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.
2020/06/18 17:07:24
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
We're just going to have to agree to disagree. I don't think being able to use a single strategem for a 17% chance to cause a mortal wound per model is worth having my unit completely obliterated next turn. That is still the issue. Not only that, but now I have to pay a CP to do it. So, you can still leave combat, I MIGHT cause 1-2 wounds on you when you, then you focus fire my melee unit. What is the incentive for rushing in, chainswords drawn, again?
But it's not "your unit" alone that is attacking when you utilize this stratagem.
It is the MODELS. FROM. YOUR. ARMY. that are within Engagement Range of the enemy unit that was chosen to Fall Back with.
Understand:
THIS IS NOT A ONE UNIT STRATAGEM ON YOUR PART.
We know Blast weapons cannot be used while an enemy is within Engagement Range. We don't know 100% yet how Fall Back or how Morale works with 9E. We do know that terrain rules have changed.
You weren't "causing a mortal wound" to units that Fell Back before(or if you were--congrats, you're one of the few armies doing so!), so spending 1CP now to finish off a unit that currently just continually gets pulled back and you have to keep chipping away at it is not exactly a downside. And frankly, you never should be able to get 100% immunity from shooting attacks simply by walking up and hitting something.
LOL imagine thinking that, because Overwatch was effectively removed, it makes this Stratagem ANY better. Spoiler alert: it's still a waste of CP.
Then again you said Fall Back was never an issue to begin with so you're not to be taken seriously.
LOL, imagine thinking this stratagem is trash while nonstop whining about Fall Back being such a big deal.
If it's SUCH A BIG ISSUE, then spoiler:
This stratagem should be a big deal to you. After all, it's a hard counter to Fall Back--which we know is a fairly big deal to Blast Weapon equipped units since they cannot utilize Blast Weapons on units within Engagement Range of them.
Hrmmmh, what kind of units usually come with Blast Weapons?
A once-per-turn opportunity to hardly inflict mortal wounds will not stop ANYONE from falling back.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2020/06/18 17:09:05
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Interesting point - the unit or monster within 3" of the character doesn't need to be closer to the enemy in order for the character to be untargetable. So as long as the character is sticks within 3" of a 3+ unit or a monster/vehicle they gain protection from units that are closer to the enemy but might not be anywhere near the character.
Further other characters are ignored when determining what unit is closer, but there's nothing stopping you from using another character as your bodyguard unit as long as they are within 3" and are a monster/vehicle (or more rarely part of a 3+ model unit).
This means that if your daemon prince keeps another daemon prince accountabili-buddy next to him they can fly around just like before as long as they aren't closer to the enemy than that unit of cultists.
2020/06/18 17:14:28
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Looks like I was lucky again. Guessed the character targeting rules on the spot right, May 23
EDIT: Looks like GW leaked the charges also. Didn't I say that the charge needs to reach every unit you declare, or you don't move at all?
You went from your source saying it was gone completely-which was 100% wrong, to saying maybe it's a stratagem after being presented with with stuff from Engine War. You can't claim this one is a win, when you are saying 2 out of the possible 3 options.
It's fair play you get to claim the Look out Sir! that was !00% correct.
Abadabadoobaddon wrote: Interesting point - the unit or monster within 3" of the character doesn't need to be closer to the enemy in order for the character to be untargetable. So as long as the character is sticks within 3" of a 3+ unit or a monster/vehicle they gain protection from units that are closer to the enemy but might not be anywhere near the character.
Further other characters are ignored when determining what unit is closer, but there's nothing stopping you from using another character as your bodyguard unit as long as they are within 3" and are a monster/vehicle (or more rarely part of a 3+ model unit).
This means that if your daemon prince keeps another daemon prince accountabili-buddy next to him they can fly around just like before as long as they aren't closer to the enemy than that unit of cultists.
There is no "bodyguarding" to be done. If the character is targetable, you can shot it, otherwise you can't. Other characters can't "shield" because they are themselves targetable or not.
