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.

 Togusa wrote:
Wow this is dumb. Overwatch is now CP locked and limited.

You gain one CP in your Command Phase.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
Wow this is dumb. Overwatch is now CP locked and limited.

Found the T'au player!

Lol! I actually did used to play T'au. I rethought though, this isn't that bad.

Speaking of the T'au, I bet they'll be the exception.

For all we know, factions with good overwatch may just get "all your units can overwatch every turn for free" as a rule. So it may not do that much to shut down the oppressive overwatch factions at all.

I'd be so much more up on this change without that "oh but don't worry there are other ways to overwatch too" thing they threw in.

yukishiro1 wrote:
For all we know, factions with good overwatch may just get "all your units can overwatch every turn for free" as a rule. So it may not do that much to shut down the oppressive overwatch factions at all.

I'd be so much more up on this change without that "oh but don't worry there are other ways to overwatch too" thing they threw in.

If I were a betting man, I would bet that it will be pushed as an ability granted by a character, which I think would be a cool ability. Though that may change how the spets work. On the whole, though, I don't think that would be such a bad thing.

My guess would be that Greater Good becomes "whenever a unit declares overwatch, an additional unit may declare overwatch". Getting free overwatch for everyone would be grossly overbearing in the new paradigm.

We do know Ultramarines will be getting a strat to allow them to overwatch. And It would not susprise me if Guard get an order for it, and similar abilities for Tau.

I certainly don't want them to remove overwatch completely, my friend play Mordians and I wouldn't want to see him sad. But the problem with overwatch has always been that there's no cost associated with performing overwatch

 Arachnofiend wrote:
My guess would be that Greater Good becomes "whenever a unit declares overwatch, an additional unit may declare overwatch". Getting free overwatch for everyone would be grossly overbearing in the new paradigm.

OOOH, that's a good point, I didn't think of that.

My big fear is that they're going to make a faction tactic that just allows every unit with the <faction> keyword to be able to overwatch, and I feel like it's basically an inevitability.

Like would anyone really be surprised if three years from now the iron hands chapter tactic is just "6++ on everything and "cool headed" on everything"?

Or Imperial fists, for that matter.

Yea well for today overwatch is fixed and we can all celebrate, if GW do something in the future to ruin it again we can complain then!

Seabass wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
My guess would be that Greater Good becomes "whenever a unit declares overwatch, an additional unit may declare overwatch". Getting free overwatch for everyone would be grossly overbearing in the new paradigm.

OOOH, that's a good point, I didn't think of that.

On top of that at some point GW will likely add a stratagem that lets you Overwatch with two or three squads (at an increased CP cost if they're intelligent), each against a different charger.

Not sure what they will do for Tau sept (or other units) whose Overwatch hits on a 5+, though it may be a case of "they get it all the time" not just in defended terrain.

One thing to keep in mind is that there are strategems and litanies that would allow additional overwatch attacks. Born protectors from Salamanders comes to mind. What other strategems exist out there that allow another overwatch sequence? They'll be important to keep track of.

Also, unwieldy weapons are now terrifying on defensive units. That intercessor TH sgt is now hitting on 3's again while in defensible terrain. That's pretty nasty

It's interesting to see that part of what motivated them to change Overwatch was the way it was a lot of dice rolling for not a lot of effect. As someone put it earlier, the way you would "fish for sixes". I would hope that GW realises that the very same thing applies to the general To Wound chart, given that everything can wound everything on a 6, and thus you can always fish for sixes.

It'd be nice if they made it so certain weapons cannot hurt tougher targets to remove this pointless dice rolling as well.

 AndrewC wrote:
And nobody has mentioned or noted that Look out Sir is back as a rule?

That's the part I saw. Very worrisome.

Vilehydra wrote:
One thing to keep in mind is that there are strategems and litanies that would allow additional overwatch attacks. Born protectors from Salamanders comes to mind. What other strategems exist out there that allow another overwatch sequence? They'll be important to keep track of.

Also, unwieldy weapons are now terrifying on defensive units. That intercessor TH sgt is now hitting on 3's again while in defensible terrain. That's pretty nasty

Ultramarines can over watch with 3 units IRCC via a strategum.
Knights have strategums to overwatch for others

Well so far the pendulum is swinging lets see if GW can keep it sensible or if we'll be back to turn 1 auto charges with you can't fall back rules being the default way to win by going first.

Also GW saying they will be updating rules that alter overwatch, literally Tau septs full faction bonus.
However what they aren't going to say is that fixing these subfactions that are now without a trait will be done in their 9th edition codex

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It's interesting to see that part of what motivated them to change Overwatch was the way it was a lot of dice rolling for not a lot of effect. As someone put it earlier, the way you would "fish for sixes". I would hope that GW realises that the very same thing applies to the general To Wound chart, given that everything can wound everything on a 6, and thus you can always fish for sixes.

It'd be nice if they made it so certain weapons cannot hurt tougher targets to remove this pointless dice rolling as well.

 AndrewC wrote:
And nobody has mentioned or noted that Look out Sir is back as a rule?

That's the part I saw. Very worrisome.

Why worrisome?

the_scotsman wrote:

Karol wrote:
never had an opponent unit charge something my with enough shots charge, unless they could ingore overwatch. for 5 man squads it was mostly irrelevant, if free rules. small nerf, but hardly worth the worry for me.

It does make IH seem strange though. If they can use their chapter tactic only on 1 unit and only 1 CP, it gets a lot worse.

I mean, until you realize that they have another half of their chapter tactic...the 6+ FNP, which several other factions have as their chapter tactic but WITHOUT the bonus overwatch thing.

I concur. Suddenly the 3-part Iron Hands Chapter Tactic and the 3-part Sacred Rose Order Conviction make more sense when you only get to overwatch once per phase with CP expenditure.

Luke_Prowler wrote:We do know Ultramarines will be getting a strat to allow them to overwatch. And It would not susprise me if Guard get an order for it, and similar abilities for Tau.

I certainly don't want them to remove overwatch completely, my friend play Mordians and I wouldn't want to see him sad. But the problem with overwatch has always been that there's no cost associated with performing overwatch

The Ultramarines have a stratagem that allows unto 3 units to overwatch when a unit is charged. Makes much more sense when Overwatch requires CP to use of all units.

It's almost like all the Space Marines and Adepta Sororitas rules were made with 9th Edition in mind...

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It's interesting to see that part of what motivated them to change Overwatch was the way it was a lot of dice rolling for not a lot of effect. As someone put it earlier, the way you would "fish for sixes". I would hope that GW realises that the very same thing applies to the general To Wound chart, given that everything can wound everything on a 6, and thus you can always fish for sixes.

It'd be nice if they made it so certain weapons cannot hurt tougher targets to remove this pointless dice rolling as well.

 AndrewC wrote:
And nobody has mentioned or noted that Look out Sir is back as a rule?

That's the part I saw. Very worrisome.

Why worrisome?

Yeah wont it be the same thing as it is now i..e Character keyword?

I think also they are going back to codified USRs.hopefuly means less need for FAQs.


Seems to be the case with a lot of things they mentioned like "shocked"

Ice_can wrote:


Also GW saying they will be updating rules that alter overwatch, literally Tau septs full faction bonus.
However what they aren't going to say is that fixing these subfactions that are now without a trait will be done in their 9th edition codex

Where has GW said this? I don't see it on the Overwatch article.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It's interesting to see that part of what motivated them to change Overwatch was the way it was a lot of dice rolling for not a lot of effect. As someone put it earlier, the way you would "fish for sixes". I would hope that GW realises that the very same thing applies to the general To Wound chart, given that everything can wound everything on a 6, and thus you can always fish for sixes.

It'd be nice if they made it so certain weapons cannot hurt tougher targets to remove this pointless dice rolling as well.

"If toughness is more than twice the weapon's strength it cannot wound at all" would resolve this without upending the simplicity of the wound chart (something I personally think is worth preserving). Could even make it "wound on a 7+" if GW is interested in preserving specific synergies for punching up the wound chart.

Stuff not being able to hurt other stuff is bad game design. One of the better things they have done in recent editions is made 6s always wound, and in 9th, 6s will also always hit. It would be very strange indeed to flip it around in 9th so 6s always hit but don't always wound.

8th edition suffers hugely from rolling too many dice, but "fishing for 6s" is such a tiny part of that equation. Rerolls and ridiculous rate of fire are the main culprits.

 alextroy wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Karol wrote:
never had an opponent unit charge something my with enough shots charge, unless they could ingore overwatch. for 5 man squads it was mostly irrelevant, if free rules. small nerf, but hardly worth the worry for me.

It does make IH seem strange though. If they can use their chapter tactic only on 1 unit and only 1 CP, it gets a lot worse.

I mean, until you realize that they have another half of their chapter tactic...the 6+ FNP, which several other factions have as their chapter tactic but WITHOUT the bonus overwatch thing.

I concur. Suddenly the 3-part Iron Hands Chapter Tactic and the 3-part Sacred Rose Order Conviction make more sense when you only get to overwatch once per phase with CP expenditure.

Luke_Prowler wrote:We do know Ultramarines will be getting a strat to allow them to overwatch. And It would not susprise me if Guard get an order for it, and similar abilities for Tau.

I certainly don't want them to remove overwatch completely, my friend play Mordians and I wouldn't want to see him sad. But the problem with overwatch has always been that there's no cost associated with performing overwatch

The Ultramarines have a stratagem that allows unto 3 units to overwatch when a unit is charged. Makes much more sense when Overwatch requires CP to use of all units.

It's almost like all the Space Marines and Adepta Sororitas rules were made with 9th Edition in mind...

Yep - GW has been planning this this update for a while. The design for the launch box started 3 years ago even. I can't imagine them juggling the codexes, FAQs, errata, and this simultaneously so the screws up make a bit more sense.

But the question is now....can GW ever get ahead of the curve?

It is not bad game design though. Why exactly should my tanks fear bolters plinking of the last 2 wounds they have? I will admit this is my first edition of 40k but I never had a problem with certain units not being able to wound my super tough units in other games.

 Castozor wrote:
It is not bad game design though. Why exactly should my tanks fear bolters plinking of the last 2 wounds they have? I will admit this is my first edition of 40k but I never had a problem with certain units not being able to wound my super tough units in other games.

The fact that I can have an entirely T8 army. (T9, with Chaos Knigts, at the cost of d3 mortals a turn.)

So once I silence your anti-tank weapons, I'm effectively immune to you.

While I can certainly appreciate and understand the why people are happy with this change, I'm mostly bummed since I play Mordians. So unless IG gets something like an order to allow more units to overwatch, my doctrine just became mostly useless. Even more so if the max +1/-1 I've seen mentioned effects Ld as well.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
It is not bad game design though. Why exactly should my tanks fear bolters plinking of the last 2 wounds they have? I will admit this is my first edition of 40k but I never had a problem with certain units not being able to wound my super tough units in other games.

The fact that I can have an entirely T8 army. (T9, with Chaos Knigts, at the cost of d3 mortals a turn.)

So once I silence your anti-tank weapons, I'm effectively immune to you.

This was the case in previous editions for vehicles and big monsters, and never really was a problem in and of itself. Massed AV14 never did particularly well in any edition for instance. Breaking through saves (smoke/jink/ion shield/armor on MC's/etc) was generally the greater issue by far than simply having enough high-S weapons to hurt something big.

While the current system doesn't bother me enough to really agitate about changing it, the idea of having heavy battle tanks that aren't having to deal with A: gobs of ineffective dice slowing the game down being thrown at them hoping for lucky 6's, or B: small arms equipped units boot-strapping multiple overlapping buffs and special rules to become more capable AT units than many actual dedicated AT units (looking at you Intercessors...), is also appealing.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
It is not bad game design though. Why exactly should my tanks fear bolters plinking of the last 2 wounds they have? I will admit this is my first edition of 40k but I never had a problem with certain units not being able to wound my super tough units in other games.

The fact that I can have an entirely T8 army. (T9, with Chaos Knigts, at the cost of d3 mortals a turn.)

So once I silence your anti-tank weapons, I'm effectively immune to you.

Allowing pure heavy armies was a mistake to begin with in my opinion. I realize these are in the game now, but they were a mistake to begin with. Fully armored companies and worse do not belong in a skirmish game.

 Castozor wrote:
It is not bad game design though. Why exactly should my tanks fear bolters plinking of the last 2 wounds they have? I will admit this is my first edition of 40k but I never had a problem with certain units not being able to wound my super tough units in other games.

Because invincible units are bad game design, and anything that encourages people to bring skew lists is also bad game design. You should never show up to a game and find that most of your opponents' units are completely immune to most of your units, as in literally cannot be harmed.

If your opponent is shooting dozens of bolter shots at a tank in the hopes of plinking off a unit or two, be happy, because it means you are winning the game by forcing them to shoot at a hugely sub-optimal target. Be happy that only 1 in 20 shots is getting through, not upset about the 1 in 20 that does.

Honestly, the much bigger problem with plinking wounds off tanks isn't the roll to wound, it's the armor saves. This is another case of "Primaris Marines wreck everything," because S4, AP:- is vastly different than S4, AP2.

A 3+ armor save barely means anything any more when space marines come with stock AP-2 on T2 and T3 if they want it.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Why worrisome?

Two words: Character sniping.

My hope is that "Look Out, Sir!" is a strat that allows protection against Snipers. If it's a general rule that make characters harder to target, that means characters can be targeted, which means death for a lot of character units (who's going to bring the otherwise useless Malanthrope if it can be shot from the word go?), and it also takes away the point of actual sniper units.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
"If toughness is more than twice the weapon's strength it cannot wound at all" would resolve this without upending the simplicity of the wound chart (something I personally think is worth preserving). Could even make it "wound on a 7+" if GW is interested in preserving specific synergies for punching up the wound chart.

The double toughness thing would go part of the way to resolving the issue, but not far enough. As long as S5 can wound T8/9 on 5+, the problem doesn't go away.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Stuff not being able to hurt other stuff is bad game design.

Why? Laspistols shouldn't even have the opportunity to hurt Land Raiders and Knights.

The issue with the current To Wound rules is that it makes multi-shot mid-damage S5/S6 weapons the best at taking out tanks, certainly more than super-swingy actual anti-tank weapons. If there were delineations to what counted as anti-infantry and anti-tank then it wouldn't be a problem.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Stuff not being able to hurt other stuff is bad game design. One of the better things they have done in recent editions is made 6s always wound, and in 9th, 6s will also always hit. It would be very strange indeed to flip it around in 9th so 6s always hit but don't always wound.

8th edition suffers hugely from rolling too many dice, but "fishing for 6s" is such a tiny part of that equation. Rerolls and ridiculous rate of fire are the main culprits.

No, it's not.
With how the game is set up, the "new" wounding chart is actually an issue. Everything being able to hit and wound everything is quite bad. It is the basis of what promotes quantity over quality, as it covers every bases you'll need in your army and tends to promote medium size weapons (anti light vehicles, heavy infantry) which in turns either reduce the usability of their favoured targets or force designers to buff them out of proportion (I'm pretty sure everyone one has obvious examples in mind). It also promotes wound inflation in profiles as toughness isn't as good as it should.

I don't know why it feels normal to have troops with knifes be able to blow up a predator just because they have numbers.
If you design a game with such a scale that you have nurglings facing titans, it's perfectly fine for something to not be able to wound something else. It actually already exists with hand to hand units without fly and aircrafts for example. I dunno why it can't be a thing for vehicles or tough monsters versus F4 or lower for example.
If someone has to face off against an army it can't scratch, it's kinda his own issue. If someone had no option to deal with aircrafts at the moment, I don't think we would be saying "OMG, the rules needs to be changed !!!" rather than "it's ok mate, get some ranged weapons next time".

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Two words: Character sniping.

My hope is that "Look Out, Sir!" is a strat that allows protection against Snipers. If it's a general rule that make characters harder to target, that means characters can be targeted, which means death for a lot of character units (who's going to bring the otherwise useless Malanthrope if it can be shot from the word go?), and it also takes away the point of actual sniper units.

Oh, right. My mental process went to the current character targeting along with Look Out, Sir. Sniper units are way more lethal now and plenty of armies lack bodyguards.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Two words: Character sniping.

My hope is that "Look Out, Sir!" is a strat that allows protection against Snipers. If it's a general rule that make characters harder to target, that means characters can be targeted, which means death for a lot of character units (who's going to bring the otherwise useless Malanthrope if it can be shot from the word go?), and it also takes away the point of actual sniper units.

Oh, right. My mental process went to the current character targeting along with Look Out, Sir. Sniper units are way more lethal now and plenty of armies lack bodyguards.

Plenty of armies lack snipers as well.