40k 9th edition, : App released page 413

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.

**Ice_can**

yukishiro1 wrote:
Things like 6 aggressors rolling 140 dice (more than that actually since you gotta roll the dice to see how many dice you roll...what a perfect metaphor) are awful. It adds no fun whatsoever, just tedium.

Again the issur mainly revolves around marines specifically primaris and their ever balloning buckets of dice, the FRFSRF conscript blob or Slaneshy cultists blob was kind of a joke, vut marines now use sinilar or more dice and have rerolls out the wazzo.

I dont think I have ever seen someone shoot every weapon on a repulsor, atleast not legally, Aggressors another example of everything dies with enough dice and rerolls.

**BaconCatBug**

Spoiler:

The Sorcerer on the left can be shot. The Sorcerer on the right cannot be shot.
Who here can guess the reason why?

Solution: The Left is secretly this scenario

Spoiler:

**slave.entity**

BaconCatBug wrote:
slave.entity wrote:
Competitive 40k in 8th edition was honestly pretty good. Just about every army had some representation in the tournament scene and the meta was always changing, which kept things fresh.

There were definitely some low points (Castellans, Iron Hands) but there were also many distinct periods where a bunch of armies were top-tier viable.

I'm confident things will only improve for 9th edition.
I am sure "Ynnari = I win button" was fun for everyone involved.

Ynnari was definitely broken. Still I don't think that year was anywhere near as bad as the sheer number of Castellans at LVO 2019 or Iron Hands at LVO 2020.

And at the GT level there were tons of other factions that enjoyed dominance over the past 3 years. I'm not much of a tourney player but even just following the competitive scene was a lot of fun.

**H.B.M.C.**

So it seems after our brief interlude with new information, introspection and actual 9th Ed insight from the Sisters article, we're back to the trite and meaningless Faction Focus articles we have expected.

GW wrote:They’re mean, they’re green and, in the new edition of Warhammer 40,000, they’ll be making a scene. Longtime Grand Tournaments player and Orks expert Matt Root is here with his advice on how to get your Waaagh! on.

Aiight Matty boy, let's see what exciting new things you can tell us about the Orks!

A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:One of the most striking changes is to vehicles. Orks units like the Megatrakk Scrapjet are deadly both in shooting and in combat, but previously, you had to choose one or the other because being stuck in combat stopped you from shooting. In the new edition, this is no longer the case – you can unload rokkits with malicious glee as you charge towards your opponent’s lines, and if you get stuck in combat, you can still keep shooting with your other weapons!*

Or, to put it another way, "The new vehicle rules that everyone can use can also be used by the Orks! WOW!".

A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:The new terrain rules will also be appreciated by all Orks players. With terrain having clearly defined features, you don’t have to worry about your opponent seeing through a crack in the wall to shoot your entire Boyz squad.

Or, to put it another way, "The new terrain rules that everyone can use can also be used by the Orks! WOW!".

I guess it's time to reprint a bunch of rules we already know, right?

A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Burna-bommers were already good, but the changes to Flyers in the new edition make them even better (take two!).

Or, to put it another way, "The new terrain flyer rules that everyone can use can also be used by the Orks! WOW!".

A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:While they’re great flying around immolating targets, they’re even better if someone is foolish enough to shoot it down. Unlike most other exploding vehicles, Burna-bommers explode on a 4+ instead of a 6+, and they do 3 mortal wounds instead of D3.

And this has what to do with 9th?

A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:Skorcha missiles are also Blast weapons in the new edition...

Actual new information. Incredible.

A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:In the new edition, thanks to the way that Detachments work, all armies start with the same Command points.

Thanks. Pretty sure we've known that for two weeks now.

A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:That means that if you don’t want to take loads of Gretchin troops, you don’t have to!** You want an army filled with nothing but Meganobz and Warbosses? You can have it and still have all the Command points you’ll need. Which you can then spend back on your Meganobz to make them hit even harder in combat.

Followed by a strat that already exists. This would have been a great place to give a look into the way that detachments and formations work, but no, we'll just reiterate that everyone gets the same amount of CP now. WOW!

A Playtester Who Should Know Better wrote:The change in the overwatch rules will also help out the Meganobz. If you charge your opponent’s entire army currently, they essentially get a free shooting phase. In the new edition, they will have to choose a unit to shoot with and pay the necessary cost in Command points. This means more of your green tide will make it to combat.

Or, to put it another way, "The changes to Overwatch that impacts everyone also impacts the Orks! WOW!". Well duh.

GW wrote:There’s a lot to be excited about, and even more to look forward to.