Edit : Ok nvm, actually you are right if you meant having a unit close to the first character and another character further away but in 3" of the first character. Both character aren't targetable despite the second one not being close to anything else than a character (as long as it is a monster/unit of 3+/whatever).
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/06/18 17:24:32
2020/06/18 17:21:38
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Additionally, it is still bugging me that the veterens all have iron halos... Have we had anything written in any articles or stated on the streams to indicate the way storm shields work has changed? I wonder if they are going back to melee only, or is the iron halo just a design choice (and not actually an iron halo).
Aash wrote: So today’s big reveal - you can pain your own minis in the colours you want. Tomorrow - you can glue the minis together!! Who knew!? Oh well, I guess we have to wait til Monday now to find out something new about 9th.
I was curious to see if the new veterans would be officially part of the Deathwing, so that article was quite useful
Whilst the vast majority won't care, this is actually a fairly big development in terms of lore.
Undercuts their concept entirely imo.
Until there are terminator primaris (and aggressors aren't them) then they need to be models of some sort for primaris within the deathwing as they are now being accepted within the inner circle in the lore, so unless they all become masters and go back to companies, they need a place to go. I think they look cool in deathwing colours anyway.
They went years saying that primaris have all-primaris chapters without so much as a hint of first company models, waiting in limbo for their heavy veteran version to come out would have been the status quo.
Next we’ll be seeing Redemptors in deathwing company colours despite their life support system being too faulty to allow for a venerable dread. But that’s fine, actively making no sense and undercutting core lore concepts is “better” than trying to reconcile things.
So do Primaris Marines in general, if we're being honest.
Well yeah, they’ve made very little effort to make sense of the rules, lore and models of primaris from the start. Their execution cheapens themselves as full of cheap gimmickry and regular marines as “inferior”.
They already did. If I recall correctly, the issue was less the life support capabilities of the Redemptor, but rather too much heat produced by essentially overclocking the dread while fighting. How much fighting is too hard for super space marine tech?
No, there is lore that Redemptor Dreads cut corners on life support because Cawl sees the pilot as an easily replaced component.
Nah. I just read through both Space Marine codices. The tech priests didn’t add any extra systems than normal to protect the interred marine from the machine as a pilot can be replaced. The life support works like a normal dread. It’s just that prolonged and intense fighting from the Redemptor chassis (more powerful than older dreads) will burn out the marine. So, as I said, the actual life support capabilities are fine, it’s just that pushing the machine too hard will burn out the pilot.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/18 17:22:46
If the truth can destroy it, then it deserves to be destroyed.
2020/06/18 17:23:00
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Galas wrote: Man Basilisk and Manticora have become the best snipers of the game!
I understand what they wanted to fix with this rule but I believe they are going too hard on the other extreme, this will make characters extremely vulnerable.
How? I don't think they can ignore the targeting rule.
Tell me what character can survive 3 manticores or 3 basilisk firing at everything thats 3" of him and then him (And thats easy on the first turn. The moment you start moving you won't have that much units at 3" of all of your characters) . Or any kind of character that maybe you would use alone with LOS blocking terrain.
Oh, you don't mean directly attacking him. Well, you still have to get rid of the bodyguard, right? So if the bodyguard is tough enough to survive bombardment then so will the character.
I guess terminators or shield lychguard or something.
Artillery probably needs a bit of a nerf, imo. In earlier editions they had to deal with scatter. Now they don't really have a weakness. They should at least have hit penalties if firing indirectly.
My bet is that Object Terrain will provide a lot of that. They said it provides cover if it is between you and the firing unit. so I'm guessing firing across the board will most likely cross several pieces of object terrain and pick up several penalties.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/06/18 17:25:48
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
We're just going to have to agree to disagree. I don't think being able to use a single strategem for a 17% chance to cause a mortal wound per model is worth having my unit completely obliterated next turn. That is still the issue. Not only that, but now I have to pay a CP to do it. So, you can still leave combat, I MIGHT cause 1-2 wounds on you when you, then you focus fire my melee unit. What is the incentive for rushing in, chainswords drawn, again?
But it's not "your unit" alone that is attacking when you utilize this stratagem.
