Switch Theme:

40k 9th edition, : App released page 413  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis




On the Internet

Ice_can wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lumineth just got their round 1, so just Gargants and Pariah left, which could still mean 40k coming out in early July.


Why woulf Gargants need to be before 9th edition?
Even if so they could do them preorder 25th released 1st and still have 9th go preorder the 11th and on sale 25th as roumered.

Nothing says Pariah has to come before 9th either. Point was more that those were the last two large releases and assuming GW does both of them then we're likely only 3 weeks out from getting 9th.
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Chief Deputy Sub Assistant Trainee Squig Handling Intern






Dudeface wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Indeed.

If Desperate Breakout is how one can trigger Fall Back without faction specific bonuses, ala Overwatch, this could be very, very good.

I have to assume it is. Because otherwise, why spend 2CP and risk auto destruction?


This is to escape from a tri-point situation, so the alternative is not fall back at all, hence the danger risk


I disagree, as the wording allows it to be used provided an enemy unit is in Engagement Range, rather than requiring multiple?

Goes back to my assumption of why? If Fall Back remains, why this strat to spend 2CP to make a Fall Back deadlier?

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

Hey look! It’s my 2025 Hobby Log/Blog/Project/Whatevs 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





Yeah last paragraph seems to indicate fall back stil exists. This is for 3 pointed trapped but with penalty

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in au
Hissing Hybrid Metamorph






 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Indeed.

If Desperate Breakout is how one can trigger Fall Back without faction specific bonuses, ala Overwatch, this could be very, very good.

I have to assume it is. Because otherwise, why spend 2CP and risk auto destruction?


This is to escape from a tri-point situation, so the alternative is not fall back at all, hence the danger risk


I disagree, as the wording allows it to be used provided an enemy unit is in Engagement Range, rather than requiring multiple?

Goes back to my assumption of why? If Fall Back remains, why this strat to spend 2CP to make a Fall Back deadlier?


In theory it could be when you’re just totally surrounded and unable to move at all. So even just one big unit is capable of doing that and trapping your unit in place.
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Indeed.

If Desperate Breakout is how one can trigger Fall Back without faction specific bonuses, ala Overwatch, this could be very, very good.

I have to assume it is. Because otherwise, why spend 2CP and risk auto destruction?


This is to escape from a tri-point situation, so the alternative is not fall back at all, hence the danger risk


I disagree, as the wording allows it to be used provided an enemy unit is in Engagement Range, rather than requiring multiple?

Goes back to my assumption of why? If Fall Back remains, why this strat to spend 2CP to make a Fall Back deadlier?


3 pointed. Before you could not. Now you can. At risk and cp cost

Oh and it's at least one enemy unit

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 15:18:58


2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Chief Deputy Sub Assistant Trainee Squig Handling Intern






 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I have to assume it is. Because otherwise, why spend 2CP and risk auto destruction?
Logic dictates that the existence of this stratagem means that Fall Back isn't just "waltz out of combat for no cost", because why would one pay points to inflict casualties on themselves when they don't need to.

From what I can see this leaves only two possible explanations:

1. Fall Back as we know it is gone, and it is no longer something you can just do for free without there being an associated cost.
2. GW really have written a 2CP strat for the times when you get tri-pointed. This means that tri-pointing is no longer an tactic borne of an unintended consequence of a rules quirk, but rather something GW expects everyone to do.





Pretty much this. Though I still don’t understand tripoointing, and never will! But my lack of comprehension don’t matter!

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

Hey look! It’s my 2025 Hobby Log/Blog/Project/Whatevs 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

But tri-pointing exists because it's something people have to do because the Fall Back rules are so detrimental to assault units/armies.

So... actually... yeah. It makes sense that GW would write a CP to help you out of a situation that only comes about because they made Fall Back too powerful in the first place that people had to find a way to stop it rather than just fixing the core problem itself.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 15:19:38


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dark Angels Dreadnought





It sounds like specifically regarding a "trapped" unit (the answer to tri-pointing), perhaps fall back is still allowed as long as each model can move without moving through an enemy model. Which makes sense as it specifically forbids rules to allow firing after falling back which would be terrible for all units engaged in combat.. This strat seems like a desperate escape rather than a true fall back. (can't shoot, even if rule allows..ala Ultras)

edit: wow, I must be super slow at typing seeing all of the answers above mine, lol

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 15:21:58


 
   
Made in gb
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant






Isn't the point of paying and potentially destroying part of your own unit, not so you get the unit out of combat for the units sake, but so you can shoot the unit that tried to tie your unit up... Indicating tri-pointing is still a thing, but you now have an option to nullify it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 15:21:40


My hobby instagram account: @the_shroud_of_vigilance
My Shroud of Vigilance Hobby update blog for me detailed updates and lore on the faction:
Blog 
   
Made in us
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis




On the Internet

Well one thing this clears up is that you can't fall back over enemy models...for free.

