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.

Wyldhunt wrote:
Combined with the new coherency rules, this is just annoying. I don't really play hordes, but I I feel for those who do. Plus, having to measure half inches is going to require I squint at the tape measure just a bit more.

I'm still mostly positive about 9th edition, but some of the more recent reveals have been like... the opposite of hype.

Maybe pile in moves will be increased to balance this out a bit?

I don't think anyone will measure 1/2 inch; I think everyone will just go base to base to base. Same way I don't think anyone will measure for coherency- I think they'll just eyeball it, erring on the side of caution and keep measuring for truly edge cases. Granted, I've only ever really played fairly casually- maybe 2 tournaments in 31 years?

But that's how me, and everyone I've ever played against is- set models up in a pattern. Measure movement for the first model. Then rebuild the pattern. If conforming to terrain causes issues for some models in the unit, they can be measured, but often the pattern method will suffice for most models in the unit- especially MSU. The other thing that makes it work is graciousness when and if your opponent calls shenanigans.

Consolidate and pile in help with ranking up and coherency.

I don't know- I could be wrong; I'm trying to imagine how all the new moving parts will interact, rather than playing and discovering how they interact. I'm curious.

From looking at it my Plague Bearers will be having a hard time at the start of 9th. And they've been shot of the board throughout 8th anyway. Well, guess my Plague Marines will continue to be the easy mode and Daemons will be brought when I'm up to a challenge

Wait, what happens if you are attacking 5 dudes on smaller bases with a unit of more then 5 and trying to pile in as close as possible to enemy models means some of your modesl are no longer within 2" of two other models and die because of not being in cohorency?

A few things to like, 1st rank + 2nd rank seems pretty easy to explain how it works, the old system had quite a bit more nuance to it. The new system treats every base size equally, the old system let you get more people in if they were on smaller bases. The new system should require less measuring, with a smaller engagement range less models will be close enough to justify measuring.

I wish they had cleaned up pile in a bit, but it's still must end closer, which allows you to pull all sorts of pile in shenanigans, which admittedly matter a lot less now.

Karol wrote:
Wait, what happens if you are attacking 5 dudes on smaller bases with a unit of more then 5 and trying to pile in as close as possible to enemy models means some of your modesl are no longer within 2" of two other models and die because of not being in cohorency?

The check is made in the morale phase, so you still have 3" of consolidation to be coherent again.

Karol wrote:
Wait, what happens if you are attacking 5 dudes on smaller bases with a unit of more then 5 and trying to pile in as close as possible to enemy models means some of your modesl are no longer within 2" of two other models and die because of not being in cohorency?

Well, RAW, you just can't make that move to begin with. If you did it anyway, you violated the game rules unwittingly, and whatever happens when that happens happens.

Karol wrote:
Wait, what happens if you are attacking 5 dudes on smaller bases with a unit of more then 5 and trying to pile in as close as possible to enemy models means some of your modesl are no longer within 2" of two other models and die because of not being in cohorency?

Yes, that seems to be the case, so, move carefully. They've called it out very specifically when in melee. I don't understand what they were going for though.

 Grimgold wrote:
A few things to like, 1st rank + 2nd rank seems pretty easy to explain how it works, the old system had quite a bit more nuance to it. The new system treats every base size equally, the old system let you get more people in if they were on smaller bases. The new system should require less measuring, with a smaller engagement range less models will be close enough to justify measuring.

I wish they had cleaned up pile in a bit, but it's still must end closer, which allows you to pull all sorts of pile in shenanigans, which admittedly matter a lot less now.

I think I have to measure more, first everybody that is in 1", then everybody that is in 1/2 ". Models that are within 1, but not 1/2 can fight but don't allow guys to fight behind them. Right?

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
A few things to like, 1st rank + 2nd rank seems pretty easy to explain how it works, the old system had quite a bit more nuance to it. The new system treats every base size equally, the old system let you get more people in if they were on smaller bases. The new system should require less measuring, with a smaller engagement range less models will be close enough to justify measuring.

I wish they had cleaned up pile in a bit, but it's still must end closer, which allows you to pull all sorts of pile in shenanigans, which admittedly matter a lot less now.

I think I have to measure more, first everybody that is in 1", then everybody that is in 1/2 ". Models that are within 1, but not 1/2 can fight but don't allow guys to fight behind them. Right?

Yes, so a charge that just catches a unit won't get a second rank in.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Karol wrote:
Wait, what happens if you are attacking 5 dudes on smaller bases with a unit of more then 5 and trying to pile in as close as possible to enemy models means some of your modesl are no longer within 2" of two other models and die because of not being in cohorency?

Yes, that seems to be the case, so, move carefully. They've called it out very specifically when in melee. I don't understand what they were going for though.

Okey what happens in w40k, this is my first time in to running in to such a rule problem. when two rules with no activation priority tell you to do a thing which you can't do because of another rule.

I have been thinking about it since GW showed those new cynpotek necron bodyguards too. If they are outside of LoS, but within 3" of a cryptek , and you see the cryptek you still have to target him, but you can't because the rule is worded in a such way that you have to target them first.

You never have to pile in, and you literally can't if it would take you out of coherency. There's no conflict in those two rules.

I was under the impression that you could only fight in two ranks in 8th anyway!

Playing wrong all edition, nice!

So what happens if I have a unit of 10 paladins set up like this

88888
charing a unit of 5 msu models set up like this
0-2"gap -0000
I have to leave some of the paladins at the back so they can't attack?