It is the MODELS. FROM. YOUR. ARMY. that are within Engagement Range of the enemy unit that was chosen to Fall Back with.
Understand:
THIS IS NOT A ONE UNIT STRATAGEM ON YOUR PART.
We know Blast weapons cannot be used while an enemy is within Engagement Range. We don't know 100% yet how Fall Back or how Morale works with 9E. We do know that terrain rules have changed.
You weren't "causing a mortal wound" to units that Fell Back before(or if you were--congrats, you're one of the few armies doing so!), so spending 1CP now to finish off a unit that currently just continually gets pulled back and you have to keep chipping away at it is not exactly a downside. And frankly, you never should be able to get 100% immunity from shooting attacks simply by walking up and hitting something.
LOL imagine thinking that, because Overwatch was effectively removed, it makes this Stratagem ANY better. Spoiler alert: it's still a waste of CP.
Then again you said Fall Back was never an issue to begin with so you're not to be taken seriously.
LOL, imagine thinking this stratagem is trash while nonstop whining about Fall Back being such a big deal.
If it's SUCH A BIG ISSUE, then spoiler:
This stratagem should be a big deal to you. After all, it's a hard counter to Fall Back--which we know is a fairly big deal to Blast Weapon equipped units since they cannot utilize Blast Weapons on units within Engagement Range of them.
Hrmmmh, what kind of units usually come with Blast Weapons?
At least your acknowledging the fact it takes an entire melee army to charge a single shooty unit!
Abadabadoobaddon wrote: Interesting point - the unit or monster within 3" of the character doesn't need to be closer to the enemy in order for the character to be untargetable. So as long as the character is sticks within 3" of a 3+ unit or a monster/vehicle they gain protection from units that are closer to the enemy but might not be anywhere near the character.
Further other characters are ignored when determining what unit is closer, but there's nothing stopping you from using another character as your bodyguard unit as long as they are within 3" and are a monster/vehicle (or more rarely part of a 3+ model unit).
This means that if your daemon prince keeps another daemon prince accountabili-buddy next to him they can fly around just like before as long as they aren't closer to the enemy than that unit of cultists.
There is no "bodyguarding" to be done. If the character is targetable, you can shot it, otherwise you can't. Other characters can't "shield" because they are themselves targetable or not.
Edit : Ok nvm, actually you are right if you meant having a unit close to the first character and another character further away but in 3" of the first character. Both character aren't targetable despite the second one not being close to anything else than a character.
is this second daemon prince somehow not a model with the CHARACTER keyword? Or is there some linguistic shenanigan that causes the last line "Ignore other enemy models with the CHARACTER keyword when determining if the target is the closest enemy" to not apply here?
...or are you saying if they've got a THIRD unit that's like cultists or something closer then the rule applies? I think I get the problem here...you can turn old CHARACTER protection rule on by having a pair of characters with the VEHICLE or MONSTER keyword within 3".
....This seems like a minor issue to me tbh.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/06/18 17:28:52
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Additionally, it is still bugging me that the veterens all have iron halos... Have we had anything written in any articles or stated on the streams to indicate the way storm shields work has changed? I wonder if they are going back to melee only, or is the iron halo just a design choice (and not actually an iron halo).
Aash wrote: So today’s big reveal - you can pain your own minis in the colours you want. Tomorrow - you can glue the minis together!! Who knew!? Oh well, I guess we have to wait til Monday now to find out something new about 9th.
I was curious to see if the new veterans would be officially part of the Deathwing, so that article was quite useful
Whilst the vast majority won't care, this is actually a fairly big development in terms of lore.
Undercuts their concept entirely imo.
Until there are terminator primaris (and aggressors aren't them) then they need to be models of some sort for primaris within the deathwing as they are now being accepted within the inner circle in the lore, so unless they all become masters and go back to companies, they need a place to go. I think they look cool in deathwing colours anyway.
They went years saying that primaris have all-primaris chapters without so much as a hint of first company models, waiting in limbo for their heavy veteran version to come out would have been the status quo.
