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.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Not to mention that the "gimmick" of wrapping isn't half as gimmicky as the gimmick of falling back while the enemy you are in combat with has to just stand there and take your whole army's shooting instead of following you.

You mean like the gimmick were my unit can't see you running towards them and decide to fall back before you reach them?

We can play that game all day. The game is structured in turns and that means thing happen in a way they don't in real life. It's not a gimmick that your model act on your turn and my models on my turn. It's the convention of the game.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

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.

Night Lords are already the "kings of trapping people in melee", which begs the question: if I play "We Have Come For You" does this strategem still work? Which strategem trumps which? If this beats "We Have Come For You" I will not be happy.

 alextroy wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
Not to mention that the "gimmick" of wrapping isn't half as gimmicky as the gimmick of falling back while the enemy you are in combat with has to just stand there and take your whole army's shooting instead of following you.

You mean like the gimmick were my unit can't see you running towards them and decide to fall back before you reach them?

We can play that game all day. The game is structured in turns and that means thing happen in a way they don't in real life. It's not a gimmick that your model act on your turn and my models on my turn. It's the convention of the game.

The other guy was the one talking about gimmicks. So I think you agree with me and made my point for me?

There is something we don't know about that could also massive change to how melee and the whole fallback/tri-point thing works and that's the wordage for the assault move/pile in/consolidate. In previous editions you had to move "The shortest possible" with these particular movements, which would there by make things like wrapping and tri-pointing much harder because a lack of free movement would means you'd have to set something like that up in your movement phase. "move closer" is a 8th edition thing, at least for the assault move.

I'd personally hope they don't do that. The Assault phase has largely been uninteractive during those previous editions, and I would assume "player agency" would be important even to those who "hate" wrapping. If assault movement really does have to be nerfed (and I don't think so), I'd much rather pile in and consolidation distance just be shorted.

Great, so they AREN'T going to fix one of the main problems with melee.

yukishiro1 wrote:

 alextroy wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
Not to mention that the "gimmick" of wrapping isn't half as gimmicky as the gimmick of falling back while the enemy you are in combat with has to just stand there and take your whole army's shooting instead of following you.

You mean like the gimmick were my unit can't see you running towards them and decide to fall back before you reach them?

We can play that game all day. The game is structured in turns and that means thing happen in a way they don't in real life. It's not a gimmick that your model act on your turn and my models on my turn. It's the convention of the game.

The other guy was the one talking about gimmicks. So I think you agree with me and made my point for me?

Sorry I misinterpreted your post. The point is correct, just directed toward anyone who thinks Fall Back is a gimmick and not just a rule.

yukishiro1 wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
For the "tripointing is becoming more important crowd", we still don't know if there are any changes to how close combat works. A small tweak to the rules for Charging, Piling In and/or Consolidating can greatly impact the ability to tripoint a unit. If they return the move directly towards the closest enemy model rule that would be a big change. Also if they required all charging models to move as far as possible to get into Engagement Range, that would be a significant change. We will have to wait for more information.

All those things would be even bigger nerfs to melee. If your suggestion is that people should wait for the whole ruleset before judging because it might be even worse for melee than it currently looks...I'm not sure it really assuages anyone's concerns, but ok I guess?

The point is people are making sweeping judgements on incomplete information. We know that changes are on the way. Seeing the constant drip of small changes, I'm not sure where the final result will end. No one should except those lucky enough to have seen the rules in totality.

Will Close Combat be improved, degraded, or the same in the new Edition? Wait for all the rules to find out.

yukishiro1 wrote:
You're happy with a solution that preserves all the tedium of and continues to reward the "gimmick," just not as much as before?.

I love your kneejerk reactions, I really do. But you should realize at some point that I was referring to falling back.

But yes, the accumulating total of changes, particularly this and to overwatch strike me as positive changes. Having costs and consequences rather than just rewards is a good thing for game design.

 alextroy wrote:


Will Close Combat be improved, degraded, or the same in the new Edition? Wait for all the rules to find out.

Sure, but the point is this particular decision seems like one that doesn't really please anybody. Retaining wrapping but giving you a 2CP stratagem to get out of a wrap doesn't address anyone who thought it was a gimmick, nor does it please anybody who thought it was a good part of the game. It just nerfs wrapping while retaining the tedium.

If they make other changes that make it harder or almost impossible to wrap in the first place, the stratagem just becomes even weirder as it won't even come up hardly ever, so why was it even needed?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
You're happy with a solution that preserves all the tedium of and continues to reward the "gimmick," just not as much as before?.

I love your kneejerk reactions, I really do. But you should realize at some point that I was referring to falling back.

But yes, the accumulating total of changes, particularly this and to overwatch strike me as positive changes. Having costs and consequences rather than just rewards is a good thing for game design.

