Switch Theme:

Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in au
[MOD]
Making Stuff






Under the couch

Folks, let's keep the Covid discussion out of the thread, please.

Mentioning it as something that is having an effect on your game is ok, as it's rather obviously a thing that is happening. Debating the way that various governments are choosing to tackle it and the merits of those approaches is not on topic for this thread.

 
   
Made in ca
Nihilistic Necron Lord




The best State-Texas

I've been throuhgly enjoying my games of 9th so far, more than I did in 8th edition by a pretty significant margin.

That being said, I am hoping they can tune up the secondary's and missions in the 2021 GT pack. I'd really like to see secondary's like Abhor the Witch go away OR make the Psychic secondary's much easier to achieve. I think the best thing would just be remove both though.

I'd also like to see something done to help improve the first/second turn win disparity. I'm not sure what the answer is to that though.

4000+
6000+ Order. Unity. Obedience.
Thousand Sons 4000+
:Necron: Necron Discord: https://discord.com/invite/AGtpeD4  
   
Made in us
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus





How much of the obnoxiousness of Quinns is caused by the fact that, in a current competitive 40k setting, you MUST tailor your whole list to beat multiwound low-T-high-Sv MEQs or you WILL LOSE?

Because I look at a tournament winning, say, Admech list, and I see a high AP electropriest bomb, breachers for troops, dakkabots and the rifle rider guys and I'm like...yeah, quins are gonna eat that for lunch, that's totally tailored against marines because marines+custodes are still like 55% of the competitive list pool. And when I play against Quinns with an actual TAC list that includes anti light infantry stuff, I don't really seem to have that many issues.


I haven't played in a tourney either, but I kind of have the same question. When my group first started playing 9th, most of our lists were very general TAC lists and our 'Quins player wasn't doing as well. Now that we have started shaping the lists to be more reflective of what you might see in a tournament, he's doing better. It does seem that the rise of Marines is having a side effect of making Harlies a lot better. Strictly anecdotal of course, but it's an interesting thing to consider.

I think for us the biggest issue is still that the game is tactically very shallow. It's like AnomanderRake alluded to earlier, you don't really have as many choices as you would like. The game often boils down to "Do I take that objective and try to resist your attempt to kill me, or do I let YOU take it, then try to kill you ...". And even that isn't much of a choice given the large first turn win skew.

Add to that things like movement not truly mattering, smaller board sizes, etc. and you have a game that fixes some of the parts of 8th but shifts other issues.

Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in gb
Fully-charged Electropriest





 sfshilo wrote:
I'm not really inspired to play much. Covid hit, the game has become bloated, and it has not been as fun as it was when the indexes dropped and every army was balanced (for the most part)

Now it's a rock, paper, scissor, flamethrower cycle of new space marine releases that lacks any kind of incentive to play again.....


Indexhammer wasn't even close to "balanced"



“Do not ask me to approach the battle meekly, to creep through the shadows, or to quietly slip on my foes in the dark. I am Rogal Dorn, Imperial Fist, Space Marine, Emperor’s Champion. Let my enemies cower at my advance and tremble at the sight of me.”
-Rogal Dorn
 
   
Made in ca
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






 Corrode wrote:
 sfshilo wrote:
I'm not really inspired to play much. Covid hit, the game has become bloated, and it has not been as fun as it was when the indexes dropped and every army was balanced (for the most part)

Now it's a rock, paper, scissor, flamethrower cycle of new space marine releases that lacks any kind of incentive to play again.....


Indexhammer wasn't even close to "balanced"


More than what we have right now where armies have outdated stats and weapons just because they didnt get a codex release yet. CSM having only 1 wound, fusion guns not getting the new melta rule, plaguespitters not getting 12", not having faction-specific secondaries, etc. At the moment the division is obvious between 8th ed codexes and 9th ed codexes.
   