Next we’ll be seeing Redemptors in deathwing company colours despite their life support system being too faulty to allow for a venerable dread. But that’s fine, actively making no sense and undercutting core lore concepts is “better” than trying to reconcile things.
So do Primaris Marines in general, if we're being honest.
Well yeah, they’ve made very little effort to make sense of the rules, lore and models of primaris from the start. Their execution cheapens themselves as full of cheap gimmickry and regular marines as “inferior”.
They already did. If I recall correctly, the issue was less the life support capabilities of the Redemptor, but rather too much heat produced by essentially overclocking the dread while fighting. How much fighting is too hard for super space marine tech?
No, there is lore that Redemptor Dreads cut corners on life support because Cawl sees the pilot as an easily replaced component.
Nah. I just read through both Space Marine codices. The tech priests didn’t add any extra systems than normal to protect the interred marine from the machine as a pilot can be replaced. The life support works like a normal dread. It’s just that prolonged and intense fighting from the Redemptor chassis (more powerful than older dreads) will burn out the marine. So, as I said, the actual life support capabilities are fine, it’s just that pushing the machine too hard will burn out the pilot.
Congratulations, you won on semantics without actually changing the essential facts of the matter or undercutting the point.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/19 01:46:45
2020/06/18 17:30:08
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Abadabadoobaddon wrote: Interesting point - the unit or monster within 3" of the character doesn't need to be closer to the enemy in order for the character to be untargetable. So as long as the character is sticks within 3" of a 3+ unit or a monster/vehicle they gain protection from units that are closer to the enemy but might not be anywhere near the character.
Further other characters are ignored when determining what unit is closer, but there's nothing stopping you from using another character as your bodyguard unit as long as they are within 3" and are a monster/vehicle (or more rarely part of a 3+ model unit).
This means that if your daemon prince keeps another daemon prince accountabili-buddy next to him they can fly around just like before as long as they aren't closer to the enemy than that unit of cultists.
There is no "bodyguarding" to be done. If the character is targetable, you can shot it, otherwise you can't. Other characters can't "shield" because they are themselves targetable or not.
Edit : Ok nvm, actually you are right if you meant having a unit close to the first character and another character further away but in 3" of the first character.
There are 2 requirements for a character with 9 wounds or less not to be targetable:
1) They need to be within 3" of a unit that has 3+ models or is a vehicle/monster. There is nothing preventing the unit within 3" from being another character unit as long as it is 3+ models or is a vehicle/monster.
2) They need to not be the closest unit to the enemy - i.e., there needs to be another unit closer. The closer unit cannot be another character with 9 wounds or less. The closer unit need not be the same unit as in 1).
Now take 2 daemon princes that are within 3" of each other. Both are within 3" of a monster so they satisfy 1). If there is a cultist unit closer to the enemy than either of them then they satisfy 2). Thus both are untargetable. It doesn't matter if the cultist unit is on the other side of the board.
2020/06/18 17:32:12
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Additionally, it is still bugging me that the veterens all have iron halos... Have we had anything written in any articles or stated on the streams to indicate the way storm shields work has changed? I wonder if they are going back to melee only, or is the iron halo just a design choice (and not actually an iron halo).
Aash wrote: So today’s big reveal - you can pain your own minis in the colours you want. Tomorrow - you can glue the minis together!! Who knew!? Oh well, I guess we have to wait til Monday now to find out something new about 9th.
I was curious to see if the new veterans would be officially part of the Deathwing, so that article was quite useful
Whilst the vast majority won't care, this is actually a fairly big development in terms of lore.
Undercuts their concept entirely imo.
Until there are terminator primaris (and aggressors aren't them) then they need to be models of some sort for primaris within the deathwing as they are now being accepted within the inner circle in the lore, so unless they all become masters and go back to companies, they need a place to go. I think they look cool in deathwing colours anyway.
They went years saying that primaris have all-primaris chapters without so much as a hint of first company models, waiting in limbo for their heavy veteran version to come out would have been the status quo.
Next we’ll be seeing Redemptors in deathwing company colours despite their life support system being too faulty to allow for a venerable dread. But that’s fine, actively making no sense and undercutting core lore concepts is “better” than trying to reconcile things.