But not in any of these articles, it seems...

**puma713**

BaconCatBug wrote:

Spoiler:

The Sorcerer on the left can be shot. The Sorcerer on the right cannot be shot.
Who here can guess the reason why?

Solution: The Left is secretly this scenario

Spoiler:

As the shell howls through the air, smoke trailing its descent, the Sorcerer looks to his left and to his right, knowing that at least one of the cultists surrounding him will push him out of the way, screaming, "Look out, sir!"

What the Sorcerer fails to realize is that the six men surrounding him have been separated from their own units and have no idea what is going on. In their confusion, looking back and forth between each other, the shell lands squarely atop the Sorcerer's position, vaporizing him and replacing him with a smoldering crater. Uncovering their eyes from the blast, the cultists check that each other are unharmed, shrug at one another, and then scurry off towards the closest objective, still not quite clear about what they're supposed to be doing.

**H.B.M.C.**

puma713 wrote:
What the Sorcerer fails to realize is that the six men surrounding him have been separated from their own units and have no idea what is going on. In their confusion, looking back and forth between each other, the shell lands squarely atop the Sorcerer's position, vaporizing him and replacing him with a smoldering crater. Uncovering their eyes from the blast, the cultists check that each other are unharmed, shrug at one another, and then scurry off towards the closest objective, still not quite clear about what they're supposed to be doing.[/i]

In the confusion, Cultist Rethkar looks to Cultist Rakhter and remarks, 'Why are there a third less of us than before?'."

**ClockworkZion**

Yeah, it's a weird edge case, but you can argue weird edge cases for any ruleset.

Listened to the Signals from the Frontline podcast today and my biggest take away from that was Reese being extremely clear that we don't have all the rules and the game doesn't work like how some of the internet salt miners claim it will. That was recorded on Wens so no LoS talk, but still, I think it's a fair take that the game will likely be different than we currently expect and some of the panic is likely a bit premature.

Since GW said they'd be defining Hordes in the book, I was honestly hoping we'd see some kind of Horde keyword that gives some kind of bonus to Horde units for their model count, but I suspect that their "define hordes" claim might be more just a way to say "define larger units inside of the blast rule" specifically. Which would be a damn shame in all honesty.

But maybe future codexes might fix that with AoS style buffs like +1 attack for every 10 models over the first 10, or something.

Right now while Obscuring does help hordes cross the table safer, it doesn't mitigate all the other issues hordes face in 8th, not to mention the addition of blast weapons in 9th to boot. Which is a damn shame because I love the look of a horde army on the table.It's just that right now there isn't a lot of reasons to take hordes over MSU.

**Eldarain**

Maybe some units will get additional "actions" I'd feel better about a Cultist price hike if they could start performing rituals/sacrifices for summoning points etc.

**NinthMusketeer**

H wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:
Darsath wrote:
Games workshop have experimented with a less competitive game with no points values or anything of the sort. It was Age of Sigmar on launch. I didn't play it on release, so I don't know what it was like, but Games workshop did a 180 on it not too long after.
It was great, and the most balanced* I have seen a GW game, ever. And not by a small margin.

*The community stepped in and provided points. We did a better job than GW ever has.
Yeah, I mean, the amount of hours that even a small community can put in vastly outweighs what any development or play-testing team can put in. Sure, "professionals" might know some things here or there that a community might not, but the number of play-hours, test-hours, communities can do is beyond what any company could pay anyone to do realistically.

I can jokingly imagine the following meeting:
GW Employee 1: We'll just drop points, they are never accurate anyway!
GW Employee 2: What are they going to do, make their own?
Community: *Makes best points costing ever.*
GW:

That's how you effect change though, you demonstrate it. What could they have done there? Pretend the community points costing wasn't happening? No, they pretty much had to compete in the points costing game. No competition, no likely change, honestly.

I mean, perhaps I should just get off my soap-box here, but 9 editions and what 3 Apocalypse iterations, plus Epic and whatever other supplemental rules sources we've had and somehow, out of all that, we could not syncreticly devise notionally "better" rules sets, based on subjective criteria? Seems unlikely. We could probably come up with at least 3 different rules sets, one to focus on ideal "gameness," one on more "simulation" and even one that is a hybrid of the two. And who knows how many others, if we really tried. But perhaps I am just delusional.