Made in gb
Fully-charged Electropriest





 VladimirHerzog wrote:
 Corrode wrote:
 sfshilo wrote:
I'm not really inspired to play much. Covid hit, the game has become bloated, and it has not been as fun as it was when the indexes dropped and every army was balanced (for the most part)

Now it's a rock, paper, scissor, flamethrower cycle of new space marine releases that lacks any kind of incentive to play again.....


Indexhammer wasn't even close to "balanced"


More than what we have right now where armies have outdated stats and weapons just because they didnt get a codex release yet. CSM having only 1 wound, fusion guns not getting the new melta rule, plaguespitters not getting 12", not having faction-specific secondaries, etc. At the moment the division is obvious between 8th ed codexes and 9th ed codexes.


Absolute nonsense. The Index era was catastrophically unbalanced and it was immediately observable how index vs. codex armies stacked up.



“Do not ask me to approach the battle meekly, to creep through the shadows, or to quietly slip on my foes in the dark. I am Rogal Dorn, Imperial Fist, Space Marine, Emperor’s Champion. Let my enemies cower at my advance and tremble at the sight of me.”
-Rogal Dorn
 
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
 Corrode wrote:
 sfshilo wrote:
I'm not really inspired to play much. Covid hit, the game has become bloated, and it has not been as fun as it was when the indexes dropped and every army was balanced (for the most part)

Now it's a rock, paper, scissor, flamethrower cycle of new space marine releases that lacks any kind of incentive to play again.....


Indexhammer wasn't even close to "balanced"


More than what we have right now where armies have outdated stats and weapons just because they didnt get a codex release yet. CSM having only 1 wound, fusion guns not getting the new melta rule, plaguespitters not getting 12", not having faction-specific secondaries, etc. At the moment the division is obvious between 8th ed codexes and 9th ed codexes.


It really depends on what you played back then, for my armies it wasn't a good time. Orks had the worst set of rules in history for example with litterally EVERYTHING unplayable (AKA utterly overcosted) except for boyz and 3-4 supporting characters. Dark Eldar became even worse than they were in 7th, and cherry on top GW also changed their name. SW were so overcosted that their lists looked like custodes ones.

AM had some builds that were flat out impossible to defeat for the majority of other armies.

So yeah, index 8th only worked for a few chaos and imperium armies. Other than that it was a total garbage, I remember at that time I really missed 7th edition which was something I could have never said during 7th. Too bad that even playing 3 armies (and proxing a 4th one) I saw my first codex 10 months after the released of 8th edition.

Not to mention that index vs codex was extremely more unbalanced than 8th codex vs 9th codex.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/02 14:31:24


 
   
Made in fr
Mekboy Hammerin' Somethin'






Harlquins ignoring many rules, including the most important ones (AP and those related to terrain) as well as, basically, distances is IMO not great game design.
But if GW wants to stay on that orad, OK fine, but at least cost the clowns appropriately. They always were a very elite army. Now they they should be to Eldar what Custodes are to SM.

Ere we go ere we go ere we go
Corona Givin’ Umies Da good ol Krulpin they deserve huh huh 
   
Made in ca
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






 addnid wrote:
Harlquins ignoring many rules, including the most important ones (AP and those related to terrain) as well as, basically, distances is IMO not great game design.
But if GW wants to stay on that orad, OK fine, but at least cost the clowns appropriately. They always were a very elite army. Now they they should be to Eldar what Custodes are to SM.


People keep bringing up flip belts but do they actually do anything? The whole army is either infantry or flying, they already ignore most terrain.

   
Made in us
Waaagh! Warbiker





 Corrode wrote:
 VladimirHerzog wrote:
 Corrode wrote:
 sfshilo wrote:
I'm not really inspired to play much. Covid hit, the game has become bloated, and it has not been as fun as it was when the indexes dropped and every army was balanced (for the most part)

Now it's a rock, paper, scissor, flamethrower cycle of new space marine releases that lacks any kind of incentive to play again.....


