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.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
There's a lot of units in the game that aren't useful right now because they are footslogging melee. One of the best things GW could do with 9th is make these units more viable somehow. If that happens, then melee intercessors could have a role. The question is if they have a role compared to ranged intercessors, as those are already solid and only have 1 less attack.

That's something we don't know.

Astartes Chainswords could easily be AP-1, which is a big deal.

You'd go from killing 0.9 Guardsmen per model to 1.1. Very big deal.

You double damage against Terminators.

From 0.16 wounds inflicted per model to 0.33 wounds inflicted per model (six whole models required to kill one Terminator).

I'll go out on a limb and say that you still shouldn't be attacking Terminators with chainsword models.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
There's a lot of units in the game that aren't useful right now because they are footslogging melee. One of the best things GW could do with 9th is make these units more viable somehow. If that happens, then melee intercessors could have a role. The question is if they have a role compared to ranged intercessors, as those are already solid and only have 1 less attack.

That's something we don't know.

Astartes Chainswords could easily be AP-1, which is a big deal.

You'd go from killing 0.9 Guardsmen per model to 1.1. Very big deal.

You double damage against Terminators.

From 0.16 wounds inflicted per model to 0.33 wounds inflicted per model (six whole models required to kill one Terminator).

I'll go out on a limb and say that you still shouldn't be attacking Terminators with chainsword models.

The point is that it helps it rival the bolt rifle. Its not about the absolute amount of damage. That may still be far too low.

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
...The point is that it helps it rival the bolt rifle. Its not about the absolute amount of damage. That may still be far too low.

I don't think it does. If a bolt rifle and the melee attacks out of the chainsword squad do the same amount of damage the bolt rifle is still vastly superior since you get the 30" threat range, don't have to leave cover to use it, and don't give your opponent a free hit on you by using it.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
...The point is that it helps it rival the bolt rifle. Its not about the absolute amount of damage. That may still be far too low.

I don't think it does. If a bolt rifle and the melee attacks out of the chainsword squad do the same amount of damage the bolt rifle is still vastly superior since you get the 30" threat range, don't have to leave cover to use it, and don't give your opponent a free hit on you by using it.

Yes. I was talking about this problem on the previous page. This is why the ap-1 matters for the chainsword, but still may not be enough.

^The Fall Back/Assault mechanics may be quite different and change the equation in ways we don't know yet.

These guys (and the rest of the new box set) make me wonder if primaris are ever going to get personal jump packs or if GW is trying to move marines away from those. These guys and the shield vets arent mobile without a transport. Bikes are mobile, but have drawbacks instead of the fly keyword. They have a new shield CC captain, but without that fly keyword he's still no smash captain...This seems like an obvious gap, so I wonder if it is intentional army design shift or are they just having issues making a cool jump pack design after the lukewarm response for the inceptors and suppressors?

 fraser1191 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Here's hoping the 'Astartes Chainsword' and any related improvement winds up being what Assault Marines are armed with.

Easy now they aren't Primaris chainswords

I know, that's why I'm optimistic. I'm not concerned about the Primaris releases, I just want to know if/how my traditional army plays.

The Astartes Chainsword could be Str+1 Ap-1

The Assault Intercessors could have a rule that allows them to charge after advancing.

The new edition might allow them to outflank next to enemy units in later turns.

 Orange Knight wrote:
The Astartes Chainsword could be Str+1 Ap-1

The Assault Intercessors could have a rule that allows them to charge after advancing.

The new edition might allow them to outflank next to enemy units in later turns.

Very true, they said reserves would let us attack from multiple directions. Which feels a lot better for the health of the game.

I'm sure some rules changes in 9th will make assault interecessors viable. Like, what if sword weapons gain the parry ability in CC? Let's just wait and see.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Here's hoping the 'Astartes Chainsword' and any related improvement winds up being what Assault Marines are armed with.

Easy now they aren't Primaris chainswords

I know, that's why I'm optimistic. I'm not concerned about the Primaris releases, I just want to know if/how my traditional army plays.

I'm slightly worried.

There's 2 things I'm curious about. Firstly we all know all codexes are valid, and that blast weapons are gonna have max shots against hordes. So does that mean the rule book is going to errata every weapon in the game almost like a CA or just certain ones? (blast weapons and the chainsword so far)

Are they gonna take the time to fix powerful units/weak units? If the Astartes Chainsword is +1 S or even - 1 AP unless knives for reivers get that, there's not much incentive to take reivers. Unless they go all in on the LD debuff

Not only all of that but meele chapters will benefit for having actual meele troops that can accomplish something on meele, or at least having the option to have those will be usefull.

 Galas wrote:
Not only all of that but meele chapters will benefit for having actual meele troops that can accomplish something on meele, or at least having the option to have those will be usefull.