I'm still hoping we see some kind of nerf to falling back, but we'll have to wait and see for now.
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dark Angels Dreadnought





It's a great strat against harlequins.....until they use their 1CP start Twilit Encore to reconsolidate and tag you again
   
Made in us
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine




Falling back normally might have a similar mechanic as this strat, where you roll a d6 for every model in the unit that attempts to fall back, and on the roll of a 1 a model in that unit dies.

This strat might just allow you to escape tri-pointing but all the other rules in the strat are the same as a fall back.
   
Made in de
Nihilistic Necron Lord






Germany

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah last paragraph seems to indicate fall back stil exists. This is for 3 pointed trapped but with penalty


So, my imperial knight, who is surrounded by non infantry units, and cant fall back normally, has the same chance of dying as a tri pointed T2 gretchin ?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 15:48:43


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 p5freak wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Yeah last paragraph seems to indicate fall back stil exists. This is for 3 pointed trapped but with penalty


So, my imperial knight, who is surrounded by non infantry units, and cant fall back normally, has the same chance of dying as a tri pointed T2 gretchin ?


Yeah, just like he has the same chance of Cutting Someone Down as the S2 Gretchin.

It is frustrating they leaked this without leaking what is happening to falling back generally. It looks like this is just a 2CP "escape from a wrap" strat, which is actually a nerf to melee overall if falling back stays the same. But it's hard to believe even GW would be dumb enough to keep falling back the same and nerf melee AGAIN by letting you also get out of wraps, albeit at significant cost.

It also lets you suicide your unit that is engaged in combat for 2CP, which also seems like a very strange design decision - see the wording about any model that finishes its move inside engagement range being destroyed, meaning you have the option to hit the strat then not actually fall back and just pull the unit, so even move-blocking the fall back will not prevent them from pulling their unit then blasting you off the table.

This just feeds into the basic problems with falling back - people don't do it to the save the unit, just to allow the rest of their army to shoot what was fighting the unit. This just makes it worse because it allows you to always be able to shoot the unit, for 2CP.

Unless, of course, they wrap two different units.

So from what we can tell, wrapping just got even more important, not less important.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/06/21 15:58:22


 
   
Made in fi
Jervis Johnson






tneva82 wrote:
Yeah last paragraph seems to indicate fall back stil exists. This is for 3 pointed trapped but with penalty

Oh crap! I’ve been so lucky with my guesses lately.
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





 p5freak wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Yeah last paragraph seems to indicate fall back stil exists. This is for 3 pointed trapped but with penalty


So, my imperial knight, who is surrounded by non infantry units, and cant fall back normally, has the same chance of dying as a tri pointed T2 gretchin ?


Or you could use your datasheet's rule that allows you to fall back...but too hard concept?

Until gw says otherwise no reason to think others have changed. This and previous knight rule can work just fine together. Nothing in either prevents other to exists.

Hell even knight could technically find use for this if 3 pointed by non infantry/swarm. But if 3 pointed by infantry then unless gw changes it you use rules in your datasheet. That stratagem doesn't override.

Common logic. Sparse in these days


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Therion wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Yeah last paragraph seems to indicate fall back stil exists. This is for 3 pointed trapped but with penalty

Oh crap! I’ve been so lucky with my guesses lately.


As if they were guesses

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 16:03:00


2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in us
Pious Palatine




 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Indeed.

If Desperate Breakout is how one can trigger Fall Back without faction specific bonuses, ala Overwatch, this could be very, very good.

I have to assume it is. Because otherwise, why spend 2CP and risk auto destruction?


This is to escape from a tri-point situation, so the alternative is not fall back at all, hence the danger risk


I disagree, as the wording allows it to be used provided an enemy unit is in Engagement Range, rather than requiring multiple?

Goes back to my assumption of why? If Fall Back remains, why this strat to spend 2CP to make a Fall Back deadlier?


Why would being AN enemy unit vs multiple matter? Most Tripoints are 1 unit tripointing 1 unit for protection or 1 unit tripointing multiple bad in melee units.


 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






So this doesn't actually help knights, because it's a 1/6 chance of dying. I like
   
Made in us
Loyal Necron Lychguard





Working on it

Dont knights inately have a rule that allows them to just fall back over infantry models and such?

Why wouldnt they maintain a similar rule in 9th?

<Dynasty> ~10500pts
War Coven of the Coruscating Gaze ~3000pts
Thrice-Damned Plague Corps ~3250pts
Admech (TBN) ~3500pts +30k Bots and Ulator

 
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

Yeah. If your knights is surrounded by... bikers or... dreadnoughts or rhinos... then... bad luck?

 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Chief Deputy Sub Assistant Trainee Squig Handling Intern






General word of caution about drawing conclusions from what we know to be incomplete data.

I’m not saying anyone is wrong. They may well be proven right. But for now, we’re all flailing in the dark.