Indexhammer wasn't even close to "balanced"


More than what we have right now where armies have outdated stats and weapons just because they didnt get a codex release yet. CSM having only 1 wound, fusion guns not getting the new melta rule, plaguespitters not getting 12", not having faction-specific secondaries, etc. At the moment the division is obvious between 8th ed codexes and 9th ed codexes.


Absolute nonsense. The Index era was catastrophically unbalanced and it was immediately observable how index vs. codex armies stacked up.


Try this: take the 8th Index rules but use the points from Chapter Approved 2019. Makes for a more streamlined game when you use the more balanced points and remove all of the bloated layers of stratagems, chapter/faction/subfaction traits, relics, warlord traits, etc. that the 8th and 9th codexes add. But even then, I'd still likely recommend the new Apocalypse rules over any of the 8th/9th rulesets when given a choice.

 
   
Made in de
Oozing Plague Marine Terminator





Index 40K was extremely unbalanced AND bland - why would anyone want to play that? If I was tired of the layers of special rules I'd rather play 1page40K instead of an Alpha Version of the 40K rules.
   
Made in us
Waaagh! Warbiker





Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Index 40K was extremely unbalanced AND bland - why would anyone want to play that? If I was tired of the layers of special rules I'd rather play 1page40K instead of an Alpha Version of the 40K rules.


One player's bland is another player's streamlined. Some of us don't like to have to memorize dozens of stratagems, subfaction bonuses, warlord traits and relic abilities to play a fun beer and pretzels game - and that's just from one codex, not including the 20+ other codexes that you may be playing against. I enjoyed earlier editions of 40k just fine without such additional layers of rules, and the fact that we have them now is simply to disguise the bare-bones nature of the current core rules.

 
   
Made in us
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan




Mexico

Personally I prefer that the core rules are bare-bones, while the actual meat is in the codex.
   
Made in us
Waaagh! Warbiker





 Tyran wrote:
Personally I prefer that the core rules are bare-bones, while the actual meat is in the codex.


That's a valid preference; different strokes for different folks. It definitely does play into GW's marketing strategy, requiring players to purchase more codexes to learn how other armies operate.

I happen to prefer a bit more substance in the core rules, including one or two pages of true universal special rules (USRs) with terminology that is shared across all codexes and units that utilize those rules (ex. Deep Strike; Infiltrate; Fearless; Fleet; Feel No Pain; etc.), instead of each unit having a different term for the same rule. That way if you mention your unit has "x" USRs, I know immediately how they operate and what they are capable of. Less rules to memorize that are easily applied to all armies. I personally would also do away with the card game mechanics of stratagems and give units back their abilities they once had that have now been turned into stratagems (ex. Smoke Launchers; True Grit; Ork Bikers' Smoke Clouds; etc.). Relics and Warlord traits are fun for adding fluff but are easily forgettable, and often vary significantly in effectiveness. I'd just include them as wargear options like many used to be, and price them in points accordingly (ex. Necron's Veil of Darkness).

 
   
Made in us
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan




Mexico

Regarding USRs, a page or two would be fine with a condition that they are true USRs, something that is shared by all, and I mean all, factions.

During 6th and 7th editions, USRs were so inflated with rules like Rage, Zealot, Vector Dance and who knows what else.

Rules that I personally never used and I cannot even recall if I played against something that used them. That is not a USRs.

It also got kinda ridiculous with rules referencing rules referencing rules.

E.G. This unit is has X wargear, so you go to the wargear page on the codex to see what X does, and X wargear turns the unit into Y unit type, so you a have to go the rulebook to see what Y unit type does, and you see Y unit type has Z special rule, so you go to the USRs page to see what Z does.
   
Made in us
Waaagh! Warbiker





I totally agree with your views on USRs. I found 4th/5th editions' USRs to work quite well, as well as the similar amount and types of USRs in the new Apocalypse.