How could you have been referring to falling back as the gimmick that was being changed to have costs and consequences? This doesn't change falling back except to make you able to do it through a wrap for a CP cost. Before this, you couldn't fall back from a wrap. Now, you can. The rewards for falling back have been increased, not counter-balanced.

If this was now the only way to fall back I would agree with you completely. But it clearly isn't, as the 40k facebook account itself confirmed. This is an additional option you get on top of the normal fall back, not a limitation on it.

Based on everything we know, it's even easier and less consequential to fall back than it was before. That may not turn out to be true when the full rules are revealed, but it is based on what we know now.

It comes up when a unit is surrounded, but not necessarily the victim of a deliberate wrap and trap. I hope the assault phase has changed to change the way wrap and traps have worked in 8th (which are dumb) but still allows for surrounding a unit. Then we need to see the full rules for consequences and abilities to fall back.
There is still so much to be seen and endless speculating that the game is fethed is very short sighted.

 bullyboy wrote:
It comes up when a unit is surrounded, but not necessarily the victim of a deliberate wrap and trap. I hope the assault phase has changed to change the way wrap and traps have worked in 8th (which are dumb) but still allows for surrounding a unit. Then we need to see the full rules for consequences and abilities to fall back.
There is still so much to be seen and endless speculating that the game is fethed is very short sighted.

I'm convinced Slayer and yukishiro come on here just to spread their misery. I wish we could live in a world where you weren't forced to play badly made games by companies you hate. But alas, tis but a dream.

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
It comes up when a unit is surrounded, but not necessarily the victim of a deliberate wrap and trap. I hope the assault phase has changed to change the way wrap and traps have worked in 8th (which are dumb) but still allows for surrounding a unit. Then we need to see the full rules for consequences and abilities to fall back.
There is still so much to be seen and endless speculating that the game is fethed is very short sighted.

I'm convinced Slayer and yukishiro come on here just to spread their misery. I wish we could live in a world where you weren't forced to play badly made games by companies you hate. But alas, tis but a dream.

When you have invested enough time and money in a game you become a hostage. Every new edition is a pain when the game moves in a completely wrong direction (shallow, gimmicky ccg).

Thats how i feel anyway.

Us $ price speculation?

I think GW are trying to steer away the "wrap and trap" tedium by allowing people to get out of it.

I've never played assault units to wrap and trap. Hard hitting assault units are meant to carve stuff up, not sit and hold an enemy in position. That's what tar pit units do. Poxwalkers, Plaguebearers, Nurglings, Scarabs, Rippers, etc are tar pit units. Berserkers, DC, Bloodletters, etc aren't.

With multi-charges harder to pull off and wrap and trap harder to pull off the emphasis is on focus killing a unit. Not to mention 2 CP is a lot considering in a 2k game we start with 12; start deducting pre-game CP usage for multiple detachments, relics, pre-game strats and 2 CP starts to be VERY expensive. I feel most 2k games are going to start at around 8 CP. That's not very many.

8 CP disappear fast. Start blowing CP to save a unit wrapped because you were dumb enough to let said unit get wrapped in the first place then it's on you.

noexit1982 wrote:
Us $ price speculation?

A lot. Limited run. Collector's rulebook mark up. Lots of minis.

 jhnbrg wrote:

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
It comes up when a unit is surrounded, but not necessarily the victim of a deliberate wrap and trap. I hope the assault phase has changed to change the way wrap and traps have worked in 8th (which are dumb) but still allows for surrounding a unit. Then we need to see the full rules for consequences and abilities to fall back.
There is still so much to be seen and endless speculating that the game is fethed is very short sighted.

I'm convinced Slayer and yukishiro come on here just to spread their misery. I wish we could live in a world where you weren't forced to play badly made games by companies you hate. But alas, tis but a dream.

When you have invested enough time and money in a game you become a hostage. Every new edition is a pain when the game moves in a completely wrong direction (shallow, gimmicky ccg).

Thats how i feel anyway.

You are only a hostage in your head. Sunk Cost Fallacy

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Great, so they AREN'T going to fix one of the main problems with melee.

If you mean the ability to trap models via tripointing, then no they are not. If you mean anything to do with falling back, no one knows yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

noexit1982 wrote:
Us $ price speculation?

$250-300USD seems to be the local prediction.

 jhnbrg wrote:

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
It comes up when a unit is surrounded, but not necessarily the victim of a deliberate wrap and trap. I hope the assault phase has changed to change the way wrap and traps have worked in 8th (which are dumb) but still allows for surrounding a unit. Then we need to see the full rules for consequences and abilities to fall back.
There is still so much to be seen and endless speculating that the game is fethed is very short sighted.

I'm convinced Slayer and yukishiro come on here just to spread their misery. I wish we could live in a world where you weren't forced to play badly made games by companies you hate. But alas, tis but a dream.