So do Primaris Marines in general, if we're being honest.
Well yeah, they’ve made very little effort to make sense of the rules, lore and models of primaris from the start. Their execution cheapens themselves as full of cheap gimmickry and regular marines as “inferior”.
They already did. If I recall correctly, the issue was less the life support capabilities of the Redemptor, but rather too much heat produced by essentially overclocking the dread while fighting. How much fighting is too hard for super space marine tech?
No, there is lore that Redemptor Dreads cut corners on life support because Cawl sees the pilot as an easily replaced component.
Nah. I just read through both Space Marine codices. The tech priests didn’t add any extra systems than normal to protect the interred marine from the machine as a pilot can be replaced. The life support works like a normal dread. It’s just that prolonged and intense fighting from the Redemptor chassis (more powerful than older dreads) will burn out the marine. So, as I said, the actual life support capabilities are fine, it’s just that pushing the machine too hard will burn out the pilot.
Congratulations, you won on semantics without actually changing the essential facts of the matter or undercutting the point.
Yes. And you will be spreading less false info.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/19 01:47:24
If the truth can destroy it, then it deserves to be destroyed.
2020/06/18 17:33:05
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Abadabadoobaddon wrote: Interesting point - the unit or monster within 3" of the character doesn't need to be closer to the enemy in order for the character to be untargetable. So as long as the character is sticks within 3" of a 3+ unit or a monster/vehicle they gain protection from units that are closer to the enemy but might not be anywhere near the character.
Further other characters are ignored when determining what unit is closer, but there's nothing stopping you from using another character as your bodyguard unit as long as they are within 3" and are a monster/vehicle (or more rarely part of a 3+ model unit).
This means that if your daemon prince keeps another daemon prince accountabili-buddy next to him they can fly around just like before as long as they aren't closer to the enemy than that unit of cultists.
There is no "bodyguarding" to be done. If the character is targetable, you can shot it, otherwise you can't. Other characters can't "shield" because they are themselves targetable or not.
Edit : Ok nvm, actually you are right if you meant having a unit close to the first character and another character further away but in 3" of the first character.
There are 2 requirements for a character with 9 wounds or less not to be targetable:
1) They need to be within 3" of a unit that has 3+ models or is a vehicle/monster. There is nothing preventing the unit within 3" from being another character unit as long as it is 3+ models or is a vehicle/monster.
2) They need to not be the closest unit to the enemy - i.e., there needs to be another unit closer. The closer unit cannot be another character with 9 wounds or less. The closer unit need not be the same unit as in 1).
Now take 2 daemon princes that are within 3" of each other. Both are within 3" of a monster so they satisfy 1). If there is a cultist unit closer to the enemy than either of them then they satisfy 2). Thus both are untargetable. It doesn't matter if the cultist unit is on the other side of the board.
If my opponent wants to buy two daemon princes and elect to not use the warptime power with them to keep them within 3" of each other he can have that victory, but only if he promises to sing some kind of shmaltzy broadway musical duet with them as they run around the field.
This is like when it was possible earlier in the edition to get a turn 1 charge with khorne bezerkers by equipping a rhino with a combi-plasma, giving it a -1 to hit and rapid firing it overcharged into the nearest enemy unit to blow it up. Like, sure, you CAN do that, absolutely, power to you.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/06/18 17:59:42
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
If they’re going to make moral a bigger part of the game, I really hope (I know they won’t though :C) they drop the current way it works. It was a cool idea in theory, but it just ends up being a big kick in the teeth having to remove more models after suffering a thrashing.
I hope they can make a simplified version of them running towards a table edge or something.
2020/06/18 18:11:14
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
The charge change is more problematic than the look out, sir change, unless they remove the rule that says a unit that charges can only fight units it declares a charge against.
If that rule remains, it becomes trivially easy to set up situations where a charging unit cannot fight against a unit you heroic into it in response to the charge, because doing so would require it to make an impossible or virtually impossible charge roll.
It's going to be a total disaster. Such a disaster that I have to assume they are removing that portion of the rule if they are changing multi-charges that way.