 
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







 Tyran wrote:
Regarding USRs, a page or two would be fine with a condition that they are true USRs, something that is shared by all, and I mean all, factions.

During 6th and 7th editions, USRs were so inflated with rules like Rage, Zealot, Vector Dance and who knows what else.

Rules that I personally never used and I cannot even recall if I played against something that used them. That is not a USRs.

It also got kinda ridiculous with rules referencing rules referencing rules.

E.G. This unit is has X wargear, so you go to the wargear page on the codex to see what X does, and X wargear turns the unit into Y unit type, so you a have to go the rulebook to see what Y unit type does, and you see Y unit type has Z special rule, so you go to the USRs page to see what Z does.


In my opinion the biggest failing of both 8e/9e 40k and Sigmar, on the USR front at least, is that it's no longer possible to read the core rules and get a good sense of how the game works. The core rules describe a set of basic interactions and say "and then go read all the Codexes!", and if you don't read the right Codexes you may have no idea that people can move or charge out of sequence, or ignore line of sight, or charge easily out of deep strike, or stack bonuses to move-run-charge something 40" away, or a whole bunch of other random "gotcha" moments that make the game feel random, arbitrary, and unstructured. 9e 40k is feeling increasingly like Warmachine to me; you need to have read in detail every army list you come across or you'll get blindsided by some trick you had no idea what was coming.

I agree that GW went too far with irrelevant/self-referential USRs shared by too few books in 7th, but in the course of rebuilding USRs for my own oldhammer project I don't think "is in every Codex" is a feasible bar for what should be a USR. Tyranids have no melta weapons, for instance; does that mean melta shouldn't be a USR when it appears on a whole bunch of weapons across eleven Codexes (SM, Sisters, Guard, Knights, CSM, Chaos Knights, Death Guard, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequins, Tau)? I tried to go the other approach and ask "is this a signature rule that defines this one army/unit and appears only on it?" before writing bespoke rules for anyone, and then tried to apply the USRs I had more broadly (ex. laser lock on the 6e/7e Scatter Laser does the same thing as the co-axial rule on a few Guard tanks, so why not make it the same USR?).

As to the problem of the chain of referencing rulebooks that'd be easily solved by the implementation of MTG-style reminder text (write down the name of the rule on the datasheet, and then write down exactly what the rule does, so people who know all the USRs can look at the name of the rule and move on while people who don't can see what it does right there).

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in us
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan




Mexico

 AnomanderRake wrote:


In my opinion the biggest failing of both 8e/9e 40k and Sigmar, on the USR front at least, is that it's no longer possible to read the core rules and get a good sense of how the game works. The core rules describe a set of basic interactions and say "and then go read all the Codexes!", and if you don't read the right Codexes you may have no idea that people can move or charge out of sequence, or ignore line of sight, or charge easily out of deep strike, or stack bonuses to move-run-charge something 40" away, or a whole bunch of other random "gotcha" moments that make the game feel random, arbitrary, and unstructured. 9e 40k is feeling increasingly like Warmachine to me; you need to have read in detail every army list you come across or you'll get blindsided by some trick you had no idea what was coming.


That is an inherent part of having such asymmetric game. Each faction, specially ones like Genestealer Cults, are meant to operate in completely different ways.
It means you will get blindsided a lot each time you fight a faction for the first time, but it is arguably one of the reason 40k has been successful.

I agree that GW went too far with irrelevant/self-referential USRs shared by too few books in 7th, but in the course of rebuilding USRs for my ow oldhammer project I don't think "is in every Codex" is a feasible bar for what should be a USR. Tyranids have no melta weapons, for instance; does that mean melta shouldn't be a USR when it appears on a whole bunch of weapons across eleven Codexes (SM, Sisters, Guard, Knights, CSM, Chaos Knights, Death Guard, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequins, Tau)? I tried to go the other approach and ask "is this a signature rule that defines this one army/unit and appears only on it?" before writing bespoke rules for anyone, and then tried to apply the USRs I had more broadly (ex. laser lock on the 6e/7e Scatter Laser does the same thing as the co-axial rule on a few Guard tanks, so why not make it the same USR?).