Karol wrote:
So what happens if I have a unit of 10 paladins set up like this

88888
charing a unit of 5 msu models set up like this
0-2"gap -0000
I have to leave some of the paladins at the back so they can't attack?

You can still get two ranks in. If the front rank is with 1/2" of the enemy and the second rank is w/i 1/2" of the front rank then they all fight.

ah okey thanks

 Castozor wrote:
It makes no sense unless, like me, you are beginning to suspect GW and their play testing baboons wanted to completely kill of big horde units. Why, beats me, no one was complaining about big combat blobs before to my understanding, unless it was about them slowing the game down.

I think this is the case. GW is trying to push "Can be played in a couple hours" pretty hard.

On flipside maybe puts end to the silly "you must rebase" silliness from certain tfg's


Automatically Appended Next Post:

stratigo wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
It makes no sense unless, like me, you are beginning to suspect GW and their play testing baboons wanted to completely kill of big horde units. Why, beats me, no one was complaining about big combat blobs before to my understanding, unless it was about them slowing the game down.

I think this is the case. GW is trying to push "Can be played in a couple hours" pretty hard.

Too bad they don't actually fix biggest slow downers

stratigo wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
It makes no sense unless, like me, you are beginning to suspect GW and their play testing baboons wanted to completely kill of big horde units. Why, beats me, no one was complaining about big combat blobs before to my understanding, unless it was about them slowing the game down.

I think this is the case. GW is trying to push "Can be played in a couple hours" pretty hard.

Easy fix to do that? Cut off 90% of the re-rolls and set the standard format to 1500 points. Done.

No need to force all the factions to go elite style.

 Blackie wrote:

stratigo wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
It makes no sense unless, like me, you are beginning to suspect GW and their play testing baboons wanted to completely kill of big horde units. Why, beats me, no one was complaining about big combat blobs before to my understanding, unless it was about them slowing the game down.

I think this is the case. GW is trying to push "Can be played in a couple hours" pretty hard.

Easy fix to do that? Cut off 90% of the re-rolls and set the standard format to 1500 points. Done.

No need to force all the factions to go elite style.

Don't even realy need to go to 1500 points if it's not codex Rerolls everything vrs Codex Rerolls everything for a meta.
Sack off rerolls and you would speed up the game alot.

They are actually speeding up the gate quite a bit.

5 turn games .

Less points on the battlefield.

Smaller boards (more action).

Less overwatch.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the rerolls being redesigned too. The new SM codex is coming, and this edition until now has been quite steamrolly in how it tackles problems to the game.

Might also explain why it doesn't feel like marines have even remotely fair points costs when you bring an LT and CM buffs.
But this is Marines and GW right now I'll believe it when I see it.

I'm still convinced that those leaked points are fakes or at least outdated.

If not, I have a Seraphon army.

Spoletta wrote:
I'm still convinced that those leaked points are fakes or at least outdated.

If not, I have a Seraphon army.

At this point I am sadly left hoping against hope that they are fake as if not it looks like Marines got cheaper between playtesting and the community previews.

Also looks like we'll either get scalped for 2 CA in 2020 or we'll be stuck with any undercosted unit till next year unless we get hot fixes.

I have a small hope that since CA2020 is now slotted in the app, we will receive the new points digitally.

Karol wrote:
Wait, what happens if you are attacking 5 dudes on smaller bases with a unit of more then 5 and trying to pile in as close as possible to enemy models means some of your modesl are no longer within 2" of two other models and die because of not being in cohorency?

Nothing. You can't move out of coherency, so you have to redo the move into a legal position.


The only legal way to end up out of coherency is casualties.

Karol wrote:
Wait, what happens if you are attacking 5 dudes on smaller bases with a unit of more then 5 and trying to pile in as close as possible to enemy models means some of your modesl are no longer within 2" of two other models and die because of not being in cohorency?

It causes a divide by 0 error and the table collapses into a singularity.

This is solely to balance 25mm and 32mm bases

tneva82 wrote:
On flipside maybe puts end to the silly "you must rebase" silliness from certain tfg's


Automatically Appended Next Post:

stratigo wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
It makes no sense unless, like me, you are beginning to suspect GW and their play testing baboons wanted to completely kill of big horde units. Why, beats me, no one was complaining about big combat blobs before to my understanding, unless it was about them slowing the game down.

I think this is the case. GW is trying to push "Can be played in a couple hours" pretty hard.

Too bad they don't actually fix biggest slow downers

Hordes, 100 percent, took the longest to play. Chaos cultists could get piles of rerolls, orks had to grab out every 6 to roll again, et cetera. Hordes didn’t tend to have fantastically fewer ancillary rules than marines do, on top of the time to roll their base dice pools and move the models


The number one longest dice roll interactions have always been multi wound weapons against fnp saves though, something that effected some hordes, but is very noticeable because the best marine army has a fnp

Bitharne wrote:
This is solely to balance 25mm and 32mm bases

It's not a very good way of doing that, if that's the intent. Because it also radically reduces the amount of models on either base size you can get fighting.

stratigo wrote:

Hordes, 100 percent, took the longest to play. Chaos cultists could get piles of rerolls, orks had to grab out every 6 to roll again, et cetera. Hordes didn’t tend to have fantastically fewer ancillary rules than marines do, on top of the time to roll their base dice pools and move the models

Nah, it's all a matter on how people play. I play two very different armies in terms of size and SW require me more time than orks despite I usually play 2x or 3x number of models when I use orks. I never go full hordes but still 40-60 SW models takes me more time than 90-120 ork models. Actually no real difference but between the two armies I'd consider SW to be slower to play. Way more dice rolling.