Ironically the combination of the two rules would result in it becoming easier to snipe characters with ranged weapons but vastly harder to fight characters with melee weapons, the complete opposite of anything that makes any sort of sense.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/18 18:12:16
2020/06/18 18:15:08
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Tiberius501 wrote: If they’re going to make moral a bigger part of the game, I really hope (I know they won’t though :C) they drop the current way it works. It was a cool idea in theory, but it just ends up being a big kick in the teeth having to remove more models after suffering a thrashing.
I hope they can make a simplified version of them running towards a table edge or something.
Or something like a penalty to movement or offense due to suppression.
it'd also be great for the mechanic to causing morale be something other than models in the unit dying, which necessarily reduces the impact of morale due to many times the unit just being 1-2 models at the point that morale matters.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/06/18 18:15:18
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
yukishiro1 wrote: The charge change is more problematic than the look out, sir change, unless they remove the rule that says a unit that charges can only fight units it declares a charge against.
If that rule remains, it becomes trivially easy to set up situations where a charging unit cannot fight against a unit you heroic into it in response to the charge, because doing so would require it to make an impossible or virtually impossible charge roll.
It's going to be a total disaster. Such a disaster that I have to assume they are removing that portion of the rule if they are changing multi-charges that way.
Ironically the combination of the two rules would result in it becoming easier to snipe characters with ranged weapons but vastly harder to fight characters with melee weapons, the complete opposite of anything that makes any sort of sense.
I’m hoping they change the rules so that a unit that charges can still fight other units but without any of the advantages it normally gains from charging (+1 attack, heavy cover etc)
2020/06/18 18:17:31
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Abadabadoobaddon wrote: Interesting point - the unit or monster within 3" of the character doesn't need to be closer to the enemy in order for the character to be untargetable. So as long as the character is sticks within 3" of a 3+ unit or a monster/vehicle they gain protection from units that are closer to the enemy but might not be anywhere near the character.
Further other characters are ignored when determining what unit is closer, but there's nothing stopping you from using another character as your bodyguard unit as long as they are within 3" and are a monster/vehicle (or more rarely part of a 3+ model unit).
This means that if your daemon prince keeps another daemon prince accountabili-buddy next to him they can fly around just like before as long as they aren't closer to the enemy than that unit of cultists.
There is no "bodyguarding" to be done. If the character is targetable, you can shot it, otherwise you can't. Other characters can't "shield" because they are themselves targetable or not.
Edit : Ok nvm, actually you are right if you meant having a unit close to the first character and another character further away but in 3" of the first character.
There are 2 requirements for a character with 9 wounds or less not to be targetable:
1) They need to be within 3" of a unit that has 3+ models or is a vehicle/monster. There is nothing preventing the unit within 3" from being another character unit as long as it is 3+ models or is a vehicle/monster.
2) They need to not be the closest unit to the enemy - i.e., there needs to be another unit closer. The closer unit cannot be another character with 9 wounds or less. The closer unit need not be the same unit as in 1).
Now take 2 daemon princes that are within 3" of each other. Both are within 3" of a monster so they satisfy 1). If there is a cultist unit closer to the enemy than either of them then they satisfy 2). Thus both are untargetable. It doesn't matter if the cultist unit is on the other side of the board.
If my opponent wants to buy two daemon princes and elect to not use the warptime power with them to keep them within 3" of each other he can have that victory, but only if he promises to sing some kind of shmaltzy broadway musical duet with them as they run around the field.
This is like when it was possible earlier in the edition to get a turn 1 charge with khorne bezerkers by equipping a rhino with a combi-plasma, giving it a -1 to hit and rapid firing it overcharged into the nearest enemy unit to blow it up. Like, sure, you CAN do that, absolutely, power to you.
There are quite a few monster characters in the game, it’s not just DPs. C’Tan, for one, and they were actually seeing competitive play in late 8th.
2020/06/18 18:17:47
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
I like the new character rule. If the enemy has a lot of LOS-ignoring weapons, its going to force placing HQs in reserve until those threats have been dealt with.