That is lowering the bar too much. Two units having the same rule in the game, even if they are from different factions, should not make a USRs.
Sure maybe "every codex" is unfeasible, but somewhere between 50% to 80% of codexes, something you are almost guaranteed to fight or have in your arsenal.

As to the problem of the chain of referencing rulebooks that'd be easily solved by the implementation of MTG-style reminder text (write down the name of the rule on the datasheet, and then write down exactly what the rule does, so people who know all the USRs can look at the name of the rule and move on while people who don't can see what it does right there).

In that I agree.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





It doesn't have to be bland vs streamlined. GW has proved with games like Adeptus Titanicus, Blood Bowl, and Epic Armageddon that it can do streamlined and interesting.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




For the most part, COVID is killing the gaming scene pretty badly, but the games I have gotten in haven't been that bad. I do have to note though that 2.0 and Spacemarines on steroids (9th edition Marines) is just a giant detriment to the gaming community, both in friendly and tournament games.

I played one game against a particularly talented SM UM player and only won because he took eradicators instead of aggressors since he didn't know what army I was playing. Changing out that 1 unit would have won him the game.

The difference in power between 9th edition Marines and Orkz is almost insurmountable unless I revert to a tournament style skew list and take Ghaz and his boyz. And even then it will only work if my opponent doesn't list tailor since SM currently have more than enough tools in their kit to deal with horde.

Personally I am hoping we get some better balance and soon because once the events start opening up again its going to get nasty.

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




So the marines who have multiple builds and multiple ways to play are the ones that are making 9th ed worse, and not armies that have one build, like orks with their 1 goff/ghaz build?

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Karol wrote:
So the marines who have multiple builds and multiple ways to play are the ones that are making 9th ed worse, and not armies that have one build, like orks with their 1 goff/ghaz build?


Lets flip this on its head Karol and you can take a peak at it from the other side.

How would you feel if SM's as a faction were so incredibly over powered by everything ork that the only way you stood a chance against them was to take a rather boring list/playstyle and really only have a chance to win if the Ork didn't list tailor against you that much.

On the flipside, how would you feel if every single build you tried against Orkz failed and the ork player had units that were better than yours in basically every way possible?


 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in ca
Secretive Dark Angels Veteran



Canada

SemperMortis wrote:
For the most part, COVID is killing the gaming scene pretty badly, but the games I have gotten in haven't been that bad. I do have to note though that 2.0 and Spacemarines on steroids (9th edition Marines) is just a giant detriment to the gaming community, both in friendly and tournament games.

I played one game against a particularly talented SM UM player and only won because he took eradicators instead of aggressors since he didn't know what army I was playing. Changing out that 1 unit would have won him the game.

The difference in power between 9th edition Marines and Orkz is almost insurmountable unless I revert to a tournament style skew list and take Ghaz and his boyz. And even then it will only work if my opponent doesn't list tailor since SM currently have more than enough tools in their kit to deal with horde.

Personally I am hoping we get some better balance and soon because once the events start opening up again its going to get nasty.


I guess it can always be a bad game if it is a tourney list against a fellow looking for a “narrative” experience. Your point about your opponent being beat by you because he took one unit instead of another could mean that the game is working as designed. We shouldn’t list tailor. If you are in a competitive tourney game then it makes sense to bring a competitive tourney list, unless I am completely misreading your post?

If what you are saying is that each Codex should have several paths to victory then I suppose I cannot disagree. Still, Space Marines in 9th are toned down. We will see what comes for Orks, who can indeed do quite well in 9th.