When you have invested enough time and money in a game you become a hostage. Every new edition is a pain when the game moves in a completely wrong direction (shallow, gimmicky ccg).

Thats how i feel anyway.

You really are not and if you don't like something you shouldn't be expending so much effort to force something on yourself. I've got a mountain of 40k crap and just ditched it to play Infinity and haven't even felt slightly bad about. Sure I still buy 40k and I still get in the occasional game for fun. But I'm not going to force myself to play. I yeeted right out of 7th edition because I hated it, nothing happened to me.

noexit1982 wrote:
Us $ price speculation?

Apparently some seem to think $150. https://spikeybits.com/2020/06/rumors-9th-edition-40k-indomitus-box-set-price-cost.html

I stand by that I don't think the $150 box is Indomitus. I'm betting it's 9th's actual starter instead.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

noexit1982 wrote:
Us $ price speculation?

Apparently some seem to think $150. https://spikeybits.com/2020/06/rumors-9th-edition-40k-indomitus-box-set-price-cost.html

That article says they think it will be $200.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Random question, is anyone else seeing the difference on the Warhammer 40k store page?

I don't want to prejudice anyone before they check and maybe it's just a thing I've missed, so I'll be putting the weirdness in spoilers:

Spoiler:

Hey, did you look yet? Cool. Space Marines are not present in Armies of the Imperium. They have their own tag.

Confirmed! Guilleman to lead a revolt against the corrupt and decadent Imperium! All 3rd edition marines to be wiped out by Order LXVI!

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Random question, is anyone else seeing the difference on the Warhammer 40k store page?

I don't want to prejudice anyone before they check and maybe it's just a thing I've missed, so I'll be putting the weirdness in spoilers:

Spoiler:

Hey, did you look yet? Cool. Space Marines are not present in Armies of the Imperium. They have their own tag.

Confirmed! Guilleman to lead a revolt against the corrupt and decadent Imperium! All 3rd edition marines to be wiped out by Order LXVI!

By that arguement in 9th all Xenos will become one mega army.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I stand by that I don't think the $150 box is Indomitus. I'm betting it's 9th's actual starter instead.

Is there going to be a separate starter set?

jivardi wrote:
I think GW are trying to steer away the "wrap and trap" tedium by allowing people to get out of it.

I've never played assault units to wrap and trap. Hard hitting assault units are meant to carve stuff up, not sit and hold an enemy in position. That's what tar pit units do. Poxwalkers, Plaguebearers, Nurglings, Scarabs, Rippers, etc are tar pit units. Berserkers, DC, Bloodletters, etc aren't.

With multi-charges harder to pull off and wrap and trap harder to pull off the emphasis is on focus killing a unit. Not to mention 2 CP is a lot considering in a 2k game we start with 12; start deducting pre-game CP usage for multiple detachments, relics, pre-game strats and 2 CP starts to be VERY expensive. I feel most 2k games are going to start at around 8 CP. That's not very many.

8 CP disappear fast. Start blowing CP to save a unit wrapped because you were dumb enough to let said unit get wrapped in the first place then it's on you.

The trouble is this is internally inconsistent in its logic. The change doesn't steer away from wrap and trap by letting people get out of it. You'll still want to wrap and trap every time in 9th based on this, except possibly against extremely elite units - and even then you'd rather try a wrap and trap on the last model than deliberately kill the whole unit.

It's just that they opponent does get an expensive way to escape it - but precisely because it's expensive, you still want to do it in almost all circumstances.

If they thought wrap and trap was bad they should have just got rid of it and rebalanced melee in other ways.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I stand by that I don't think the $150 box is Indomitus. I'm betting it's 9th's actual starter instead.

Is there going to be a separate starter set?

Yes, because Indomitus is not a true starter set and is a limited run big box for established players to jump into 9th with.

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
It comes up when a unit is surrounded, but not necessarily the victim of a deliberate wrap and trap. I hope the assault phase has changed to change the way wrap and traps have worked in 8th (which are dumb) but still allows for surrounding a unit. Then we need to see the full rules for consequences and abilities to fall back.
There is still so much to be seen and endless speculating that the game is fethed is very short sighted.

I'm convinced Slayer and yukishiro come on here just to spread their misery. I wish we could live in a world where you weren't forced to play badly made games by companies you hate. But alas, tis but a dream.

This is such a weird thing to say, on so many levels. First of all, why would you let someone get into your head so much that you actually make a post complaining about them allegedly complaining?

Second, we all presumably want a better game. It seems really weird to act like only positive reactions to rules changes are allowed. In fact, it's the negative reactions that are actually useful from a development perspective. Being told "this is all great" doesn't teach anybody anything.

We're all working on incomplete information and this may all somehow come together into a great package. But that doesn't mean people shouldn't be allowed to talk about the changes in the meantime - the whole reason they're releasing the changes this way is to get people talking. If you aren't interested in talking about the new rules, why come to a thread just to complain about others allegedly complaining? That seems like the height of doing exactly what you're accusing others of doing.

yukishiro1 wrote:

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
It comes up when a unit is surrounded, but not necessarily the victim of a deliberate wrap and trap. I hope the assault phase has changed to change the way wrap and traps have worked in 8th (which are dumb) but still allows for surrounding a unit. Then we need to see the full rules for consequences and abilities to fall back.
There is still so much to be seen and endless speculating that the game is fethed is very short sighted.

I'm convinced Slayer and yukishiro come on here just to spread their misery. I wish we could live in a world where you weren't forced to play badly made games by companies you hate. But alas, tis but a dream.

This is such a weird thing to say, on so many levels. First of all, why would you let someone get into your head so much that you actually make a post complaining about them allegedly complaining?

Not really though, it it, unless you're being extremely hyperbolic? He literally just wrote "I've observed that some people here complain a lot". Probably took him less than a minute.But you're saying that it must be something deep in his head, gnawing at his psyche, for him to go to the extreme effort of expressing the thought? Come now.

yukishiro1 wrote:

Spoiler:

jivardi wrote:
I think GW are trying to steer away the "wrap and trap" tedium by allowing people to get out of it.

I've never played assault units to wrap and trap. Hard hitting assault units are meant to carve stuff up, not sit and hold an enemy in position. That's what tar pit units do. Poxwalkers, Plaguebearers, Nurglings, Scarabs, Rippers, etc are tar pit units. Berserkers, DC, Bloodletters, etc aren't.

With multi-charges harder to pull off and wrap and trap harder to pull off the emphasis is on focus killing a unit. Not to mention 2 CP is a lot considering in a 2k game we start with 12; start deducting pre-game CP usage for multiple detachments, relics, pre-game strats and 2 CP starts to be VERY expensive. I feel most 2k games are going to start at around 8 CP. That's not very many.

8 CP disappear fast. Start blowing CP to save a unit wrapped because you were dumb enough to let said unit get wrapped in the first place then it's on you.

The trouble is this is internally inconsistent in its logic. The change doesn't steer away from wrap and trap by letting people get out of it. You'll still want to wrap and trap every time in 9th based on this, except possibly against extremely elite units - and even then you'd rather try a wrap and trap on the last model than deliberately kill the whole unit.

It's just that they opponent does get an expensive way to escape it - but precisely because it's expensive, you still want to do it in almost all circumstances.

If they thought wrap and trap was bad they should have just got rid of it and rebalanced melee in other ways.

It is and it isn't the thibg is tripointing as gamey and rules lawyerly as it is, when your playing competitive it's part of the game so why complain, not to mention fly basically invalidates it. And everything in competitive needs fly.

Also try explaining tripointing to casual players and they just look confused.
This is for qhen tripointing is done to someone who wasn't expecting or aware of it probably.

As GW doesn't like feel bads they are bad for sales and bad for streaming.

JWBS wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:

 Nah Man Pichu wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
It comes up when a unit is surrounded, but not necessarily the victim of a deliberate wrap and trap. I hope the assault phase has changed to change the way wrap and traps have worked in 8th (which are dumb) but still allows for surrounding a unit. Then we need to see the full rules for consequences and abilities to fall back.
There is still so much to be seen and endless speculating that the game is fethed is very short sighted.

I'm convinced Slayer and yukishiro come on here just to spread their misery. I wish we could live in a world where you weren't forced to play badly made games by companies you hate. But alas, tis but a dream.

This is such a weird thing to say, on so many levels. First of all, why would you let someone get into your head so much that you actually make a post complaining about them allegedly complaining?

Not really though, it it, unless you're being extremely hyperbolic? He literally just wrote "I've observed that some people here complain a lot". Probably took him less than a minute.But you're saying that it must be something deep in his head, gnawing at his psyche, for him to go to the extreme effort of expressing the thought? Come now.

Well, no, that isn't literally or figuratively what he said, nor is that what I said. But I'm not interested in getting into a sniping match over a straw man. It's irrelevant, which was my original point. If people don't enjoy talking about the rules they just shouldn't talk about the rules. The nice thing about dakka is it isn't full of people who make everything personal, and I hope it stays that way. I shouldn't have risen to the bait, I just wanted to call it out because it's not what this place should be. There's enough other forums on the internet full of people calling each other haters and white knights and making every disagreement into some personal flaw in the person they're disagreeing with.

yukishiro1 wrote:
The nice thing about dakka is it isn't full of people who make everything personal, and I hope it stays that way. I shouldn't have risen to the bait, I just wanted to call it out because it's not what this place should be. There's enough other forums on the internet full of people calling each other haters and white knights and making every disagreement into some personal flaw in the person they're disagreeing with.

You must be new here.