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 at
Not as Good as a Minion





Austria

 Ghaz wrote:
The 'Raiding Force' rule is an 8th edition rule already in Codex: Drukhari...


so they were not able to update that rule for the 9th edition preview but just showed the original picture to demonstrate how well this will work in 9th?

I have a very bad feeling for the day 1 FAQ

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise 
   
Made in us
Lieutenant General





Florence, KY

 Tyran wrote:
When did the 6 patrol ever come into effect? that was always a purely narrative rule as detachment limits was also a thing in 8th.

Only if you were using the optional Organized Events guidelines.

 kodos wrote:
 Ghaz wrote:
The 'Raiding Force' rule is an 8th edition rule already in Codex: Drukhari...


so they were not able to update that rule for the 9th edition preview but just showed the original picture to demonstrate how well this will work in 9th?

I have a very bad feeling for the day 1 FAQ

Honestly, I don't see that needing changed for 9th edition.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/26 15:38:35


'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents
cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable
defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'

- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty
Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
 
   
Made in fr
Mekboy Hammerin' Somethin'






Why are none of you talking about the No Escape rule ? Or did I miss something.
Anyway, this can be a major game changer IMHO, making a unit with that rule absolutely great for tying infantry up (yes a roll off can be lost but still)

Ere we go ere we go ere we go
Corona Givin’ Umies Da good ol Krulpin they deserve huh huh 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull




 BaconCatBug wrote:
Also the 6 patrol detachment rule can't ever come into effect.


Yeah, there's something missing here, and it seems obvious. Dark Eldar can't play below 'strike force' level and use the Raiding Force rule (Battleforged has a max number of detachments, but you must be battleforged to use Raiding Force), and 5 or 6 detachments is always out. Raiding force needs an addendum that they can take extra patrol detachments (even if it requires all their detachments to be patrols if they choose to do so).

----
Aircraft Engagement Range is using a lot of words to say... not very much. You basically treat everything involving Aircraft as if it were not there, except you can't end on the bases (or on top of a model), and you can't END a move in engagement range of an aircraft. Ever.
Why do they have engagement ranges at all?

 addnid wrote:
Why are none of you talking about the No Escape rule ? Or did I miss something.
Anyway, this can be a major game changer IMHO, making a unit with that rule absolutely great for tying infantry up (yes a roll off can be lost but still)


Because its a rule for Wyches, not a general rule.
It already exists.



This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/06/26 15:45:45


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Tzeentch Veteran Marine with Psychic Potential





I don't play Dark Eldar (Sorry that is how i remember them), but the raiding rule actually seems better in 9th than 8th. In 8th it netted you 1 more CP than a Battalion for the cost of having one more HQ. Now, it lets Dark Eldar have three free patrol detachments all of which can be different legion traits (or whatever their version of legion traits are). I would love this rule for my Thousand Sons to bring three patrols that could all be different cults without losing any CP. I don't think a day 1 FAQ is necessary, especially since there is no way to bring 6 patrols, as even the 3000 point game has a 4 detachment limit.
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

Yeah, wytches already had that ability.

What I have
~4100
~1660

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 lord_blackfang wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So... Combat Patrol.

Why?

I mean you can play 40k at this low level without the need for a special set of rules. The only difference here seems to be 3 rather than 12 CP, and only Patrol.

So why bother?


Illusion of added content.


No, it's more than that. The missions are written specifically to address that there are fewer units on the table.
   
Made in at
Not as Good as a Minion





Austria

 Ghaz wrote:

 kodos wrote:
 Ghaz wrote:
The 'Raiding Force' rule is an 8th edition rule already in Codex: Drukhari...


so they were not able to update that rule for the 9th edition preview but just showed the original picture to demonstrate how well this will work in 9th?

I have a very bad feeling for the day 1 FAQ

Honestly, I don't see that needing changed for 9th edition.

so let the arguments begin if the 6 patrol detachments are intented to overrul the maximum of 4 at 3k points or that DE are able to ignore the maximum limit in general and can also bring in 3 in Combat Patrol sized games

it is either they change that, DE get a rule that allows them to take more, or we will see discussions going on (as Codex > RB)

and if all other existing rules are handled the same way, there will be a lot of dicussions on how to acutally play 9th for everysthing but the new Box Set

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull




 kodos wrote:
 Ghaz wrote:

 kodos wrote:
 Ghaz wrote:
The 'Raiding Force' rule is an 8th edition rule already in Codex: Drukhari...


so they were not able to update that rule for the 9th edition preview but just showed the original picture to demonstrate how well this will work in 9th?