All you have to do is fire three rounds a minute, and stand 
   
Made in ca
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






SemperMortis wrote:
Karol wrote:
So the marines who have multiple builds and multiple ways to play are the ones that are making 9th ed worse, and not armies that have one build, like orks with their 1 goff/ghaz build?


Lets flip this on its head Karol and you can take a peak at it from the other side.

How would you feel if SM's as a faction were so incredibly over powered by everything ork that the only way you stood a chance against them was to take a rather boring list/playstyle and really only have a chance to win if the Ork didn't list tailor against you that much.

On the flipside, how would you feel if every single build you tried against Orkz failed and the ork player had units that were better than yours in basically every way possible?



They don't care. They've shown multiple times that they're incapable of empathy.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




TangoTwoBravo wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
For the most part, COVID is killing the gaming scene pretty badly, but the games I have gotten in haven't been that bad. I do have to note though that 2.0 and Spacemarines on steroids (9th edition Marines) is just a giant detriment to the gaming community, both in friendly and tournament games.

I played one game against a particularly talented SM UM player and only won because he took eradicators instead of aggressors since he didn't know what army I was playing. Changing out that 1 unit would have won him the game.

The difference in power between 9th edition Marines and Orkz is almost insurmountable unless I revert to a tournament style skew list and take Ghaz and his boyz. And even then it will only work if my opponent doesn't list tailor since SM currently have more than enough tools in their kit to deal with horde.

Personally I am hoping we get some better balance and soon because once the events start opening up again its going to get nasty.


I guess it can always be a bad game if it is a tourney list against a fellow looking for a “narrative” experience. Your point about your opponent being beat by you because he took one unit instead of another could mean that the game is working as designed. We shouldn’t list tailor. If you are in a competitive tourney game then it makes sense to bring a competitive tourney list, unless I am completely misreading your post?

If what you are saying is that each Codex should have several paths to victory then I suppose I cannot disagree. Still, Space Marines in 9th are toned down. We will see what comes for Orks, who can indeed do quite well in 9th.


The game against the UM player was set up as tournament prep, as in, we both brought our best lists we could manage. I had a Horde army backed by KFF big mek, painboy, warboss on warbike etc (Of note, I was playing as deathskullz not goff)

He brought a comp list filled with lots of primaris infantry and gravis infantry. He had 2 units of eradicators and 1 unit of the plasma versions. Had he given even a fraction of those points over to anti-horde he would have won. And from what I have seen from tournaments, that sums up how orkz are winning perfectly. We win because nobody brings enough anti-infantry weapons to the game and instead builds a list to deal with T4 and T5 3+ infantry. And as I have previously mentioned, My orkz don't really notice a difference between getting hit by a Bolt round at AP-1 and a Melta shot.

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

SemperMortis wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
For the most part, COVID is killing the gaming scene pretty badly, but the games I have gotten in haven't been that bad. I do have to note though that 2.0 and Spacemarines on steroids (9th edition Marines) is just a giant detriment to the gaming community, both in friendly and tournament games.

I played one game against a particularly talented SM UM player and only won because he took eradicators instead of aggressors since he didn't know what army I was playing. Changing out that 1 unit would have won him the game.

The difference in power between 9th edition Marines and Orkz is almost insurmountable unless I revert to a tournament style skew list and take Ghaz and his boyz. And even then it will only work if my opponent doesn't list tailor since SM currently have more than enough tools in their kit to deal with horde.

Personally I am hoping we get some better balance and soon because once the events start opening up again its going to get nasty.


I guess it can always be a bad game if it is a tourney list against a fellow looking for a “narrative” experience. Your point about your opponent being beat by you because he took one unit instead of another could mean that the game is working as designed. We shouldn’t list tailor. If you are in a competitive tourney game then it makes sense to bring a competitive tourney list, unless I am completely misreading your post?

If what you are saying is that each Codex should have several paths to victory then I suppose I cannot disagree. Still, Space Marines in 9th are toned down. We will see what comes for Orks, who can indeed do quite well in 9th.


