The Damn Has Broken... Points Changes Are Public! New "FACTS" Are Also Live!

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.

**Carnikang**

So, the only thing I'm mildly happy about is the Hierophant going to 2000 even with all her weapons.

Not competitive, but I think it'll be fun if I get first turn to do as much damage as possible.
Benefits from Hive Traits and doesn't need Synapse...

**dominuschao**

9th looks great but the blanket approach to points is just sloppy. Feels like years worth of work was disregarded.
Also less models smaller board is good for faster games but not as much for playing with my models. Wish they had kept the pts values more in line with 8th.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:

Fellblade down to 690

Weapons unchanged so a 60 point buff in total.

Thanks Daed. 50 actually, but didn't twin heavy bolters go up? So not quite that. Maybe there's something in the new fw books that explains why it didn't go down more. I'll wait and see before getting salty.

Yea there's the whole FW re-write, but I wouldn't expect too much for units like the Fellblade.

Ok, let's say you're right. So my previously 917 point bone stock fellblade is now 880 points: a whopping 37 point buff. Why? They obviously noticed it this time, so shear laziness is out. It's still massively overpriced compared to similar units. Does gw just not want the fw super heavys to be played? I'm starting to feel salty. In fact, considering what they did to Renegades and Heretics and what I'm seeing for csm, I'm feeling really salty.

And since I'm behind the conversation let me just get these out of the way:

Grots the same price as guardsmen? That's some fine balance right there.

Also: nice to see that gw is finally acknowledging the fact that they've screwed up the rules for the ancient Veterans of the Long War so badly that a warrior who has survived hundreds to thousands of years fighting in literal hell is now equal to a neophyte from a thin blooded chapter from founding #12365 by pricing them the same. And the best of the best of those ancient warriors? They're the equivalent to the average joes from founding #12365. Fine fluffy rules writing right there yessirree Bob.

There, I feel better. Been holding that in all day.

Where did they admit they suck writing CSM rules???

**ArcaneHorror**

Voss wrote:
ArcaneHorror wrote:
Honestly, this whole 'all points go up' thing I don't think should have happened. I don't see it having a massive income on sales, and just strikes me as a way to rile up the fanbase.

Don't agree, It needed to happen, as too much was smooshed into the low end.

Unfortunately introducing a floor of 5 points sets up some obvious problems for people to yell about.

And there needed to be more individual judgement and less formulas.

And GW is still hung up on the elf statline for some bizarre reason. The only time they ever got it even close to right was when the errata'd the entire Dark Elf armybook away from the Always-Strike-First High Elf point values.
But the lethality of 8th/9th edition 40k just doesn't care about elf stats. In terms of dying, they're exactly the same as guard, admech or sister's stats, depending on the armor save.

There needed to be some changes, yes, but not this game-wide hike, and I definitely don't see why having low-end points is a bad thing, as doing so allows people to have bigger and more diverse armies. There definitely needed to be more individual analysis for different units. Going to a new edition in and of itself tends to put people on edge, and adding these points changes just throws in a whole mess of unwanted anxiety that at least for me is dampening a lot of excitement that I had about this new edition.

**Spoletta**

After reading to a good part of the point changes of the various factions, I'm not so negative about them. The total result feels a bit weird but it could make sense after a few games.

What I really cannot understand are Eradicators at 40 points... WHY?????

That single point value can literally ruin the game! I'm getting 7E WraithKnight vibes from this!

The implications of that single point entry will warp the meta completely into "Do you have an answer to Eradicators? No? You lose!"

I'm pretty excited for the 9th but that single point value is making me think of skipping this edition until it gets fixed...

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Let's hope that the marine codex is right around the corner and that it bumps it to at least 55.

**Daedalus81**

Spoletta wrote:

The implications of that single point entry will warp the meta completely into "Do you have an answer to Eradicators? No? You lose!"

When would you not have an answer for a T5 unit?

**Martel732**

I still think they are too cheap/w for what they do. 55 pts would be more fair I think.

**Insectum7**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Spoletta wrote:

The implications of that single point entry will warp the meta completely into "Do you have an answer to Eradicators? No? You lose!"

When would you not have an answer for a T5 unit?

Well it turns out that Eradicators are quite point efficient at killing Eradicators, so there's that.

Space Marine Devastator with Multimelta. T4, 1W, 1 Heavy Melta shot at 24" 35 points.
Eradicator: T5 3W, 2 Assault Melta shots at 24" 40 points.

Perfect balance. A++

And I'm usually the guy who says things like point to point comparisons aren't particularly valid. This comparison in particular just seems off.

**Nibbler**

I just took a quick look on the leaked points...
holy guacamole!