I still think the cap should have been up to 8 wounds or less however. My Chaplain Dread is still going to be able to hide behind some lowly scouts, boo..
EDIT: Does this btw mean that any HQ that has more than 9 wounds initially, qualifies for this rule after their wounds value has dropped to 9 or below? That would be even sillier..
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/18 18:22:43
"The larger point though, is that as players, we have more control over what the game looks and feels like than most of us are willing to use in order to solve our own problems"
2020/06/18 18:21:19
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Kanluwen wrote: Are you really going to sit there and pretend that a Dreadnought, 5 Deathwing Knights, or 10 Banshees are probably not going to have killed a 10 Guardsman squad after having shot, successfully charged, and then fought them?
Once again:
Roll one D6 for each model from your army that is within Engagement Range of that enemy unit.
This isn't for "maybe killing 1 or 2 guardsmen" unless you're doing trash like has been mentioned elsewhere of using non-CC weapon attacks to tie an enemy unit up from shooting rather than actually killing them. It's for when an enemy unit that actually matters leaves combat after you surrounded them.
Once more 9E-compatible faction rules start appearing i fully expect to see unit- or weapon-specific traits that affect this stratagem. Much like how some units can still trigger overwatch on 5+, you could easily see specialist units doing the same with Cut Them Down. Lash Whips anyone?
Ayup--or just more unit or weapon specific traits that let you strike when an enemy falls back.
OK, maybe not DW knights, but banshees and a single dreadnought will do jack to most units, and the chance of actually hurting them further with 1CP is minimal and a waste, but apparently you're the only one that can't see that. So tell me, why are your 20 conscripts better at causing MW on a retreating foe than a single Bloodthirster? I'll wait.
It's the horror movie trope. That lone serial killer chasing you as he waves his cleaver/chainsaw/etc. at you? You can run from him for days. That pack of tyranid gaunts nipping at your heels? Yeah, they're going to drag ONE of you down and then the whole pack is going to nom on the poor victim.
Honestly, though I would have preferred if they gave you an option
- Roll one die per model; for every 6, you cause a Mortal Wound (better for numerous, but weak unit. Reflects catching an enemy target and piling on the unfortunate soul)
- OR each model rolls its full attacks, but only hits on a 6 regardless of Weapon/Melee skill. Wounding and Saves taken normally. (better for melee-focused units, represents catching the opponent with a killing blow as they retreat).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/18 18:21:53
It never ends well
2020/06/18 18:27:21
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Man, it seems like GW rules-writing is getting more convoluted. Weren't they trying to get away from that in 8th?
So, if I am understanding LoS!, it is the same rule as 8th, but now the characters ALSO have to be within 3" of a monster, vehicle or 3-model unit.
If a character is NOT within 3" of a monster, vehicle or 3-model unit, then they are targetable. Also, if they meet the above criteria, but are also visible and the closest UNIT (not necessarily the unit that they're 3" away from), then they are also targetable.
I think I got it.
WH40K Death Guard 5100 pts.
Daemons 3000 pts.
DT:70+S++G+M-B-I--Pw40K90-D++A++/eWD?R++T(D)DM+
28 successful trades in the Dakka Swap Shop! Check out my latest auction here!
2020/06/18 18:31:24
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
puma713 wrote: Man, it seems like GW rules-writing is getting more convoluted. Weren't they trying to get away from that in 8th?
So, if I am understanding LoS!, it is the same rule as 8th, but now the characters ALSO have to be within 3" of a monster, vehicle or 3-model unit.
If a character is NOT within 3" of a monster, vehicle or 3-model unit, then they are targetable. Also, if they meet the above criteria, but are also visible and the closest UNIT (not necessarily the unit that they're 3" away from), then they are also targetable.
I think I got it.
Yeah, and everyone constantly bitched and moaned that they weren't using legalistic language with only a single possible interpretation.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/06/18 18:32:12
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
The new rules making overwatch a strat that costs a cp and can only be used by one unit a turn really seems to be rewriting the game to an extent, but then again ow fire was never really overwhelming n most cases. I'm not too happy with it as i was thinking the new gauss reapers with s5 and ap2 would make rushing a warrior unit with them a more dangerous but now it loos like they generally won't be able to use it.