The game against the UM player was set up as tournament prep, as in, we both brought our best lists we could manage. I had a Horde army backed by KFF big mek, painboy, warboss on warbike etc (Of note, I was playing as deathskullz not goff)

He brought a comp list filled with lots of primaris infantry and gravis infantry. He had 2 units of eradicators and 1 unit of the plasma versions. Had he given even a fraction of those points over to anti-horde he would have won. And from what I have seen from tournaments, that sums up how orkz are winning perfectly. We win because nobody brings enough anti-infantry weapons to the game and instead builds a list to deal with T4 and T5 3+ infantry. And as I have previously mentioned, My orkz don't really notice a difference between getting hit by a Bolt round at AP-1 and a Melta shot.


Lol. In editions past it used to be that people tended not to bring enough AT - to an environment where they could reasonably expect to have to face armour. And then they'd bitch & sob about their losses to those of us who always brought more/heavier armour than what the common group-think said to expect
Sad to see that nowdays it's expanded to include being unprepaired for basic infantry. In editions where you'll surely be seeing infantry.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




ccs wrote:


Lol. In editions past it used to be that people tended not to bring enough AT - to an environment where they could reasonably expect to have to face armour. And then they'd bitch & sob about their losses to those of us who always brought more/heavier armour than what the common group-think said to expect
Sad to see that nowdays it's expanded to include being unprepaired for basic infantry. In editions where you'll surely be seeing infantry.


Ohh he and most SM tournament players are more than prepared for infantry. What they aren't prepared for though is CHEAP infantry.

I posted the lists for the last 4 SM winning lists a few days ago, and it was like 90%+ T4 and T5 3+ save infantry. But as I previously mentioned, my orkz don't really notice much of a difference between getting drilled by an AP-1 Bolter and a Plasma gun Both reliably kill my ork in 1 or 2 shots at most. Marines, Primaris and especially Gravis absolutely notice the difference. And since SM make up like 20-30% of the entire game, most lists are built to deal with them which ignores my little green menaces


 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






ccs wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
For the most part, COVID is killing the gaming scene pretty badly, but the games I have gotten in haven't been that bad. I do have to note though that 2.0 and Spacemarines on steroids (9th edition Marines) is just a giant detriment to the gaming community, both in friendly and tournament games.

I played one game against a particularly talented SM UM player and only won because he took eradicators instead of aggressors since he didn't know what army I was playing. Changing out that 1 unit would have won him the game.

The difference in power between 9th edition Marines and Orkz is almost insurmountable unless I revert to a tournament style skew list and take Ghaz and his boyz. And even then it will only work if my opponent doesn't list tailor since SM currently have more than enough tools in their kit to deal with horde.

Personally I am hoping we get some better balance and soon because once the events start opening up again its going to get nasty.


I guess it can always be a bad game if it is a tourney list against a fellow looking for a “narrative” experience. Your point about your opponent being beat by you because he took one unit instead of another could mean that the game is working as designed. We shouldn’t list tailor. If you are in a competitive tourney game then it makes sense to bring a competitive tourney list, unless I am completely misreading your post?

If what you are saying is that each Codex should have several paths to victory then I suppose I cannot disagree. Still, Space Marines in 9th are toned down. We will see what comes for Orks, who can indeed do quite well in 9th.


The game against the UM player was set up as tournament prep, as in, we both brought our best lists we could manage. I had a Horde army backed by KFF big mek, painboy, warboss on warbike etc (Of note, I was playing as deathskullz not goff)

He brought a comp list filled with lots of primaris infantry and gravis infantry. He had 2 units of eradicators and 1 unit of the plasma versions. Had he given even a fraction of those points over to anti-horde he would have won. And from what I have seen from tournaments, that sums up how orkz are winning perfectly. We win because nobody brings enough anti-infantry weapons to the game and instead builds a list to deal with T4 and T5 3+ infantry. And as I have previously mentioned, My orkz don't really notice a difference between getting hit by a Bolt round at AP-1 and a Melta shot.