There were three major sets of points that were popular, all of them were one person running the scene and collecting feedback to make changes in their spare time. Two of those had vastly better balance than GW has ever had, while the third was misbalanced it had intentionally undercosted certain elements to encourage their use. None of them had a vast amount of man hours put into them, they were mathematical formulas to determine a base value from stats, modified by the creator to account for subjective elements, then subsequently modified every month or so based on player feedback. It was not anything GW could not achieve themselves. Hell they could just ask the creators of these systems to do it again, but for them. But for whatever reasons, be they apathy, delusion, pride, profit, or something else, they choose not to produce a well-balanced game. They choose not to.

**ClockworkZion**

Eldarain wrote:
Maybe some units will get additional "actions" I'd feel better about a Cultist price hike if they could start performing rituals/sacrifices for summoning points etc.

We know we'll be seeing Actions as a standard mechanic to score, and they'll be adding actions into the codexes that reflect that faction's goals (so like the missions we currently see in the books I guess?) but I don't know if we'll see actions as a standard part of unit design.

MSU units like Cultists and Gretchin still have value for spamming to be cheap action taking units, but honestly I just haven't seen much out of this mess to suggest the game will give hordes the tools they need to be fun to play.

**p5freak**

ClockworkZion wrote:

Listened to the Signals from the Frontline podcast today and my biggest take away from that was Reese being extremely clear that we don't have all the rules and the game doesn't work like how some of the internet salt miners claim it will. That was recorded on Wens so no LoS talk, but still, I think it's a fair take that the game will likely be different than we currently expect and some of the panic is likely a bit premature.

Then GW is to blame for previewing the rules in a bad way. They should present them so we understand how they really work. Premature panic ? Its GW. I still expect badly written, ambiguous, complicated rules. See look out sir. Terrain rules will be horrible. You will need a piece of paper to write down every trait for every piece of terrain, 50-100 traits for 10-15 pieces of terrain

**ClockworkZion**

p5freak wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:

Listened to the Signals from the Frontline podcast today and my biggest take away from that was Reese being extremely clear that we don't have all the rules and the game doesn't work like how some of the internet salt miners claim it will. That was recorded on Wens so no LoS talk, but still, I think it's a fair take that the game will likely be different than we currently expect and some of the panic is likely a bit premature.

Then GW is to blame for previewing the rules in a bad way. They should present them so we understand how they really work. Premature panic ? Its GW. I still expect badly written, ambiguous, complicated rules. See look out sir. Terrain rules will be horrible. You will need a piece of paper to write down every trait for every piece of terrain, 50-100 traits for 10-15 pieces of terrain

GW is doing what it needs to in order to keep hype going. I've said it before, but this "boiling pot" method has us clicking in to watch the stream, read the articles and then spend the rest of the day arguing over the scraps they give us, thus keeping the hype going, far better than more complete reveals would do.

I've said I don't read Look out Sir the same way people have in order to create strange scenarios, but I may be unconsciously reading intent over RAW on that one.

And you're making terrain too complicated. They define types of terrain with OPTIONAL RULES that you can use. You can decide on different rules if you'd like but really if you point at something and say "that's a ruin" it's already got a defined list of rules to work with that doesn't require extra bookkeeping. Stop making this harder than it has to be.

And expect whatever you'd like but actual tournament players who're known for taking shots at GW for their screw ups (like the TTT guys) have said the rules are pretty good, so I'm going to assume that they're not blowing smoke and ruining their credibility over a single release.

**kodos**

JWBS wrote:
kodos wrote:

but GW is doing it for 30 years and is the Top Company claiming to be the Prosche of Wargaming

I'm 90% sure that no one from GW ever said that and you've twisted a well known quote to fit your argument.

right, it is a Kirby quote, so lets go with the current one "Games Workshop is the largest and the most successful tabletop fantasy and futuristic battle-games company in the world"

so the largest battle-gamnes company in the world is not able to write good rules because their model department relase more models than the rules department can handle

the argument that GW needs sympathie and not called out for the poor product they make because they are just a small model company and does not have the resources to do it and/or still need to learn but at least they try, falls appart as soon as you read what they say about themself

it is what it is, there is no excuse for bad written, poor rules from GW.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ClockworkZion wrote:

Listened to the Signals from the Frontline podcast today and my biggest take away from that was Reese being extremely clear that we don't have all the rules and the game doesn't work like how some of the internet salt miners claim it will. That was recorded on Wens so no LoS talk, but still, I think it's a fair take that the game will likely be different than we currently expect and some of the panic is likely a bit premature..

he also said some time ago that 9th will be nothing like 8th, so panic depends on what people want and like

if someone really loves 8th, and just wanted and updated version, panic is reasonable as not matter if it gets better or not, the game he/she/it loves is gone

**ClockworkZion**

From what I've seen, 9th has a lot of the same bones as 8th, but it's shaping up to be a different animal. Like a Chimpanzee compared a Gorilla, similar in a lot of waya, but different in more.