I have a very bad feeling for the day 1 FAQ

Honestly, I don't see that needing changed for 9th edition.

so let the arguments begin if the 6 patrol detachments are intented to overrul the maximum of 4 at 3k points or that DE are able to ignore the maximum limit in general and can also bring in 3 in Combat Patrol sized games

it is either they change that, DE get a rule that allows them to take more, or we will see discussions going on (as Codex > RB)

and if all other existing rules are handled the same way, there will be a lot of dicussions on how to acutally play 9th for everysthing but the new Box Set


They have to change that and explicitly give DE a rule that allows more detachments, because the rules for detachment limits specify that to be Battleforged, you must abide by the detachment limit (presumably you can not be Battleforged and ignore it), and the Raiding Force specifies that if you ARE Battleforged, you can use Raiding Force.

So you have to abide by the detachment limits (to be BF), because raiding force checks for that (BF) before you can use it.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/06/26 16:07:36


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Auspicious Aspiring Champion of Chaos






 Binabik15 wrote:
Err...doesn't it feel like the Primaris list will kick the Emperor's everliving gak out of the Necrons? Lopsided starters are expected, but this seems pretty cruel.


That's highly dependent on the rules for the units.

2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress
2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
 
   
Made in au
Hissing Hybrid Metamorph






I’m a little disappointed that they didn’t talk about Szares’ new rules. But I guess I’ll see them in a week anyway. Just really nervous that he’ll have more than 9 wounds >.<
   
Made in gb
Jealous that Horus is Warmaster





London, UK

 Binabik15 wrote:
Err...doesn't it feel like the Primaris list will kick the Emperor's everliving gak out of the Necrons? Lopsided starters are expected, but this seems pretty cruel.


To me it looks like the Primaris are the strongest out of that group of patrols. (Having seen the rules for the bikers....)
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





 BaconCatBug wrote:
How is it helpful? I mean, it offsets the CP loss for using Patrols, but that's it. You're limited to 3 detachments at 2k points anyway, and limited to 2 at 1k points.

.


Army is basically split into 3 not-so-independent forces. You can get them to work together for free rather than pay for it

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




It's a decent buff, but it does mean you can't take 3 of anything (except troops), so I'm not sure how much play it's really going to get for competitive lists.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/26 16:28:00


 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




Since we know that those 20 warriors come to 240 points in total, and 25 PL is approximately 500 points, then that likely means that those 3 Skorpekh Destroyers plus the Lord come to a total of 260 points.
   
Made in gb
Khorne Chosen Marine Riding a Juggernaut





UK

Voss wrote:


Yeah, there's something missing here, and it seems obvious. Dark Eldar can't play below 'strike force' level and use the Raiding Force rule (Battleforged has a max number of detachments, but you must be battleforged to use Raiding Force), and 5 or 6 detachments is always out. Raiding force needs an addendum that they can take extra patrol detachments (even if it requires all their detachments to be patrols if they choose to do so).

----
Aircraft Engagement Range is using a lot of words to say... not very much. You basically treat everything involving Aircraft as if it were not there, except you can't end on the bases (or on top of a model), and you can't END a move in engagement range of an aircraft. Ever.
Why do they have engagement ranges at all?

 addnid wrote:
Why are none of you talking about the No Escape rule ? Or did I miss something.
Anyway, this can be a major game changer IMHO, making a unit with that rule absolutely great for tying infantry up (yes a roll off can be lost but still)


Because its a rule for Wyches, not a general rule.
It already exists.




they have engagement ranges because the assumption is you can still engage them in combat with stuff with the Fly keyword like daemon princes etc

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Unfortunately, the very fact that they're highlight the Wyche anti-fall-back rule probably means there are going to be no restrictions on falling back generally. So it will likely be even easier to fall back in 9th than it was in 8th, since you can now do it through models too for a CP cost.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/26 16:41:53


 
   
Made in ca
Nihilistic Necron Lord




The best State-Texas

Darsath wrote:
Since we know that those 20 warriors come to 240 points in total, and 25 PL is approximately 500 points, then that likely means that those 3 Skorpekh Destroyers plus the Lord come to a total of 260 points.


yeah. If the Skorpekh Lord is about 125, that puts the Skorpekh Destroyers at 45 each.

4000+
6000+ Order. Unity. Obedience.
Thousand Sons 4000+
:Necron: Necron Discord: https://discord.com/invite/AGtpeD4  
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





If it is an error and is supposed to say one oblit, then it's about 365 points for what is 440 worth of points in power level in 9th. Basically resetting all the heavy points cuts CSM have gotten throughout 8th because their units weren't great. 18-20% increase.

I really have zero interest in playing 1600 point games under a new name. I was never even interested in 1850. I love the sizes of armies and the diversity of detachments you could take in 8th. Been playing since 3rd edition, well over 20 years, and 8th size and style games have been the highlight of the hobby for me. I did not at all enjoy the index point sized games (or the imbalances of index armies) when 8th first came out.

