Hi Folks!
So, I’ve played two games of Ninth. Both a slightly modified version of the Combat patrol missions to allow three players. One central objective, three objectives spaced evenly around it 10” away. Both games at 500 points. In the second game we added secondary objectives.
I’m just starting out a new Tau collection. So I’ve been learning and making mistakes, but so far I’ve enjoyed these small, learning games far more than any games since 6th edition. I liked early 8th, but quickly became dissatisfied with it. I feel 9th has a lot more going for it.
Specific objective layouts is smart. I wasn’t sure if I would like progressive scoring, but it turns out that I do. Unlike previous Maelstrom-type games, there are clear, game-long objectives to complete and meaningful multi-turn plans are quite viable. The increasing numbers of objectives with game size is another great idea. I’m finding that each turn is exciting in trying to work towards scoring “all the time” instead of just at one moment in time. For me, that’s a bit of a concession to making an interesting game, instead of representing the ends-justify-the-means nature of pure end-game scoring. But I’m having more fun with the *game*, so it’s a concession I’m willing to go with.
Additionally, I VERY much enjoy the ability to select secondary objectives. I like this completely disproportionate to the actual game impact, but for me this is one of the best fluff-to-crunch implementations I’ve experienced with
GW. It works on so many levels!
It works on a fluff level. Page 285 - Psychic Ritual - It could be Eldar trying to open a webway gate, Chaos Summoning a Daemon, Grey Knights sealing off a Daemonic incursion. Tyranids activating a homing beacon. This doesn’t need to be a special scenario. You can choose to add this to any game you feel like. Mental interrogation feels sooo at home with Dark Angels seeking out the Fallen. Again, it’s not a special scenario, you can choose to add it to any game you want. Assassinate and Slay the Warlord could represent your force as an elite “Hunter” squad, sent on such missions as their core design. Such an awesome way to build fluff into win conditions.
It works on a prepared strategic level. You know you’re a fast moving, easy mobility force. Maybe you even fluff that you are a scout company or some such. Engage on all Fronts and Linebreaker are “easy” and potentially fluffy ways to score points. You can design armies that aren’t “normal” meat-grinder type armies and choose a win condition that rewards your chosen playstyle.
It works on a spontaneous, tactical level. You’re facing Knights in a pickup game? Well hello Titan Slayer! You’re a hardened, elite force taking on hordes? Thanks Attrition! You’re fast and swarmy, but your opponent is slow and tough? Domination then Raise those banners! This is your house!
I *really* like the implementation of secondary objectives. This is rules done right. I really can’t express how inspired I find this to be. I am grateful to the rules team for this. There are many flaws, but this feels so good to play with. Just the right amount of *meaningful choice” going into the game. I love it.
Our games have been close-ish. I’ve been making newbie mistakes in list building and target priority, but even so I feel that our games haven’t been 1-turn blow outs like we had in 8th. Even though I was tabled after my 3rd turn in my 2nd game... that happens in 3-player games, politics... I ended the game with 36 points compared to the winner at 51. So even there, I was one “domination” turn away from victory despite being tabled. For me, that’s fun. The give and take through the game is really exciting and fun. I’ll see if I can post a pic from our last game later today.
On the whole, we’re all enjoying this edition much more than last... and last edition my one friend threw out his terrain thinking he was not going to play
40k again and gave his
SM (old marines) away. He’s back with his Eldar and having a great time.
9th gets the GBT seal of approval.