I started Tau in february - got a stormsurge, just because I like the looks.
Reaching 9th Ed, LoWs can't be reasonable added to my existing army and it took a 120 points increase.
It has to get some overwhelmingly good rules, or it is just dead...

**Daedalus81**

Insectum7 wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
Spoletta wrote:

The implications of that single point entry will warp the meta completely into "Do you have an answer to Eradicators? No? You lose!"

When would you not have an answer for a T5 unit?
Well it turns out that Eradicators are quite point efficient at killing Eradicators, so there's that.

Space Marine Devastator with Multimelta. T4, 1W, 1 Heavy Melta shot at 24" 35 points.
Eradicator: T5 3W, 2 Assault Melta shots at 24" 40 points.

Perfect balance. A++

And I'm usually the guy who says things like point to point comparisons aren't particularly valid. This comparison in particular just seems off.

My expectation for Eradicators to "make sense" would be MM at like 12 or 15. MM has to change or it just doesn't work.

Eradicators themselves don't concern me though.

**Martel732**

MM is not 12 or 15. They already leaked it. Eradicators are 13 ppw which is crazy imo.

**Crackedgear**

I have a theory about the noise marine hike. It was pointed out recently (gimme a bit to find it again) that “ignores cover” means you ignore the effects of light cover, heavy cover, and dense cover. So they’re trying to balance out noise marines suddenly able to avoid a -1 to hit.

Naturally we’ll see an equivalent price hike in imperial fists.
Edit: correction, imperial fists specifically say they ignore the saving throw bonus from cover.
Edit 2: sonic weapons say the same thing now. Never mind.

**Eldarain**

Crackedgear wrote:
Naturally we’ll see an equivalent price hike in imperial fists.

Hahaha. Save something for your stand up routine.

**ArcaneHorror**

Crackedgear wrote:
I have a theory about the noise marine hike. It was pointed out recently (gimme a bit to find it again) that “ignores cover” means you ignore the effects of light cover, heavy cover, and dense cover. So they’re trying to balance out noise marines suddenly able to avoid a -1 to hit.

Naturally we’ll see an equivalent price hike in imperial fists.
Edit: correction, imperial fists specifically say they ignore the saving throw bonus from cover.

I hope that this doesn't mean that we see some ish pulled for stuff that works well with the Iron Warriors, since they ignore cover as well.

**H.B.M.C.**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Where did they admit they suck writing CSM rules???

Oh they don't need to admit it. It's fairly self-evident, wouldn't you say?

**Martel732**

It's not self-evident, we have heaps of evidence.

**Not Online!!!**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Where did they admit they suck writing CSM rules???
Oh they don't need to admit it. It's fairly self-evident, wouldn't you say?

10'000year Veteran inhabiting literal hell Same price as Scout neophytes only inhabiting makropolworld.

**Dysartes**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Voss wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
yukishiro1 wrote:
Yeah, marines definitely need even more free AP on their attacks, it's what the game is calling out for.
Well the new Primaris are getting it anyways so the ship has sailed on that one. I'm only in this for the Classic/True/Realmarine Assault Squads and their Chaos counterparts. Those Chaos marines in particular don't have the free Doctrine AP either.

What are the odds the chaos marines didn't 'trade in' their shiny Astartes chainswords when they signed up to be traitors, like so many other pieces of kit?

If mini marines get it and we dont then CSM would pretty much revolt.

CSM have been revolting since second edition, with a particular highlight being the period where the 3.5 'dex was an albatross around the neck of the game.

**Insectum7**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
Spoletta wrote:

The implications of that single point entry will warp the meta completely into "Do you have an answer to Eradicators? No? You lose!"

When would you not have an answer for a T5 unit?
Well it turns out that Eradicators are quite point efficient at killing Eradicators, so there's that.

Space Marine Devastator with Multimelta. T4, 1W, 1 Heavy Melta shot at 24" 35 points.
Eradicator: T5 3W, 2 Assault Melta shots at 24" 40 points.

Perfect balance. A++

And I'm usually the guy who says things like point to point comparisons aren't particularly valid. This comparison in particular just seems off.

My expectation for Eradicators to "make sense" would be MM at like 12 or 15. MM has to change or it just doesn't work.

Eradicators themselves don't concern me though.

Which is why I think the Multimelta is going to two shots. . .

But the Eradicator still compares quite favorably for their weapon being Assault, having 3W and T5 for only +5 points.

An Attack Bike looks like 55 points with a Multimelta. They have 4W, 2A, T5, twin Boltgun and a 14" move. They compare reasonably to an Eradicator only if the Multimelta is getting something like 2 shots.