**NinthMusketeer**

I'm pretty excited for it, personally. There looks to be a whole lot there to have fun with. Caveat being I do not treat matched play seriously or have an expectation for it to function properly; it's just a tool in the box so to speak.

**Therion**

The only thing I’m a bit bummed out about is that the release date is 25.7.

I’m guessing it’s 25.7, I mean. And it bums me out. More than a month more of insightful articles.

**p5freak**

ClockworkZion wrote:

GW is doing what it needs to in order to keep hype going.

Which is to present the rules in a way that they are easily misunderstood ?

ClockworkZion wrote:

I've said I don't read Look out Sir the same way people have in order to create strange scenarios, but I may be unconsciously reading intent over RAW on that one.

Its a complicated, badly written, ambiguous rule. Perfect example how GW rules are.

ClockworkZion wrote:

And you're making terrain too complicated. They define types of terrain with OPTIONAL RULES that you can use. You can decide on different rules if you'd like but really if you point at something and say "that's a ruin" it's already got a defined list of rules to work with that doesn't require extra bookkeeping. Stop making this harder than it has to be.

There is no defined terrain, it will be guidelines in the rulebook, you can choose to use those, but they arent mandatory. If your opponent doesnt like some of those suggested traits there is room for argument.

ClockworkZion wrote:

And expect whatever you'd like but actual tournament players who're known for taking shots at GW for their screw ups (like the TTT guys) have said the rules are pretty good, so I'm going to assume that they're not blowing smoke and ruining their credibility over a single release.

I respect the TTT guys, and it gives me a little bit of hope. But, they are biased, they are fanatic 40k players, of course they like it. Its new, its exciting. However, GW usually cannot write simple, easily playable rules.

**Jadenim**

Am I misreading it, or is one of those Ork stratagems “pay a command point to destroy one of your own flyers in the vain hope it will hit the enemy”?!

**kodos**

Jadenim wrote:
Am I misreading it, or is one of those Ork stratagems “pay a command point to destroy one of your own flyers in the vain hope it will hit the enemy”?!

it is not new, and yes instead of rolling for explode you pay 1 CP to get that one for sure
and as I was told it is the best way orks have to Alpha Strike

**Not Online!!!**

kodos wrote:
Jadenim wrote:
Am I misreading it, or is one of those Ork stratagems “pay a command point to destroy one of your own flyers in the vain hope it will hit the enemy”?!

it is not new, and yes instead of rolling for explode you pay 1 CP to get that one for sure
and as I was told it is the best way orks have to Alpha Strike

you combine it with the burnabomba, which detonatees with a guaranteed 3 mortals instead of D3 in a radius.
Yes kamikaze burna bombas are a thing.

It's probably one of the best use if you dropped the payload off a burna bomba.

**Esper**

I find it funny that they address Meganobz as a "key" unit because, in spite of their 2+ save, having T4 and no invul still makes them pretty squishy for a supposedly elite option.

**Mr Morden**

kodos wrote:
Jadenim wrote:
Am I misreading it, or is one of those Ork stratagems “pay a command point to destroy one of your own flyers in the vain hope it will hit the enemy”?!

it is not new, and yes instead of rolling for explode you pay 1 CP to get that one for sure
and as I was told it is the best way orks have to Alpha Strike

Sisters have a similar one to make Immolators auto explode and I think Knights do as well.

**Doohicky**

Mr Morden wrote:
kodos wrote:
Jadenim wrote:
Am I misreading it, or is one of those Ork stratagems “pay a command point to destroy one of your own flyers in the vain hope it will hit the enemy”?!

it is not new, and yes instead of rolling for explode you pay 1 CP to get that one for sure
and as I was told it is the best way orks have to Alpha Strike

Sisters have a similar one to make Immolators auto explode and I think Knights do as well.

So do Deathguard. But the difference is the Ork one makes it reduce to 0 wounds and explode.
The DG, Knights and Sisters can only be used after it has reached 0 wounds.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Ok this is hilarious. The ork don't wait until the plane is wasted and decide "Feth it, I'll go down with a bang" like Sisters or Knights do. He is like "Yeah, my plane is like a big rocket, let's send it right at the enemy" lol.

**diepotato47**

We may actually get the rules a bit earlier than the release, iirc the app goes live on the day preorders open, and the app may be fully equip with rules and new power levels.

**ClockworkZion**

p5freak wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:

GW is doing what it needs to in order to keep hype going.

