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 just noticed that the Thralls are 'Canoptek' but also have reanimation protocols.
I wonder if another Canoptek units will get that rule or if these guys are a special case.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Rinkydink wrote:
Conga line is dead. New coherency rules.

Behold, a totally not a daisy chain/conga line!

Spoiler:

This new rule did quite literally nothing except prevent coherency from ground level to 2nd floor of standard 3" floor ruins.

Except in your example, if I kill one guy, the rest die in the morale phase until you're left with 5 men. Unless there is a chance to move them into coherency:

You have a daisy-chained conga line of 30 boyz. I shoot at them and kill 1. You remove it from the back cluster of 3, breaking coherency at the back of the chain. Now you hit morale phase (which is where you do a coherency check). Not all of your unit is within 2" of 3 models, so you must remove models until your unit is in coherency. So, if you have a unit of 30 boyz lined up like this, I kill one, then you lose 24 in the coherency check. Although in your example, you'd only lose 3 additional models.

They have effectively killed conga lines, imo.

oh lawd think about how this coherency thing effects snaking your units out to get character buffs?

Its gonna be very tricky to do.

Voss wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
So when is this coherency check taken?

Morale phase (just before end of turn). Its weird that it doesn't say it outright, but the bullet points in the GSC article do. Presumably the check has some sort of context in the rules for the morale phase, since the text starts as if its in some sort of sequence (Each player must now...)

Even weirder is that the rule specifies that each player is removing models but the bullet points just says 'your army,' which implies just whoever's turn it is.

as there is close combat, each player might have units that need to be checked

The other thing I notice about the new GSC preview is....I have basically no info on how GSC will operate in 8th edition.

They told me that...I won't have to worry about my aberrants getting destroyed by my opponents destroying their transport? What? None of that makes any sense on any level, why would I put aberrants in a transport, why would it end up surrounded, what is actually happening?

The only actual preview is that Brood Brothers units, all of them, might be able to be taken in GSC detachments? Maybe? As long as units you take from Codex Astra Militarum still gain the Brood Brothers keyword, which the new rule thingy doesn't actually say?

Currently, you can take certain BB units in GSC detachments (the ones printed in Codex: GSC, which is Sentinels, Armored sentinels, Leman Russes, Infantry Squads and HWTs) and others you must take in a separate BB Astra MIlitarum detachment.

I cannot tell from the preview if that is still allowed.

 kodos wrote:

Voss wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
So when is this coherency check taken?

Morale phase (just before end of turn). Its weird that it doesn't say it outright, but the bullet points in the GSC article do. Presumably the check has some sort of context in the rules for the morale phase, since the text starts as if its in some sort of sequence (Each player must now...)

Even weirder is that the rule specifies that each player is removing models but the bullet points just says 'your army,' which implies just whoever's turn it is.

as there is close combat, each player might have units that need to be checked

Yep. I was commenting on the disconnect between the bullet points and the actual rules text.
Its a problem that's come up before with these bullet points. If you rely just on them, you're going to run into errors.

With double shooting S8 ap-4 at 24 inch range with no overheat... those Eradicators are arguably better at being supercharged plasma than Hellblasters are.

Either way they seem kinda too good at secondary target shooting once their main job is over.

So a quick question here, I read the Genestealer Cult focus and it mentioned the Genestealer Cult armies can take AM units in the same army without them sharing a keyword. Is that how it currently is now?

I read the GS cult book for 7th and it was only a very select number of AM units you could take, but now it sounds like you can take any, just not in the same detachment.

New core strat:

Emergency Disembarkation seems like a weird rule.

So you get three inches of extra movement, but you lose twice as many models for doing so.

Certainly, the notion that you'd put already overpriced Aberrants in a truck because you could use this stratagem where more of them die before getting to hit something seems very, very weird.

Am I misreading this or something?

 Sabotage! wrote:
So a quick question here, I read the Genestealer Cult focus and it mentioned the Genestealer Cult armies can take AM units in the same army without them sharing a keyword. Is that how it currently is now?