A lot of the changes to the game seem good in the new edition but I am struggling to have any enthusiasm at all for an edition where the games will be so much smaller and there will be so much less options for list building especially when you include the prohibitions to bringing allies. Just doesn't seem fun to me. I wonder if this will be the first time in over 20 years that I stop going to tournaments and events and instead just try to find people for occasional casual games in my area so we can play 2500-3000 point games on bigger tables, with more CP, and most importantly larger and more fun armies.

I hope once all is said and done I am wrong and the game is still fun for me and that points increases aren't as dramatic as they currently seem....

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/26 16:41:33


   
Made in us
Pious Palatine





Tacoma, WA, USA

BaconCatBug wrote:
So, taking 3 Patrols grants you a whopping 0CP bonus.

-6 CP for 3 patrols.
+2 for Warlord Refund
+4 for Raiding Force
yukishiro1 wrote:It's a decent buff, but it does mean you can't take 3 of anything (except troops), so I'm not sure how much play it's really going to get for competitive lists.
Oh ye of little imagination. You're looking this wrong. In an 3 Detachment game, a Drukhari Overlord has the following choices for a 12 CP base army:

Battalion: 2-3 HQ, 3-6 Troops, 0-6 Elites, 0-3 Fast Attack, 0-3 Heavy Support, 0-2 Flyers with one Subfaction trait
Brigade: 3-5 HQ, 6-12 Troops, 3-8 Elites, 3-5 Fast Attack, 3-5 Heavy Support, 0-2 Flyers with one Subfaction trait
Triple Patrol: 3-6 HQ, 3-9 Troops, 0-6 Elites, 0-6 Fast Attack, 0-6 Heavy Support, 0-6 Flyers with 1-3 Subfaction traits (limits on selections made by taking more than 1 Subfaction)

Tell me who isn't signing up for Triple Patrol when it requires 1 more HQ than a Battalion with much more flexibility on list building?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/26 16:42:33


 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull




 Latro_ wrote:


they have engagement ranges because the assumption is you can still engage them in combat with stuff with the Fly keyword like daemon princes etc


Assumption, yes- that's just it. The problem is, current 8th edition language puts pile in and consolidate as 'moves' and even charge is a 'charge move.'
Aircraft Engagement Range says that when a model makes 'any kind of move...it cannot end the move within Engagement Range of any Enemy Aircraft models.'

So presumably a fairly significant rewrite of the Charge and Fight phases happened, or Aircraft can't be engaged... ever.
Even without it, the idea that you ignore Aircraft for almost all movement, but you have to double check ER for things that can't fight each other is just... bizarre. Nope, have to scoot those guardsmen back because they can't get too close to the plane that will just fly away next turn.


Then of course it points out that when in aircraft (or things near an aircraft) moves in the movement phase, it just doesn't care about engagement, or engagement range, and can just leave by normal moves (no fall back or remain stationary).


So its a wordy mess that mostly says that Aircraft don't interact with anything except possibly melee rules revisions they haven't shown off yet. At the very least they should have shown those off before posting four paragraphs of essentially a giant word salad of 'don't overlap models (or bases), ignore everything else.'

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/06/26 17:09:22


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Probably old news, but I just noticed that the structures to the right of the further monolith
Spoiler:

appears in the new artwork (which I can't seem to find atm)

I guess that confirms it will be a model released alongside the necron, though
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 alextroy wrote:
BaconCatBug wrote:
So, taking 3 Patrols grants you a whopping 0CP bonus.

-6 CP for 3 patrols.
+2 for Warlord Refund
+4 for Raiding Force
yukishiro1 wrote:It's a decent buff, but it does mean you can't take 3 of anything (except troops), so I'm not sure how much play it's really going to get for competitive lists.
Oh ye of little imagination. You're looking this wrong. In an 3 Detachment game, a Drukhari Overlord has the following choices for a 12 CP base army:

Battalion: 2-3 HQ, 3-6 Troops, 0-6 Elites, 0-3 Fast Attack, 0-3 Heavy Support, 0-2 Flyers with one Subfaction trait
Brigade: 3-5 HQ, 6-12 Troops, 3-8 Elites, 3-5 Fast Attack, 3-5 Heavy Support, 0-2 Flyers with one Subfaction trait
Triple Patrol: 3-6 HQ, 3-9 Troops, 0-6 Elites, 0-6 Fast Attack, 0-6 Heavy Support, 0-6 Flyers with 1-3 Subfaction traits (limits on selections made by taking more than 1 Subfaction)

Tell me who isn't signing up for Triple Patrol when it requires 1 more HQ than a Battalion with much more flexibility on list building?


Ok, that's fair. I was going on the assumption people wanted to take one of each type (coven, cult, kabal). If you double up with two patrols from the same division of the army you can then take 3x any choice you want. So this does let you effectively take 2 of the 3 parts of the army and take 3x something from one.
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Tyran wrote:
When did the 6 patrol ever come into effect? that was always a purely narrative rule as detachment limits was also a thing in 8th.

3 patrols are in general far more flexible than 1 battalion. Even with 2k points you should be able to fit a balanced force in 3 patrols.



Again, there are no limits to the number of detachments or duplicate datasheets in the 8th Edition matched play rules.

6 Drukhari Patrols with 6 Ravagers is a perfectly legal matched play army as of 8th Edition in June 2020.


There are purely optional, not specifically worded recommendations for organised events that suggest TOs might want to limit detachments (for example 3) and datasheets (for example 1, i.e. "Highlander" or 3), but those are not part of matched play rules and also very explicitly suggest that TOs play and modify them (i.e. it would be perfectly fine for TOs to perhaps exclude Patrol Detachments or Fortification Detachments or some such from a detachment limit, say).
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




It doesn't matter whether it's technically optional, you can always agree to make anything option you want. In point of fact basically everybody plays matched play with the rule of 3 and the 3 detachment limit.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/26 17:22:31


 
   
Made in us
Plaguelord Titan Princeps of Nurgle




Alabama

I think the shift in costing CP rather than granting CP is going to make Patrols much more attractive. I also think the preview highlighted how it will changed Drukhari into a flexible army when before it was not. Now you can have little bit of Haemonculus for tough units, a little bit of Wych Cult for fast, melee units and fill the rest with Kabal for mid- and long-range firepower. I like it. It also shows that I can probably keep my Harlie detachment in my Eldar force without a significant CP investment, which makes me happy.

WH40K
Death Guard 5100 pts.
Daemons 3000 pts.

DT:70+S++G+M-B-I--Pw40K90-D++A++/eWD?R++T(D)DM+

28 successful trades in the Dakka Swap Shop! Check out my latest auction here!
 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




yukishiro1 wrote:
It doesn't matter whether it's technically optional, you can always agree to make anything option you want. In point of fact basically everybody plays matched play with the rule of 3 and the 3 detachment limit.



A, that is technically not true. There are quite a few tournaments that limit it to 2 or even 1 each. Including large United States ones such as Adepticon, which has a Highlander event, etc.. (well, last year anyhow).

B, just because a majority doesn't make use of an option doesn't mean it's meaningless to the perhaps fewer people that make use of that option.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I'm not sure how tournaments with side events that limit you to 2 detachments help illustrate your point about taking 6 patrols...
   
Made in at
Not as Good as a Minion





Austria

yukishiro1 wrote:
It doesn't matter whether it's technically optional, you can always agree to make anything option you want. In point of fact basically everybody plays matched play with the rule of 3 and the 3 detachment limit.

same as everyone uses the house rule that ground level always blocks LOS
yet it is still a house rule and GW did not include it into the new game

so there was no rule that limited the Detachments, therefore the original Dark Eldar rule with 6 Patrol Detachments was perfectly fine

Now we have an official limit to 3 at 2k and 4 at 3k, making the rule only playable with 3 Detachments in 2-3k point games, which is a problem and just illustrates that how think the game works and what they write down for others are 2 different things

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise 
   
Made in gb
Khorne Chosen Marine Riding a Juggernaut





UK

Voss wrote:
 Latro_ wrote:


they have engagement ranges because the assumption is you can still engage them in combat with stuff with the Fly keyword like daemon princes etc


Assumption, yes- that's just it. The problem is, current 8th edition language puts pile in and consolidate as 'moves' and even charge is a 'charge move.'
Aircraft Engagement Range says that when a model makes 'any kind of move...it cannot end the move within Engagement Range of any Enemy Aircraft models.'

So presumably a fairly significant rewrite of the Charge and Fight phases happened, or Aircraft can't be engaged... ever.
Even without it, the idea that you ignore Aircraft for almost all movement, but you have to double check ER for things that can't fight each other is just... bizarre. Nope, have to scoot those guardsmen back because they can't get too close to the plane that will just fly away next turn.


Then of course it points out that when in aircraft (or things near an aircraft) moves in the movement phase, it just doesn't care about engagement, or engagement range, and can just leave by normal moves (no fall back or remain stationary).


So its a wordy mess that mostly says that Aircraft don't interact with anything except possibly melee rules revisions they haven't shown off yet. At the very least they should have shown those off before posting four paragraphs of essentially a giant word salad of 'don't overlap models (or bases), ignore everything else.'


Yea the second from last paragraph kinda makes me think they can be charged in some way still. If you cannot move within ER ever then how does an aircraft begin its turn in ER like the rule describes. Surely it would be impossible for an opponent to create that situation in his previously turn.

 
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: