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.

With the existence of obscuring terrain, are people concerned their artillery pieces that need LOS are going to be a lot weaker in 9th? It seems they are emphasizing movement (which is a good thing), and being able to get into position if you want to get that shot off -- meaning your LRBT is going to be driving up to get angles, not just hiding in / behind cover.

Certain platforms don't have the luxury of decent movement (3", infantry with long range shooting). How are people feeling about those right now? Seems like you might be getting one round of shooting off, if you're lucky, before being engaged in CC.

First of all, obscuring terrain needs to be at least 5" tall, its unlikely that all of your terrain will be at least 5" tall. Even if thats the case you still need to give every terrain piece the obscuring trait. Thats up to you and your opponent to decide.

Are long-range infantry what you mean by LOS artillery? When I hear artillery, I think Earthshaker platforms and the like.

I think long-range infantry are going to benefit from the new terrain rules, but they'll need to be deployed correctly to start with. Putting them somewhere where they can cover a particular objective or lane will allow them to shoot, but prevent them from engaging just anything on the board.

Non-LOS shooting is going to become even more valuable with the new terrain rules. Honestly I wouldn't mind a rule such that non-LOS shooting requires a spotter who has LOS to a target to engage.

Either way, the new edition is shaping up to put more emphasis on deployment and maneuver, and make it harder to deploy in a corner and shoot clear across the board.

 catbarf wrote:
Are long-range infantry what you mean by LOS artillery? When I hear artillery, I think Earthshaker platforms and the like.

I think long-range infantry are going to benefit from the new terrain rules, but they'll need to be deployed correctly to start with. Putting them somewhere where they can cover a particular objective or lane will allow them to shoot, but prevent them from engaging just anything on the board.

Non-LOS shooting is going to become even more valuable with the new terrain rules. Honestly I wouldn't mind a rule such that non-LOS shooting requires a spotter who has LOS to a target to engage.

Either way, the new edition is shaping up to put more emphasis on deployment and maneuver, and make it harder to deploy in a corner and shoot clear across the board.

100% agree -- TFCs are their ilk are going to be INCREDIBLY good. With the smaller board, I think there is basically no place you can now hide from a TFC if they are deploy mid your deployment zone.

For examples from my own army: Mek Guns (which might stay relevant just because they are so cheap), and the Shock Attack Gun. Basically, they typically have deployed in a crows nest and have been able to shoot almost anywhere in 8th.

If folks have not played with ITC terrain guideline, the 9th edition terrain rules may be quite different from what they are accustomed to. There is a lot of terrain variation but a lot of terrain that I've experienced generally does not block LOS if strictly using true LOS.

The loss of the -1 to hit penalty for moving a vehicle is likely one rule interaction to go along with the potential of more terrain blocking LOS.

Overall, not concerned about loss of efficiency, but interested in how my army will mold to fit 9th edition.

tulun wrote:
With the existence of obscuring terrain, are people concerned their artillery pieces that need LOS are going to be a lot weaker in 9th? It seems they are emphasizing movement (which is a good thing), and being able to get into position if you want to get that shot off -- meaning your LRBT is going to be driving up to get angles, not just hiding in / behind cover.

Certain platforms don't have the luxury of decent movement (3", infantry with long range shooting). How are people feeling about those right now? Seems like you might be getting one round of shooting off, if you're lucky, before being engaged in CC.

Well...As it is compared to common 8th ed(1st floor ruin blocks LOS) getting LOS becomes easier rather than harder. Any model in ruin visible. Any 18w+ model and aircraft visible period. That's lot more generous than what we have been playing for 3 years.

tulun wrote:


100% agree -- TFCs are their ilk are going to be INCREDIBLY good. With the smaller board, I think there is basically no place you can now hide from a TFC if they are deploy mid your deployment zone.

For examples from my own army: Mek Guns (which might stay relevant just because they are so cheap), and the Shock Attack Gun. Basically, they typically have deployed in a crows nest and have been able to shoot almost anywhere in 8th.

Points dependent. TFCs pretty much cover the board now, anyway.

They better give a -1 to hit to no LOS weapons.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

tulun wrote:


100% agree -- TFCs are their ilk are going to be INCREDIBLY good. With the smaller board, I think there is basically no place you can now hide from a TFC if they are deploy mid your deployment zone.

For examples from my own army: Mek Guns (which might stay relevant just because they are so cheap), and the Shock Attack Gun. Basically, they typically have deployed in a crows nest and have been able to shoot almost anywhere in 8th.

Points dependent. TFCs pretty much cover the board now, anyway.

They better give a -1 to hit to no LOS weapons.

-1 to hit for no LOS weapons doesn't mean anything to a TFC. It'd still be hitting on 3+ with all the juicy Space Marine re-rolls around, while Guard Artillery would default to hitting on 5s, Hive Guard lose the Symbiostorm ability from Psychic Awakening that made them at least somewhat playable again and most armies without all the Marine-style free-re-rolls-for-LOLZ like Ridgerunner Mortars and such would be even more useless than they are now.

Sunny Side Up wrote:


-1 to hit for no LOS weapons doesn't mean anything to a TFC. It'd still be hitting on 3+ with all the juicy Space Marine re-rolls around, while Guard Artillery would default to hitting on 5s, Hive Guard lose the Symbiostorm ability from Psychic Awakening that made them at least somewhat playable again and most armies without all the Marine-style free-re-rolls-for-LOLZ like Ridgerunner Mortars and such would be even more useless than they are now.

I understand - points will matter as will how people end up building lists. It may be a lot harder to fuel TFCs as well. Also, weapons don't need to always fire from behind LOS.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

tulun wrote:


100% agree -- TFCs are their ilk are going to be INCREDIBLY good. With the smaller board, I think there is basically no place you can now hide from a TFC if they are deploy mid your deployment zone.

For examples from my own army: Mek Guns (which might stay relevant just because they are so cheap), and the Shock Attack Gun. Basically, they typically have deployed in a crows nest and have been able to shoot almost anywhere in 8th.

Points dependent. TFCs pretty much cover the board now, anyway.

They better give a -1 to hit to no LOS weapons.

I imagine and hope just a healthy points hike. I think rooting out non-LOS artillery will be tough, even if you can out flank on their board edge.

Every artillery that is not a thunderfire cannon will suck in comparison.

2+ WS (and save !), range 60, no LoS + marine rerolls ? Go and beat that.

The sole problem of artillery in 9th will be the TFC statline.

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Every artillery that is not a thunderfire cannon will suck in comparison.

2+ WS (and save !), range 60, no LoS + marine rerolls ? Go and beat that.

The sole problem of artillery in 9th will be the TFC statline.

It had most of that all edition. It's the gunner that dropped slightly in points and the gun picked up BS2 from BS3. What really sold it was doctrines and traits.

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Every artillery that is not a thunderfire cannon will suck in comparison.

2+ WS (and save !), range 60, no LoS + marine rerolls ? Go and beat that.

The sole problem of artillery in 9th will be the TFC statline.

With most armies limited at 3 HQs I don't see many TFCs being inside a reroll bubble, but yes i sincerely hope that TFC sees at the very least a 50% point incrase to justify it being no-LoS, blast and the general point increase of the edition.

The points will be the decider. If quality No-LOS shooting gets a substantial points boost (especially if a Blast), they may be good without being oppressive. Or they can miss the mark and make to still too good or just bad.

The points will be the decider. If quality No-LOS shooting gets a substantial points boost (especially if a Blast), they may be good without being oppressive. Or they can miss the mark and make to still too good or just bad.

I think that's the key. The points. So far, the only think that is more than likely fethed in 9th is light infantry. Even that's still up for grabs, but I don't think there's anything else that can, definitively be put in the "at risk" category just yet.

Knowing GW, things like Plagueburst Crawlers will go up just enough to make them unusable, wile TFC's will get only a token increase, but time will tell ...

There is no point in asking these questions or anything at all about 9th until we have seen the whole picture.

Will X be in trouble? We dont know. How the hell would we?

However the rules shake out, I'm sure my arty will be just fine.

Also, keep in mind that we're losing the penalty for moving and firing Heavy weapons, and that making multi-charges is riskier. I expect that LoS artillery will be expected to be more mobile in the new edition, instead of just hanging out in the back for the entire game.

Especially given new tactical reserve options and the emphasis on board control, they seem to be encouraging mobile, coordinated armies over castling.

I'm a lot more afraid of non-LOS artillery being overpowered than I am of LOS artillery being underpowered. I would like to trust GW to get the points right, but they didn't through pretty much all of 8th, so we'll have to see if they learned their lesson.

 alextroy wrote:
The points will be the decider. If quality No-LOS shooting gets a substantial points boost (especially if a Blast), they may be good without being oppressive. Or they can miss the mark and make to still too good or just bad.

Given the TFC won't see benefit from blast until 11+ models I doubt it will see much of an increase in that regard (but still earned an increase for other reasons).

Deleted.

tulun wrote:


For examples from my own army: Mek Guns (which might stay relevant just because they are so cheap), and the Shock Attack Gun. Basically, they typically have deployed in a crows nest and have been able to shoot almost anywhere in 8th.

We tipycally play with terrain models that are 1 floor tall at most. I've always deployed mek gunz and the SAG on the ground floor, and always in the same spot. So, 9th edition new rules will change nothing about those units for me.