I read the GS cult book for 7th and it was only a very select number of AM units you could take, but now it sounds like you can take any, just not in the same detachment.

Currently you can take AM detachments, and if you do, they gain the Brood Brothers keyword in place of <Regiment>. I do not believe anything has actually changed with GSC with respect to brood bros.

The current codex already has that exact rule when it comes to units with the BB keyword. It's one of the reasons why GSC has cartoonishly few units that can actually gain subfaction keywords.

Space Marines were like "Man, none of our vehicles get subfaction keywords this sucks!" and GSC went

"Hold my beer! No vehicles, no brood brothers, no genestealer units in codex genestealer cults can get cult keywords!

Wooohoo total of 5 non-character units can ever get cult keywords!"




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, has Lying in Wait been 3CP for a while? did it get nerfed in CA or something? It was 2Cp in the codex.

 The Phazer wrote:
Emergency Disembarkation seems like a weird rule.

So you get three inches of extra movement, but you lose twice as many models for doing so.

Certainly, the notion that you'd put already overpriced Aberrants in a truck because you could use this stratagem where more of them die before getting to hit something seems very, very weird.

Am I misreading this or something?

Keeps them from dying from being surrounded. If you can't place them w/i 3", because of enemy models (and huge bases) this gets you to a safer place.

 The Phazer wrote:

Am I misreading this or something?

risk-reward Stratagem if you think that you will lose more models if the transpoprt explodes

 Sabotage! wrote:
So a quick question here, I read the Genestealer Cult focus and it mentioned the Genestealer Cult armies can take AM units in the same army without them sharing a keyword. Is that how it currently is now?

Yes

There's another two paragraphs of rules text about keywords and detachment abiltiies, but its a straight copy of the first two paragraphs from the current book.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Honestly the new Melta guys aren't that broken. The issue is Melta being garbage in general. Now, would I have made it so their weapon is Heavy or that they can't advance and shoot with the weapon? Probably.

Not that broken?
They are in 9th edition costs, compairing them to units in 8th edition points they are way more damage output, heck 3 crisis suits with double fusion are 156 points in 8th add 10% for 8th edition points increases and they are 170 points compaired to this less than 100 points unit for the same number of shots with worse stats. Even better laugh thise Crisis suits are 12PL for 3
Going all in for 9 fusion to ofset the BS you now have 198 8th edition points for comparison.
These guys aren't just a bit better than Bad units they aren't playing the same game, or GW was 100% wrong about units seeing increases as it looks like most units need to cost less than they did in 8th to compete with marines.

actually my mate raised an interesting point.... what about ledges on terrain. You line models up quite a bit... its not just silly 30man conga lines

now you cant really go on them. Untis pretty much have to be in a ball.

the more i'm thinking about this rule the more im strating to dread it. You are going to have to really (anally so) move your special models in units so they dont suffer coherency suicide...

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 The Phazer wrote:
Emergency Disembarkation seems like a weird rule.

So you get three inches of extra movement, but you lose twice as many models for doing so.

Certainly, the notion that you'd put already overpriced Aberrants in a truck because you could use this stratagem where more of them die before getting to hit something seems very, very weird.

Am I misreading this or something?

Keeps them from dying from being surrounded. If you can't place them w/i 3", because of enemy models (and huge bases) this gets you to a safer place.

Ironically another side nerf to wraping a vehical in melee to kill the occupants.

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Honestly the new Melta guys aren't that broken. The issue is Melta being garbage in general. Now, would I have made it so their weapon is Heavy or that they can't advance and shoot with the weapon? Probably.

Not that broken?
They are in 9th edition costs, compairing them to units in 8th edition points they are way more damage output, heck 3 crisis suits with double fusion are 156 points in 8th add 10% for 8th edition points increases and they are 170 points compaired to this less than 100 points unit for the same number of shots with worse stats. Even better laugh thise Crisis suits are 12PL for 3
Going all in for 9 fusion to ofset the BS you now have 198 8th edition points for comparison.
These guys aren't just a bit better than Bad units they aren't playing the same game, or GW was 100% wrong about units seeing increases as it looks like most units need to cost less than they did in 8th to compete with marines.

They're probably 35 points if looking at current Aggressor costs. For absolutely zero melee capability the cost is fine.

Thanks to GW's genius rule designed to prevent conga lines, this is legal unit coherency:




But this is an illegal conga line:



GW: Nailed it!

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Honestly the new Melta guys aren't that broken. The issue is Melta being garbage in general. Now, would I have made it so their weapon is Heavy or that they can't advance and shoot with the weapon? Probably.

Not that broken?
They are in 9th edition costs, compairing them to units in 8th edition points they are way more damage output, heck 3 crisis suits with double fusion are 156 points in 8th add 10% for 8th edition points increases and they are 170 points compaired to this less than 100 points unit for the same number of shots with worse stats. Even better laugh thise Crisis suits are 12PL for 3
Going all in for 9 fusion to ofset the BS you now have 198 8th edition points for comparison.
These guys aren't just a bit better than Bad units they aren't playing the same game, or GW was 100% wrong about units seeing increases as it looks like most units need to cost less than they did in 8th to compete with marines.

For even more Laughs just compare them with the Wraithguard, exchanging a 12" S10 weapon for a 24" S8 with double tap, almost same profile (5T vs 6T ) add Marine auras and enjoy the wreckfest.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Honestly the new Melta guys aren't that broken. The issue is Melta being garbage in general. Now, would I have made it so their weapon is Heavy or that they can't advance and shoot with the weapon? Probably.

Not that broken?
They are in 9th edition costs, compairing them to units in 8th edition points they are way more damage output, heck 3 crisis suits with double fusion are 156 points in 8th add 10% for 8th edition points increases and they are 170 points compaired to this less than 100 points unit for the same number of shots with worse stats. Even better laugh thise Crisis suits are 12PL for 3
Going all in for 9 fusion to ofset the BS you now have 198 8th edition points for comparison.
These guys aren't just a bit better than Bad units they aren't playing the same game, or GW was 100% wrong about units seeing increases as it looks like most units need to cost less than they did in 8th to compete with marines.

They're probably 35 points if looking at current Aggressor costs. For absolutely zero melee capability the cost is fine.

TIL 10 S4 AP- melee attacks is "absolutely zero", that's funny. What do other shooty factions' units have in melee then? What's the melee capability of a unit of Scourges?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Honestly the new Melta guys aren't that broken. The issue is Melta being garbage in general. Now, would I have made it so their weapon is Heavy or that they can't advance and shoot with the weapon? Probably.

Not that broken?
They are in 9th edition costs, compairing them to units in 8th edition points they are way more damage output, heck 3 crisis suits with double fusion are 156 points in 8th add 10% for 8th edition points increases and they are 170 points compaired to this less than 100 points unit for the same number of shots with worse stats. Even better laugh thise Crisis suits are 12PL for 3
Going all in for 9 fusion to ofset the BS you now have 198 8th edition points for comparison.
These guys aren't just a bit better than Bad units they aren't playing the same game, or GW was 100% wrong about units seeing increases as it looks like most units need to cost less than they did in 8th to compete with marines.

They're probably 35 points if looking at current Aggressor costs. For absolutely zero melee capability the cost is fine.

Going by PL cost they are what 18 pts each and they have 2+ attacks and are T5 plus usual marines boosts for about 18 pts....zero mele capability compared to melee units but not compared to say 3 cultists.....

yukishiro1 wrote:
Thanks to GW's genius rule designed to prevent conga lines, this is legal unit coherency:

Spoiler:

But this is an illegal conga line:

Spoiler:

GW: Nailed it!

Completely slowed if you ask me, the additional model to check cohesion is stupid as feth and shouldn't have been made considering that we ALREADY HAVE a cohesion check at the end of the Morale phase

 Mr Morden wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Honestly the new Melta guys aren't that broken. The issue is Melta being garbage in general. Now, would I have made it so their weapon is Heavy or that they can't advance and shoot with the weapon? Probably.