Indeed. Between the assault intercessors, sword-and-board veterans and the character with the sword, I'm getting a very 'black Templars' primaries feel.

 fraser1191 wrote:

 Orange Knight wrote:
The Astartes Chainsword could be Str+1 Ap-1

The Assault Intercessors could have a rule that allows them to charge after advancing.

The new edition might allow them to outflank next to enemy units in later turns.

Very true, they said reserves would let us attack from multiple directions. Which feels a lot better for the health of the game.

The impression I got from listening to the stream (which could be wrong) was that later turns you had more options. My guess is that if you go into reserves, the first turn you have the option to come in (2 unless they rescind the 1st turn restriction we have now) would be in your deployment zone. Next turn, I’d expect table sides, and finally in the enemies backfield. This is me reading a lot into what they were saying, and I was doing other things while listening, so add salt.

Regardless, having to rely on being in reserves is not always the best option for a unit. Every turn you are chilling back at base is a turn you are not holding objectives or killing enemy units. It’s also a turn you are not eating fire and being turned into bloody chunks, so there are some trade offs. In games where objectives are scored at the end, being able to drop fresh boots last minute can be critical. In progressive scoring missions, you probably want them out dying for the Emperor and holding tight to the mcguffin early and often.

 Nevelon wrote:
They are going to have to pile on the special rules or have them be criminally undercosted to make assault intercessors worth it. Heavy bolt pistols and an extra CC attack are NOT worth giving up the bolt rifle. Reivers do this already and are wildly considered hot garbage. And they actually have some deployment/movement options.

Maybe some changes to fallback rules?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
They are going to have to pile on the special rules or have them be criminally undercosted to make assault intercessors worth it. Heavy bolt pistols and an extra CC attack are NOT worth giving up the bolt rifle. Reivers do this already and are wildly considered hot garbage. And they actually have some deployment/movement options.

Maybe some changes to fallback rules?

That would help. But they would still be a low damage footslogging tarpit unit. Getting stuck in and staying there would let them get more milage from their pistols and swords.

There are a number of changes we could see to make these guys worth it. The problem IMHO, is that we’d need to see at least a few of them to let these guys see the table in a serious manner. One or two is not going to cut it, unless there are some pretty hard shifts in the core rules.

So far we have been told terrain rules have been completely changed.
We have also been told reserves have changed.
We have been told that points are being rebalanced due to core rules changes.
Arguably intercessors and more primaris troops are currently undercosted.
(Increases in the points of shooty primaris would give these guys half a chance of being able to find a niche)

I'm also interested to see just how long GW keep trying to pretend that vigilous rules should still be a thing as we are soon to be two codex's on from the codex it was designed to buff and some of the combos's it's allowing are beyond belief broken, add in more CP and it will only get more gamebreaking.

Isn’t 9th edition going to add outflank shenanigans? If you can assault from the board that would make swarming with cheap chainswords useful. It sounds like they’re going to entirely drop the idea of just charging the enemy head on.

Frankly I think bolter discipline plus all the AP stuff is silly on Space Marines. Got a whole Intercessor Ultra army and even just a superficial use of those rules makes a massive difference to the army.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:
Isn’t 9th edition going to add outflank shenanigans? If you can assault from the board that would make swarming with cheap chainswords useful. It sounds like they’re going to entirely drop the idea of just charging the enemy head on.

Frankly I think bolter discipline plus all the AP stuff is silly on Space Marines. Got a whole Intercessor Ultra army and even just a superficial use of those rules makes a massive difference to the army.

As a late game backfield bum rush, these guys might do OK. I keep forgetting about Doctrines, as I’ve not played a lot recently since they were FAQ’d to the mandatory shift. For me, I’ve got “get to Tac, stay there” locked in my brain.

Turn 3 you can be in assault doctrine and have these guys pop up somewhere. Hopefully someplace relevant. Will be also interesting to see if they keep the off table after turn3 = dead. Because turn 4 and later, all marines are in assault doc. And if they could backfield assault from reserves, that could be interesting.

But in assault doctrine, CC weapons and pistols get the extra AP. So they actually do have an edge over the shooty intercessors.

So they come in late, and bat clean up.

Would you be better off with more dakka earlier on in the game? Probably. Can other units do this better? Maybe.

It’s a niche.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
There's a lot of units in the game that aren't useful right now because they are footslogging melee. One of the best things GW could do with 9th is make these units more viable somehow. If that happens, then melee intercessors could have a role. The question is if they have a role compared to ranged intercessors, as those are already solid and only have 1 less attack.

That's something we don't know.

Astartes Chainswords could easily be AP-1, which is a big deal.

You'd go from killing 0.9 Guardsmen per model to 1.1. Very big deal.

You double damage against Terminators.

From 0.16 wounds inflicted per model to 0.33 wounds inflicted per model (six whole models required to kill one Terminator).

I'll go out on a limb and say that you still shouldn't be attacking Terminators with chainsword models.

-1 AP is the biggest AP jump in the game vs most targets. Sometimes you attack with what you have.

Ice_can wrote:
So far we have been told terrain rules have been completely changed.
We have also been told reserves have changed.
We have been told that points are being rebalanced due to core rules changes.
Arguably intercessors and more primaris troops are currently undercosted.
(Increases in the points of shooty primaris would give these guys half a chance of being able to find a niche)

I'm also interested to see just how long GW keep trying to pretend that vigilous rules should still be a thing as we are soon to be two codex's on from the codex it was designed to buff and some of the combos's it's allowing are beyond belief broken, add in more CP and it will only get more gamebreaking.

LOL imagine trying to be serious saying Intecessors and other Primaris are undercosted instead of actually blaming the real problem of rules bloat.

They have Devastator Intercessors, right?

Nurglitch wrote:
They have Devastator Intercessors, right?

Give them time.

Closest is going to be Hellblasters. Although the stalker bolt rifle guys kinda fake it.

bort wrote:
These guys (and the rest of the new box set) make me wonder if primaris are ever going to get personal jump packs or if GW is trying to move marines away from those. These guys and the shield vets arent mobile without a transport. Bikes are mobile, but have drawbacks instead of the fly keyword. They have a new shield CC captain, but without that fly keyword he's still no smash captain...This seems like an obvious gap, so I wonder if it is intentional army design shift or are they just having issues making a cool jump pack design after the lukewarm response for the inceptors and suppressors?

It's not difficult. All they need is to stick the Mk.IV jump pack (the Sanguinary Guard jump pack without the wings) on any existing Primaris infantry. I've tried it and it looks great, it's got the cleaner more streamlined look of a Primaris tool, they've put slight derivatives of the Mk.IV helmets on a lot of the models already, and it's very obviously not the Mk.VII jump pack.

I hadn't even considered how filthy AP -1 Chainswords would be in Assault Doctrine (aka -2 AP Chainswords). That's some pretty good killing power for a Primaris Marine on the charge.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
So far we have been told terrain rules have been completely changed.
We have also been told reserves have changed.
We have been told that points are being rebalanced due to core rules changes.
Arguably intercessors and more primaris troops are currently undercosted.
(Increases in the points of shooty primaris would give these guys half a chance of being able to find a niche)

I'm also interested to see just how long GW keep trying to pretend that vigilous rules should still be a thing as we are soon to be two codex's on from the codex it was designed to buff and some of the combos's it's allowing are beyond belief broken, add in more CP and it will only get more gamebreaking.

LOL imagine trying to be serious saying Intecessors and other Primaris are undercosted instead of actually blaming the real problem of rules bloat.

What other troop choice from any army has even half a change against iprimaris troops in a point for point engagement? Serious question as is they compressed the scale for every other troop way too much and its a mess down there.

 alextroy wrote:
I hadn't even considered how filthy AP -1 Chainswords would be in Assault Doctrine (aka -2 AP Chainswords). That's some pretty good killing power for a Primaris Marine on the charge.

*gasps* Killing 1.7 Guardsmen on the charge? Amazing!

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
I hadn't even considered how filthy AP -1 Chainswords would be in Assault Doctrine (aka -2 AP Chainswords). That's some pretty good killing power for a Primaris Marine on the charge.

*gasps* Killing 1.7 Guardsmen on the charge? Amazing!

But it's good vs units that aren't free.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
I hadn't even considered how filthy AP -1 Chainswords would be in Assault Doctrine (aka -2 AP Chainswords). That's some pretty good killing power for a Primaris Marine on the charge.

*gasps* Killing 1.7 Guardsmen on the charge? Amazing!

Two of these dudes kill also terminator though. With support
3 without.

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
So far we have been told terrain rules have been completely changed.
We have also been told reserves have changed.
We have been told that points are being rebalanced due to core rules changes.
Arguably intercessors and more primaris troops are currently undercosted.
(Increases in the points of shooty primaris would give these guys half a chance of being able to find a niche)

I'm also interested to see just how long GW keep trying to pretend that vigilous rules should still be a thing as we are soon to be two codex's on from the codex it was designed to buff and some of the combos's it's allowing are beyond belief broken, add in more CP and it will only get more gamebreaking.

LOL imagine trying to be serious saying Intecessors and other Primaris are undercosted instead of actually blaming the real problem of rules bloat.

What other troop choice from any army has even half a change against iprimaris troops in a point for point engagement? Serious question as is they compressed the scale for every other troop way too much and its a mess down there.

Without doctrines, quite a few actually just not the troops that are already bad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
I hadn't even considered how filthy AP -1 Chainswords would be in Assault Doctrine (aka -2 AP Chainswords). That's some pretty good killing power for a Primaris Marine on the charge.

*gasps* Killing 1.7 Guardsmen on the charge? Amazing!

That's almost a 50% return, which is really good.