed. They are exactly the same.

I think infantry heavy weapons got a major nerf. Nobody’s discussing it here though.

8th edition heavy weapons are -1 to hit if the MODEL moves. 9th edition heavy weapons get -1 to hit if the UNIT moves (only for infantry).

Personally I think that’s a big change.

Aaargh ! My classic infantry squads are doomed.
I have a heavy weapon in all my platoon squads since decades.
I will be so sad to be forced to shelve them.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
It's likely tied into streamlining the rules and preventing any gaming around the heavy weapon guy.

On the plus side they might make infantry heavy weapons cheaper as a result.

I think it will be the opposite : the studio will establish the price of heavy weapons based upon the increased power they will bring to vehicles.
So almost all heavy weapon that can be put either on a vehicle, or on infantry, will have a price assumed for a vehicle.

They weren't selling many vehicles in 8th, aside from those with fly. Doesn't take a galaxy brain to put two and two together and figure out what they want to make attractive for people to purchase at the release of 9th.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
It's likely tied into streamlining the rules and preventing any gaming around the heavy weapon guy.

On the plus side they might make infantry heavy weapons cheaper as a result.

Gaming around the Heavy Weapon guy? Do you get tired of defending GW no matter what?

yukishiro1 wrote:
They weren't selling many vehicles in 8th, aside from those with fly. Doesn't take a galaxy brain to put two and two together and figure out what they want to make attractive for people to purchase at the release of 9th.

Isn’t that a circular argument though? They don’t sell because they are underpowered, so by fixing imbalance they are going to sell more.

So getting mad at them for fixing imbalance seems counter productive.

 Leth wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
They weren't selling many vehicles in 8th, aside from those with fly. Doesn't take a galaxy brain to put two and two together and figure out what they want to make attractive for people to purchase at the release of 9th.

Isn’t that a circular argument though? They don’t sell because they are underpowered, so by fixing imbalance they are going to sell more.

So getting mad at them for fixing imbalance seems counter productive.

Except the idea is not to fix imbalance, it's to tilt it to make poorly selling models OP.

I'm not saying GW is doing this-I don't actually believe they understand their own game well enough to do so without being SO blatant that people might refuse to participate-but the idea is there.

 Eldarain wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
Unless they go back to making weapons cost different amounts for different units, I don't see how. I mean I guess they will up the base cost on vehicles generally, and in a weird way that will mean that infantry heavy weapons get cheaper by comparison. But I don't think they are going back to "tactical squads take a lascannon for 15 points, but it costs 40 on a vehicle." Though I guess they did that with thunder hammers, so it's not completely impossible.

A bigger issue is points costs needing to be broken down at the subfaction level. Adding power from paint makes balancing a nightmare.

Subfaction? How about by the codex. Why does a Word Bearers predator cost the same as an Iron Hands predator?

 ClockworkZion wrote:
It's likely tied into streamlining the rules and preventing any gaming around the heavy weapon guy..

might be that GW now moves away from single models meachnics to unit mechanics to speed the game up

but this is not streamlining, it is a design decision if the single models acts (like in 8th) or the unit acts (like in 3rd) with the simple difference that single models mechnaics are more detailed wihile units mechanics are faster

but as multiple targets can be selected it would be a strange mix that might make things more complicated than needed (unless multiple targets is a tank thing and won't be there for infantry)