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

Hey look! It’s my 2025 Hobby Log/Blog/Project/Whatevs 
   
Made in gb
Khorne Chosen Marine Riding a Juggernaut





UK

yea this seems to me to completely be a reaction to wrap'n'trap situations and is ontop of normal fallback not in replacement of it.
WNT looks a bit gamey so i can see why GW want to provide a means out of it, to be honest though its a pretty clever thing to pull off and in my opinion quite tactical and not to mention the fact it can keep assault armies alive! this 2cp get out clause just feels meh... the istuations where it's key it's a no brainer 2cp to take that one marines ou of combat so ye army can gun down 20 orks

goes along with GW really not liking hordes or big units in this ed.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 16:27:11


 
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dark Angels Dreadnought





I did not like the way tri-pointing was used in the game...super gamey and not logical. Surrounding a unit that you didn't kill off in combat is totally fine though. You have to remember it's 2CP though, it ain't cheap. We won't have infinite CP to do all of these things we're seeing (especially since you probably want to use the ones from your book that you built your list around).
   
Made in it
Dakka Veteran




 bullyboy wrote:
I did not like the way tri-pointing was used in the game...super gamey and not logical. Surrounding a unit that you didn't kill off in combat is totally fine though. You have to remember it's 2CP though, it ain't cheap. We won't have infinite CP to do all of these things we're seeing (especially since you probably want to use the ones from your book that you built your list around).


I'd gladly pay 2 CPs to blast your unit off with my army and save 83% of my remaining unit.
The only reason I could accept this stratagem would be the complete removal of standard Fall Back (leaving this Stratagem as the only option)
   
Made in de
Nihilistic Necron Lord






Germany

tneva82 wrote:
 p5freak wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Yeah last paragraph seems to indicate fall back stil exists. This is for 3 pointed trapped but with penalty


So, my imperial knight, who is surrounded by non infantry units, and cant fall back normally, has the same chance of dying as a tri pointed T2 gretchin ?


Or you could use your datasheet's rule that allows you to fall back...but too hard concept?


Read the rules before trying to lecture others Knights can only fall back over INFANTRY. They cant do it over NON INFANTRY. I said NON INFANTRY.
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dark Angels Dreadnought





 Galas wrote:
Yeah. If your knights is surrounded by... bikers or... dreadnoughts or rhinos... then... bad luck?


well, your knight is probably going to obliterate what's in contact with it in the shooting phase (and probably can target other units with remainder of weapons). But, if you really must get away...it's a 1/36 chance of killing you (you're going to save a CP for reroll right).

There are a few gamey things so far with these strats though in regards to big powerful units. Cut Them Down making grots more scary to run away from than a Bloodthirster for example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
KurtAngle2 wrote:
 bullyboy wrote:
I did not like the way tri-pointing was used in the game...super gamey and not logical. Surrounding a unit that you didn't kill off in combat is totally fine though. You have to remember it's 2CP though, it ain't cheap. We won't have infinite CP to do all of these things we're seeing (especially since you probably want to use the ones from your book that you built your list around).


I'd gladly pay 2 CPs to blast your unit off with my army and save 83% of my remaining unit.
The only reason I could accept this stratagem would be the complete removal of standard Fall Back (leaving this Stratagem as the only option)


Seems like melee units need to coordinate multiple assaults. Overwatch and this fall back strat can only be used by one unit....so the answer is to have multiple options. we still haven't seen how the game plays as a whole, that is something that needs to be seen.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 16:31:45


 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





KurtAngle2 wrote:
 bullyboy wrote:
I did not like the way tri-pointing was used in the game...super gamey and not logical. Surrounding a unit that you didn't kill off in combat is totally fine though. You have to remember it's 2CP though, it ain't cheap. We won't have infinite CP to do all of these things we're seeing (especially since you probably want to use the ones from your book that you built your list around).


I'd gladly pay 2 CPs to blast your unit off with my army and save 83% of my remaining unit.
The only reason I could accept this stratagem would be the complete removal of standard Fall Back (leaving this Stratagem as the only option)


That would require rewriting of whole game unless you want to make shooty armies worst armies ever though. Assault at it's worst would be powerhouses in comparison

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Hrm. Looking at it more and it notes "may ATTEMPT to Fall Back".

Which means there's a chance of it happening, a chance that it won't.

There's some kind of LD test involved here.

Hrm!
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Wakshaani wrote:
Hrm. Looking at it more and it notes "may ATTEMPT to Fall Back".

Which means there's a chance of it happening, a chance that it won't.

There's some kind of LD test involved here.

Hrm!


LD test to fall back would make sense, gotta do something to make it easy for space marines but hard for everyone else doncha know.
   
Made in us
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis




On the Internet

yukishiro1 wrote:
Wakshaani wrote:
Hrm. Looking at it more and it notes "may ATTEMPT to Fall Back".

Which means there's a chance of it happening, a chance that it won't.

There's some kind of LD test involved here.

Hrm!


LD test to fall back would make sense, gotta do something to make it easy for space marines but hard for everyone else doncha know.

Necrons have even better leadership though.

A leadership test to fall back seems logical (and would make Night Lords the kings of trapping people in melee), but I almost expect GW to just have players dice off for it instead.
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: