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.

I pretty much have every GW terrain made in the last 15 years except the zone mortalis stuff... I’m waiting for a Christmas bundle type deal. To even build a 4x4 table is just ridiculous in cost.

Some terrain tables that have enough large obscuring pieces are hard to navigate with large vehicle models. So there is a balance needed. Furthermore if you think you are getting 30 boys completely obscured so they can benefit from the dense cover rules. That’s just not realistically going to happen often. You will need like 3 wall of martyrs.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The Reanimator opens up a targeted buff with a range limit for the unit to stay within to benefit from, something 40k didn't jave in 8th.

Debatable...Reanimation Beam takes place during the Command Phase, so this is likely the kind of thing that would have been "until the end of the phase..." targeted buffs.

Darkstrider, off the top of my head, with his Structural Analyzer granted a targeted buff that lasted just for your Shooting Phase would have been a good example of this.

Reread that rule. It lasts until your next command phase.

Start of your next command phase. That particular timing is pretty important, with an impact depending on how 'beginning of the turn' is defined in 9th edition (and how it interacts with the current version of RP), and how RP is potentially redefined in their codex.

Personally I'd put 'beginning of turn' into the command phase for simplicity of rules resolution, but I don't know if GW will do that.

Voss wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The Reanimator opens up a targeted buff with a range limit for the unit to stay within to benefit from, something 40k didn't jave in 8th.

Debatable...Reanimation Beam takes place during the Command Phase, so this is likely the kind of thing that would have been "until the end of the phase..." targeted buffs.

Darkstrider, off the top of my head, with his Structural Analyzer granted a targeted buff that lasted just for your Shooting Phase would have been a good example of this.

Reread that rule. It lasts until your next command phase.

Start of your next command phase. That particular timing is pretty important, with an impact depending on how 'beginning of the turn' is defined in 9th edition (and how it interacts with the current version of RP), and how RP is potentially redefined in their codex.

Personally I'd put 'beginning of turn' into the command phase for simplicity of rules resolution, but I don't know if GW will do that.

They said the Command Phase was made partially to accommodate the "start of turn" stuff, so I don't see why not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

** We’ll have more on Strategic Reserves tomorrow, so be sure to join us on warhammer-community.com to learn more!

Hopefully there is a bit of info here on how that whole 'hold stuff for longer and it gets better options" thing works exactly.

I am unsure that the -1 to hit in the shoot phase provided by dense terrain will affect hordes that much, as typically they don't shoot much to start with. I guess we can't write hordes off completely before we see their point costs. We still just have points for cultists at this point.

 addnid wrote:


I am unsure that the -1 to hit in the shoot phase provided by dense terrain will affect hordes that much, as typically they don't shoot much to start with. I guess we can't write hordes off completely before we see their point costs. We still just have points for cultists at this point.

we have the costs of cultists and intercissors.
we also have the baggage of additional rules like vigilus and PA, so MO would not really be all that diffrent.


i mean, that people are starting to be slightly confused is not particulary srprising in that case and gw sofar has only really offered that it would be fine supposedly whilest not providing anything beyond reassureents without substance.

Also the new rules, i am certain, could've been written more condensed and could've had pictures aswell, not to mention that the bulletpoits would've been nice to have at the same time...

Not Online!!! wrote:

 addnid wrote:


I am unsure that the -1 to hit in the shoot phase provided by dense terrain will affect hordes that much, as typically they don't shoot much to start with. I guess we can't write hordes off completely before we see their point costs. We still just have points for cultists at this point.

we have the costs of cultists and intercissors.
we also have the baggage of additional rules like vigilus and PA, so MO would not really be all that diffrent.


i mean, that people are starting to be slightly confused is not particulary srprising in that case and gw sofar has only really offered that it would be fine supposedly whilest not providing anything beyond reassureents without substance.

Also the new rules, i am certain, could've been written more condensed and could've had pictures aswell, not to mention that the bulletpoits would've been nice to have at the same time...

We also got the points for necron warriors in their faction focus.

yep, forgot them.
still iffy imo.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 addnid wrote:


I am unsure that the -1 to hit in the shoot phase provided by dense terrain will affect hordes that much, as typically they don't shoot much to start with. I guess we can't write hordes off completely before we see their point costs. We still just have points for cultists at this point.

we have the costs of cultists and intercissors.
we also have the baggage of additional rules like vigilus and PA, so MO would not really be all that diffrent.


i mean, that people are starting to be slightly confused is not particulary srprising in that case and gw sofar has only really offered that it would be fine supposedly whilest not providing anything beyond reassureents without substance.

Also the new rules, i am certain, could've been written more condensed and could've had pictures aswell, not to mention that the bulletpoits would've been nice to have at the same time...

New rules likely do have pictures. We have been given just texts. Not entire page of rulebook

I think we'll see quite a few rule types make their way over from AoS to 40k, one being auras becoming more and more targeted.

The one thing I do hope we get with 9th is a basing guide for Matched Play such as we have in AoS.

I'm gonna make a prediction.

Just like what happened from the transition from the start of eighth, all the rules involving reserves are going to likely be rewritten or written out to maintain balance because beta strikes are too strong in this game and preserving the effective punch of your army until you need it is just going to end with the victory to the person who gets to drop theirs last.

stratigo wrote:
I'm gonna make a prediction.

Just like what happened from the transition from the start of eighth, all the rules involving reserves are going to likely be rewritten or written out to maintain balance because beta strikes are too strong in this game and preserving the effective punch of your army until you need it is just going to end with the victory to the person who gets to drop theirs last.

How so ? I never felt any beta strike dominance in 8th. Which builds do you have in mind ? Which pack such a heavy beta punch that they end the game here and then on turn 2 ? Do the bulds involve Assault centurions or possed bombs ?

For the infamous "L shaped ruins" which only block a tiny amount of line of sight - just make two. Make them face each other so that they're the corners of a rectangle. Anything within that rectangle is ruins terrain. Add a bit of paper and some rubble to taste. Done.

 addnid wrote:

stratigo wrote:
I'm gonna make a prediction.

Just like what happened from the transition from the start of eighth, all the rules involving reserves are going to likely be rewritten or written out to maintain balance because beta strikes are too strong in this game and preserving the effective punch of your army until you need it is just going to end with the victory to the person who gets to drop theirs last.

How so ? I never felt any beta strike dominance in 8th. Which builds do you have in mind ? Which pack such a heavy beta punch that they end the game here and then on turn 2 ? Do the bulds involve Assault centurions or possed bombs ?

After the change to Reserves-on-turn-1, many Blood Angels, Possessed Bomb, Ork da-jump lists had to swap to a Turn 2 or Turn 3 strike. In many instances, especially in late 8th with the nu-Marine lists, this wound up being a game of cat and mouse in terms of baiting the Marine player to drop positioning in their alpha strike.

Obviously the mirror matches were quite positionally focused in terms of circling each other for the right time/place to strike.

 Graphite wrote:
For the infamous "L shaped ruins" which only block a tiny amount of line of sight - just make two. Make them face each other so that they're the corners of a rectangle. Anything within that rectangle is ruins terrain. Add a bit of paper and some rubble to taste. Done.

At this point I'm not even sure what is being argued here. That anyone who complains about the game hasn't done a good job making their terrain? That expanded terrain rules are unnecessary and nobody would have problems if every single ruin piece was 4 L-shapes and 2 U-shapes?

A little while ago I found out that GW offers (offered maybe?) a credit program for stores to make their own terrain and use it as a selling point, and nobody had used that credit in 6 years, so i got to go on an absolutely ridiculous shopping spree of the (then fairly new) sector mechanicus stuff. That was what I painted for a solid 3 months, and I worked my ASS of making it as LOS-blocking and contained as humanly possible, because I didn't want to make it all loose and have it get broken in five seconds but I also wanted it to be useful in the game.

Turns out, when you do that, it's incredibly difficult to actually maneuver your figs in the piece. It's rare to see someone seeking them out, because to actually move your units underneath it you have to reach under and carefully fiddle around to get your infantry models standing upright and within squad coherency and moving only their movement value...because there essentially IS no special rule in 8th ed's ruleset for maneuvering through and around terrain. You have to adhere to all the same restrictions as when you are standing in the open field.

that's why we need a more flexible terrain system. Personally, I wish they'd gone a little farther. I wish they'd made pieces of terrain that you could just embark on, ala Apocalypse. Something like a neutral building that isn't a fortification but that models would reasonably have been able to go inside if it wasn't made as a solid piece. You'd move up to it, set your miniatures either on top of or off to the side, somewhere that represents they're "inside" the building, and they gain the benefit of cover from it while they're in there. All LOS and engagement range distances are measured from the building, and they can disembark from the building like you'd disembark from a transport.

That way people wouldn't have to keep jamming their sausage fingers into the bottoms of my sector mech pieces, snapping off fiddly little chains and tubes and making me have to re-glue them or losing them underneath the tables.

That would also limited size of pieces you could have though...And result in oddities where slower units can use it as speed hopping while fast units suddenly are slowed down.

stratigo wrote:
I'm gonna make a prediction.

Just like what happened from the transition from the start of eighth, all the rules involving reserves are going to likely be rewritten or written out to maintain balance because beta strikes are too strong in this game and preserving the effective punch of your army until you need it is just going to end with the victory to the person who gets to drop theirs last.

I don't like that prediction. It would be cutting the Eighth Legion's throat. Deep strike is where we shine. Aren't reserves today's topic? If they do something like this I'm going to be a bit salty.

@The_Scotsman: I was hoping for terrain that could be embarked on too. Would have been great for geq infantry, who from the look of what we've seen so far are going to need all the help they can get. This looks more and more like the anti-light infantry edition.

Looking like super heavys are second on the hit list as well.

People do not make unrealistic L-shaped buildings because they are lazy and don't feel like making realistic looking ruins.

They make L-shaped buildings because for 8 editions GW has not made a ruleset for their wargame that allows for an ENCLOSED BUILDING.Anything that models can reasonably get inside either has to be houseruled or you have to continue to micromanage your dudes through lift-off roofs (hope you didn't want multiple levels in your enclosed building) or by poking at them through windows and doors.

8th did admittedly amp up the silliness by making it so among the worst terrain you could possibly get for game functionality was the terrain that you can buy directly from games workshop at the highest possible prices for the game that they produce warhammer 40k. 3rd party terrain like this worked far better for 8th ed than GW's own terrain sets https://deathraydesigns.com/product/rapid-vanguard-bundle/

 addnid wrote:

stratigo wrote:
I'm gonna make a prediction.

Just like what happened from the transition from the start of eighth, all the rules involving reserves are going to likely be rewritten or written out to maintain balance because beta strikes are too strong in this game and preserving the effective punch of your army until you need it is just going to end with the victory to the person who gets to drop theirs last.

How so ? I never felt any beta strike dominance in 8th. Which builds do you have in mind ? Which pack such a heavy beta punch that they end the game here and then on turn 2 ? Do the bulds involve Assault centurions or possed bombs ?

At the start of 8th, dominant armies involved deepstriking a large number of tempestus squads along with guilliman and his flying circus. It was rather oppressive and they nerfed it. Then other armies, like blood angels, came out with the ability to rapidly and overwhelmingly deep strike a murder squad into the enemy. So they nerfed it again. Then people started teleporting in heavy weapon platforms to prevent them from being shot to death, like ravagers. So they nerfed deep striking AGAIN.

And it is STILL an extremely strong tool.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

stratigo wrote:
I'm gonna make a prediction.

Just like what happened from the transition from the start of eighth, all the rules involving reserves are going to likely be rewritten or written out to maintain balance because beta strikes are too strong in this game and preserving the effective punch of your army until you need it is just going to end with the victory to the person who gets to drop theirs last.

I don't like that prediction. It would be cutting the Eighth Legion's throat. Deep strike is where we shine. Aren't reserves today's topic? If they do something like this I'm going to be a bit salty.

@The_Scotsman: I was hoping for terrain that could be embarked on too. Would have been great for geq infantry, who from the look of what we've seen so far are going to need all the help they can get. This looks more and more like the anti-light infantry edition.

Looking like super heavys are second on the hit list as well.

I think you are set for deep strike and reserve dominance for maybe half a year. A year if you are lucky. Beta strike builds are going to rule early 9th like they ruled early eighth. And then you're gonna get nerfed cause it'll be TOO strong.

That's what my prediction was supposed to mean. Not that they're nerfing it at the start of 9th, that it'll be too strong at the start and have to be nerfed somewhat later.

the_scotsman wrote:
People do not make unrealistic L-shaped buildings because they are lazy and don't feel like making realistic looking ruins.

They make L-shaped buildings because for 8 editions GW has not made a ruleset for their wargame that allows for an ENCLOSED BUILDING./

That's not true!

I'm pretty sure there were rules for enclosed buildings in Rogue Trader and 2nd Edition.