"But the universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed..."
2020/06/18 18:36:09
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
puma713 wrote: Man, it seems like GW rules-writing is getting more convoluted. Weren't they trying to get away from that in 8th?
They definitely were. It was a case of "all these rules are getting in the way of us selling models and getting people to focus on what's truly important - buying models from us." I think they resented that the prior rules were too complex for the marketing folk to bother to understand and they were definitely too complex for the Community/White Dwarf article writers to keep straight.
Somewhere along the way I think someone pointed out that they could also sell more books too if they had rules that were worth using. And maybe more models, because they'd actually be bought & used instead of sitting on a store shelf and collecting dust.
They still badly need an editor to make a pass on the way they word rules. And get the descriptive language out of the wordy rules text. "Just the facts man!".
The paint scheme article yesterday still shows that GW thinks that the most important thing to its base is the models. The rules are just there to give folks something to do with their fancy toy soldiers. Rules come and go, the models are forever (and in the case of Eldar aspects, foreeeeeeever)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/18 18:39:36
It never ends well
2020/06/18 18:52:55
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
I'm surprised there was no info on flamers here, I really really hope they get something in return for basically losing overwatch.
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2020/06/18 18:54:59
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
ClockworkZion wrote: In regards to the Daemon Prince conversation earlier Characters can't protect characters regardless of other keywords.
In his example, the character isn't protecting the character, the closer unit of cultists is. In his example, the two daemon princes satisfy both conditions of being untargetable.
Are they 1.) within 3" of another vehicle or monster? Yes.
and are they 2.) Not the closest visible enemy unit? Yes. It doesn't matter that they're both characters or that one of them is closer than the other, the cultists off to the right are still closest.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/18 19:02:44
WH40K Death Guard 5100 pts.
Daemons 3000 pts.
DT:70+S++G+M-B-I--Pw40K90-D++A++/eWD?R++T(D)DM+
28 successful trades in the Dakka Swap Shop! Check out my latest auction here!
2020/06/18 19:08:08
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Matt Swain wrote: The new rules making overwatch a strat that costs a cp and can only be used by one unit a turn really seems to be rewriting the game to an extent, but then again ow fire was never really overwhelming n most cases. I'm not too happy with it as i was thinking the new gauss reapers with s5 and ap2 would make rushing a warrior unit with them a more dangerous but now it loos like they generally won't be able to use it.
You sir or ma'am must not play Chaos Daemons. I don't mean Daemon soup with rubrics that can soak up OW.
MEQ armies laugh at OW in 8th. 12 orks firing 24 shots with shootas at 10 DC might kill 1 of them, leaving 9 of them hitting with over 40 attacks.
12 Orks firing 24 shots with shootas at 20 Daemonettes or 20 Bloodletters kills 5 on average. That's a huge crippling blow to the assault power of those assault units. Letters are a waste against orks so if we charge 20 Letters against 10 Intercessors the results will be even more skewed because 9 DC charging marines is still going to do a lot more damage than 18 Bloodletters will.
2020/06/18 19:08:52
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
I could see one of them being a Fall Back strategem. I know that we think it isn't because they've referenced Falling Back more than once, but we can hope. I think we've also heard that one of them could be Falling Back through models. Of course, the original 3 are subject to change as well.
I dont know if we can assume the original 3 will still be in play. They just changed overwatch (which is a great idea and a needed thing).
They may change the original 3 as well. I can see reroll 1 dice becoming once per game, same with moral.
THey've explicitly stated the three original generic stratagems are still in 9th Edition. They even named them in a manner pretty close to the quote.
We don't have details on the upcoming Reserve Stratagem, but we know that is in there, so we only don't know about one Stratagem. Is Concealed Positions making the transition to 9th or will they slip in Fall Back (I doubt it) or some other new Stratagem?
4000+
6000+ Order. Unity. Obedience.
Thousand Sons 4000+
Death Guard 5100 pts.
Daemons 3000 pts.