Which is to present the rules in a way that they are easily misunderstood ?

ClockworkZion wrote:

I've said I don't read Look out Sir the same way people have in order to create strange scenarios, but I may be unconsciously reading intent over RAW on that one.

Its a complicated, badly written, ambiguous rule. Perfect example how GW rules are.

ClockworkZion wrote:

And you're making terrain too complicated. They define types of terrain with OPTIONAL RULES that you can use. You can decide on different rules if you'd like but really if you point at something and say "that's a ruin" it's already got a defined list of rules to work with that doesn't require extra bookkeeping. Stop making this harder than it has to be.

There is no defined terrain, it will be guidelines in the rulebook, you can choose to use those, but they arent mandatory. If your opponent doesnt like some of those suggested traits there is room for argument.

ClockworkZion wrote:

And expect whatever you'd like but actual tournament players who're known for taking shots at GW for their screw ups (like the TTT guys) have said the rules are pretty good, so I'm going to assume that they're not blowing smoke and ruining their credibility over a single release.

I respect the TTT guys, and it gives me a little bit of hope. But, they are biased, they are fanatic 40k players, of course they like it. Its new, its exciting. However, GW usually cannot write simple, easily playable rules.

It's by presenting enough information that you get an idea of the rule, but not the full context. Like the Look Out Sir. It's clear they're not showing the more detailed examples of how it works that clear up the confusion people have.

And I don't see what's so messy with Look Out Sir. My reading of it is that you are protected by monsters, vehicles, or units of 3 or more models within 3" as long as they're closer to the shooting unit and aren't characters. I'm sure someone will pop up to tell me I'm wrong, but that's how I read it and that's what seems to be the intent.

And yes, there are guidelines, but unless you're creating your own custom terrain that you need to assign keywords to, why wouldn't you use those guidelines and make the game flow easier for yourself rather than harder? Complaining about self-imposed bookkeeping is not GW's fault.

As for the salt miner's take on GW's ability to write rules, I've seen rules arguements crop up over rules that were clearly written and defined so honestly I'm going to have to disagree. The internet has taught me that even perfectly clear rules can be misunderstood, or misinterpreted, especially when dealing with folks who argue in bad faith.

**the_scotsman**

BaconCatBug wrote:

Spoiler:

The Sorcerer on the left can be shot. The Sorcerer on the right cannot be shot.
Who here can guess the reason why?

Solution: The Left is secretly this scenario

Spoiler:

So this is a post mocking how a precisely defined rule will always result in edge cases - like you could have those cultists 3.000" away and 3.001" away and make the same post - so what youd prefer is a rule where both players would just reasonably agree that a character could or could not be shot at?

**ClockworkZion**

diepotato47 wrote:
We may actually get the rules a bit earlier than the release, iirc the app goes live on the day preorders open, and the app may be fully equip with rules and new power levels.

Honestly I'm hoping we see the full free rules go live on WHC as well when the pre-order pops up.

**Ice_can**

ClockworkZion wrote:
diepotato47 wrote:
We may actually get the rules a bit earlier than the release, iirc the app goes live on the day preorders open, and the app may be fully equip with rules and new power levels.

Honestly I'm hoping we see the full free rules go live on WHC as well when the pre-order pops up.

I think you'll be sadly disappointed, in all honesty while the app goes live on the preorder date I'm not exactly sure how they intend it to work as they have aaid the new codex's will come with a code or such to unlock the digital version of the rules so we may even get an app that's esentially useless? Though I am hoping what will happen is the 8th edition hold over rules will be enabled free/ easily someway then as the ninth edition books come out they will have a QR code or some sort of key to unlock the rules.

**ClockworkZion**

Ice_can wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
diepotato47 wrote:
We may actually get the rules a bit earlier than the release, iirc the app goes live on the day preorders open, and the app may be fully equip with rules and new power levels.

Honestly I'm hoping we see the full free rules go live on WHC as well when the pre-order pops up.

I think you'll be sadly disappointed, in all honesty while the app goes live on the preorder date I'm not exactly sure how they intend it to work as they have aaid the new codex's will come with a code or such to unlock the digital version of the rules so we may even get an app that's esentially useless? Though I am hoping what will happen is the 8th edition hold over rules will be enabled free/ easily someway then as the ninth edition books come out they will have a QR code or some sort of key to unlock the rules.

QR codes are likely how they'll unlock the books.

And I'm not sure why I'd be disappointed, if they have the free core rules on the app like the AoS one does, then they should be online on the WHC site for download as well.