So they haven't made those rules for 6 editions, going on 7.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
This looks more and more like the anti-light infantry edition.

Well GW made it abundantly clear in the initial announcement video and have been sending notes about as subtle as nuclear missile reveal after reveal. It's kinda hard to miss the note.

 Graphite wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
People do not make unrealistic L-shaped buildings because they are lazy and don't feel like making realistic looking ruins.

They make L-shaped buildings because for 8 editions GW has not made a ruleset for their wargame that allows for an ENCLOSED BUILDING./

That's not true!

I'm pretty sure there were rules for enclosed buildings in Rogue Trader and 2nd Edition.

So they haven't made those rules for 6 editions, going on 7.

Pretty sure GW lumped them under "fortifications" and left players to figure it out.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Graphite wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
People do not make unrealistic L-shaped buildings because they are lazy and don't feel like making realistic looking ruins.

They make L-shaped buildings because for 8 editions GW has not made a ruleset for their wargame that allows for an ENCLOSED BUILDING./

That's not true!

I'm pretty sure there were rules for enclosed buildings in Rogue Trader and 2nd Edition.

So they haven't made those rules for 6 editions, going on 7.

Pretty sure GW lumped them under "fortifications" and left players to figure it out.

I would assume that "Fortification" rules are going to primarily function much more entirely like transports - i.e. that the building itself must be destroyed before the unit inside can be harmed at all, which is a lot of power to be putting on a neutral terrain piece, and also results in kind of a destructible board.

While that can be interesting (I have used houserules for bunkers, which allowed extremely limited firing out of them, but which protected the squad inside like a transport would) I think it's not something you'd want to put in a normal game as it's very easily powergameable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You are right though. Famously, i recall that in the 2nd ed rulebook you knew what the armor class of a tent was before you knew how to move a model.

the_scotsman wrote:

https://deathraydesigns.com/product/rapid-vanguard-bundle/

I normally much prefer plastic but this all looks very good.

JWBS wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

https://deathraydesigns.com/product/rapid-vanguard-bundle/

I normally much prefer plastic but this all looks very good.

I like their stuff. Here is another example I got to play on in an event.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Graphite wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
People do not make unrealistic L-shaped buildings because they are lazy and don't feel like making realistic looking ruins.

They make L-shaped buildings because for 8 editions GW has not made a ruleset for their wargame that allows for an ENCLOSED BUILDING./

That's not true!

I'm pretty sure there were rules for enclosed buildings in Rogue Trader and 2nd Edition.

So they haven't made those rules for 6 editions, going on 7.

Pretty sure GW lumped them under "fortifications" and left players to figure it out.

Nope, there were pretty detailed rules for how enclosed buildings worked in 2nd at least (I assume the same level of complexity was involved in 1st too). It went right down to the level of separate floorplans you could move models around in some cases. They were kind of clunky but actually much more functional than anything produced since, with the possible exception of the Apocalypse rules for embarking into buildings which seem like a pretty good idea to me.

 Sarigar wrote:

JWBS wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

https://deathraydesigns.com/product/rapid-vanguard-bundle/

I normally much prefer plastic but this all looks very good.

I like their stuff. Here is another example I got to play on in an event.

The sort of army we all have come to love to play against ! So thematic ! Death from above ! Death from above !

 addnid wrote:


The sort of army we all have come to love to play against ! So thematic ! Death from above ! Death from above !

Well, if Wraithknights were equally as good as Imperial/Chaos Knights, if close combat stuff like Striking Scorpions or Wraithblades could tangle in a world of Assault Centurions and Possessed Bombs, if Wraithlords & such could see eye to eye with the popular Forge World Marine dreads, etc.. you'd perhaps see more variety

Today on Warhammer 40,000 Daily:

It's time for the Astra Militarum to shine on today's #New40K show, along with a look at how Strategic Reserves are going to work.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 addnid wrote:


The sort of army we all have come to love to play against ! So thematic ! Death from above ! Death from above !

Well, if Wraithknights were equally as good as Imperial/Chaos Knights, if close combat stuff like Striking Scorpions or Wraithblades could tangle in a world of Assault Centurions and Possessed Bombs, if Wraithlords & such could see eye to eye with the popular Forge World Marine dreads, etc.. you'd perhaps see more variety

I agree, I also like my eggs best that way

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/24/master-your-strategygw-homepage-post-1fw-homepage-post-2/