Not that broken?
They are in 9th edition costs, compairing them to units in 8th edition points they are way more damage output, heck 3 crisis suits with double fusion are 156 points in 8th add 10% for 8th edition points increases and they are 170 points compaired to this less than 100 points unit for the same number of shots with worse stats. Even better laugh thise Crisis suits are 12PL for 3
Going all in for 9 fusion to ofset the BS you now have 198 8th edition points for comparison.
These guys aren't just a bit better than Bad units they aren't playing the same game, or GW was 100% wrong about units seeing increases as it looks like most units need to cost less than they did in 8th to compete with marines.

They're probably 35 points if looking at current Aggressor costs. For absolutely zero melee capability the cost is fine.

Going by PL cost they are what 18 pts each and they have 2+ attacks and are T5 plus usual marines boosts for about 18 pts....zero mele capability compared to melee units but not compared to say 3 cultists.....

They're not cheaper than Intercessors. 5 PL is 100 points, approximately, and they come in squads of 3.

GW isn't THAT bad.

KurtAngle2 wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
Thanks to GW's genius rule designed to prevent conga lines, this is legal unit coherency:

Spoiler:

But this is an illegal conga line:

Spoiler:

GW: Nailed it!

Completely slowed if you ask me, the additional model to check cohesion is stupid as feth and shouldn't have been made considering that we ALREADY HAVE a cohesion check at the end of the Morale phase

Again, I think you're trying to frame a rules issue as one of realism and logic when its more about trying to force the game down a certain path. They WANT you to be running 5> man units. This is the MSU edition.

Then why not just not let you take units of more than 5? It makes no sense to let you take an initial model that completely neuters the effectiveness of your unit.

Any rule which makes situation #1 legal but situation #2 an illegally spread out unit is just a stupid rule. If what they are trying to do is make nobody ever take a unit of 6 models, there are a lot simpler and more elegant ways to do that than this nonsense.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Then why not just not let you take units of more than 5? It makes no sense to let you take an initial model that completely neuters the effectiveness of your unit.

Any rule which makes situation #1 legal but situation #2 an illegally spread out unit is just a stupid rule. If what they are trying to do is make nobody ever take a unit of 6 models, there are a lot simpler and more elegant ways to do that than this nonsense.

Nah it's just rank and file for 40k, on 10th well change to square bases for sure!

yukishiro1 wrote:
Then why not just not let you take units of more than 5? It makes no sense to let you take an initial model that completely neuters the effectiveness of your unit.

Any rule which makes situation #1 legal but situation #2 an illegally spread out unit is just a stupid rule. If what they are trying to do is make nobody ever take a unit of 6 models, there are a lot simpler and more elegant ways to do that than this nonsense.

Utter, utter nonsense and you know it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

They're probably 35 points if looking at current Aggressor costs. For absolutely zero melee capability the cost is fine.

Ok. Maybe. Verbal diarrhea incoming.

Intercessors went up 18%. Makes base cost of Aggressor 25 points (also 5 PL). Aggressors have the no penalty advance and situational double tap, so, straight double tap is technically "fair" here. They pay 16 for their weapons. So the nu-Aggressor is 41+ points, which means their weapon cost will need to come down slightly to keep PL5 (if they do).

These guys will be 25 + gun, which to be in PL5 would be ballpark 12 points making a squad 111 (same as most costly Aggressors). That means mini-meltas at 14 could come way down.

Let's strip double shooting out. Would you pay 111 points for 3 melta shots with 6" extra range? Hell no. You wouldn't. But you will if it is 6 shots (19 points per shot).

If a CSM is still 11 or 12 and a melta is ~6 points (17 or 18 points per shot) I can see things making a little more sense.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Not sure I like the coherency change.
I get that it solves conga lines, but moving hordes around just got a lot more finicky.

Say you have a unit of 30 orks. With the new change, you now have to make sure that every orks is within 2" of 2 more orks, or else you will take casualties.

This means that every time you move them, you have to do a head count and measure to make sure that you aren't going to take extra losses at the end of the phase.

You know, Gw started selling 40k movement trays.

Now there is a new ruling about coherency that juuuuust to happens to benefit those said movement trays.


I like the rule, but I see the grift.