**Thousand-Son-Sorcerer**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:

Fellblade down to 690

Weapons unchanged so a 60 point buff in total.

Thanks Daed. 50 actually, but didn't twin heavy bolters go up? So not quite that. Maybe there's something in the new fw books that explains why it didn't go down more. I'll wait and see before getting salty.

Yea there's the whole FW re-write, but I wouldn't expect too much for units like the Fellblade.

Ok, let's say you're right. So my previously 917 point bone stock fellblade is now 880 points: a whopping 37 point buff. Why? They obviously noticed it this time, so shear laziness is out. It's still massively overpriced compared to similar units. Does gw just not want the fw super heavys to be played? I'm starting to feel salty. In fact, considering what they did to Renegades and Heretics and what I'm seeing for csm, I'm feeling really salty.

And since I'm behind the conversation let me just get these out of the way:

Grots the same price as guardsmen? That's some fine balance right there.

Also: nice to see that gw is finally acknowledging the fact that they've screwed up the rules for the ancient Veterans of the Long War so badly that a warrior who has survived hundreds to thousands of years fighting in literal hell is now equal to a neophyte from a thin blooded chapter from founding #12365 by pricing them the same. And the best of the best of those ancient warriors? They're the equivalent to the average joes from founding #12365. Fine fluffy rules writing right there yessirree Bob.

There, I feel better. Been holding that in all day.

Where did they admit they suck writing CSM rules???

Do they need to admit that?

**Karol**

Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote:

Do they need to admit that?

On their knees while being flogged, and with csm players being allowed to throw rotten fruits at them in the amount of 1kg of rotten fruits for each year of playing csm.

**Sgt. Cortez**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think the table size thing has been over-emphasised. People keep bringing it up like everyone's tables just shrunk spontaneously and that all players worldwide have happily and graciously adopted GW's ~~standard~~ ~~recommended~~ minimum table size.

Correct. I think outside of organized events the new size won't matter at all. Once GW starts to put out more maps with their own size you'll have new players using that (If they don’t play other Wargames with the usual 6x4). Even GW stores might continue to use to use the old sizes because of AoS, Lotr and their specialist Systems.

**Not Online!!!**

Karol wrote:
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote:

Do they need to admit that?

On their knees while being flogged, and with csm players being allowed to throw rotten fruits at them in the amount of 1kg of rotten fruits for each year of playing csm.

Wait , karol, is that humour i See

Mine eyes Water , for i have Seen the glory.

**Karol**

No. We actualy have rituals like that. You make a effigy of something bad, and after easter it gets wacked first by an adult, then by all the children, then the effigy is taken on a cart to the river, set on fire, stoned and drowned.

Now I don't think that should happen to live GW employees. But public whippings and being showered with rotten fruits has a long tradition in my country. There are still places where stone "pręgierze", which I think are called pillories in english, still stand.

Sorry I ment that the effigies of opposition politicans are burned or hanged around those in big city events.

**Not Online!!!**

ohh.

Don't do that.

**Insectum7**

Not Online!!! wrote:
ohh.

Don't do that.

HAhaha.

That's an amazing exchange, and very funny in a black humor sort of way.

**Not Online!!!**

i am honestly kinda shocked, never heard about such behaviour from my godmother...

**Togusa**

Blackie wrote:
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote:

Are you really going to argue that the new morale rules aren't wildly beneficial for hordes?

Horde players agree going to go from losing a third of thier army to morale to losing maybe 15-20%.

It depends on the unit. Boyz with a warboss or another large unit nearby bypassed the moral issue anyway, while gretchins got a significant benefit from the new morale rule.... except they are now 5ppm and combined with a plethora of new rules that badly affect large squads (blasts, coherency, cover...) it means that they were way better before.

Inquisitors seem to be set to help on the imperial side with their ability to give their leadership to friendly imperium units.

**Guyver 3**

The points increases in 9th look like they were done in 20 mins, no effort has been put into balancing armies in any way,

So much for the most playtested edition! I’m guessing the play testers used 8th edition points and weren’t asked to test anything beyond the core rules,

considering the quality Of the play testers this is a real shame and a Huge missed opportunity on gw’s part.

**topaxygouroun i**

Guyver 3 wrote:
The points increases in 9th look like they were done in 20 mins, no effort has been put into balancing armies in any way,

So much for the most playtested edition! I’m guessing the play testers used 8th edition points and weren’t asked to test anything beyond the core rules,

considering the quality Of the play testers this is a real shame and a Huge missed opportunity on gw’s part.

Pretty sure the playtesters fielded brimstone horrors and grots against guardsmen and concluded that they both worth the same.