Lol. In editions past it used to be that people tended not to bring enough AT - to an environment where they could reasonably expect to have to face armour. And then they'd bitch & sob about their losses to those of us who always brought more/heavier armour than what the common group-think said to expect
Sad to see that nowdays it's expanded to include being unprepaired for basic infantry. In editions where you'll surely be seeing infantry.


At a certain point it's just a numbers game. These spammy horde lists account for like 5% of all lists total. That gives you a roughly 40% chance of running into an infantry spam list in a three round tournament. Meanwhile, heavy infantry makes up 57% of the current game if you just combine astartes, custodes, and death guard (not counting armies like csm since I feel like their competitive lists are probably more like spamming vehicles)

If you prep for hordes, and end up taking a tac list against top-tier competitive marines, you're dead meat. And you WILL, you WILL face competitive marines.

It's a basic metagame pick to skew hard vs power armor and strip away all your antihorde defenses.

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

the_scotsman wrote:
ccs wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
For the most part, COVID is killing the gaming scene pretty badly, but the games I have gotten in haven't been that bad. I do have to note though that 2.0 and Spacemarines on steroids (9th edition Marines) is just a giant detriment to the gaming community, both in friendly and tournament games.

I played one game against a particularly talented SM UM player and only won because he took eradicators instead of aggressors since he didn't know what army I was playing. Changing out that 1 unit would have won him the game.

The difference in power between 9th edition Marines and Orkz is almost insurmountable unless I revert to a tournament style skew list and take Ghaz and his boyz. And even then it will only work if my opponent doesn't list tailor since SM currently have more than enough tools in their kit to deal with horde.

Personally I am hoping we get some better balance and soon because once the events start opening up again its going to get nasty.


I guess it can always be a bad game if it is a tourney list against a fellow looking for a “narrative” experience. Your point about your opponent being beat by you because he took one unit instead of another could mean that the game is working as designed. We shouldn’t list tailor. If you are in a competitive tourney game then it makes sense to bring a competitive tourney list, unless I am completely misreading your post?

If what you are saying is that each Codex should have several paths to victory then I suppose I cannot disagree. Still, Space Marines in 9th are toned down. We will see what comes for Orks, who can indeed do quite well in 9th.


The game against the UM player was set up as tournament prep, as in, we both brought our best lists we could manage. I had a Horde army backed by KFF big mek, painboy, warboss on warbike etc (Of note, I was playing as deathskullz not goff)

He brought a comp list filled with lots of primaris infantry and gravis infantry. He had 2 units of eradicators and 1 unit of the plasma versions. Had he given even a fraction of those points over to anti-horde he would have won. And from what I have seen from tournaments, that sums up how orkz are winning perfectly. We win because nobody brings enough anti-infantry weapons to the game and instead builds a list to deal with T4 and T5 3+ infantry. And as I have previously mentioned, My orkz don't really notice a difference between getting hit by a Bolt round at AP-1 and a Melta shot.


Lol. In editions past it used to be that people tended not to bring enough AT - to an environment where they could reasonably expect to have to face armour. And then they'd bitch & sob about their losses to those of us who always brought more/heavier armour than what the common group-think said to expect
Sad to see that nowdays it's expanded to include being unprepaired for basic infantry. In editions where you'll surely be seeing infantry.


At a certain point it's just a numbers game. These spammy horde lists account for like 5% of all lists total. That gives you a roughly 40% chance of running into an infantry spam list in a three round tournament. Meanwhile, heavy infantry makes up 57% of the current game if you just combine astartes, custodes, and death guard (not counting armies like csm since I feel like their competitive lists are probably more like spamming vehicles)

If you prep for hordes, and end up taking a tac list against top-tier competitive marines, you're dead meat. And you WILL, you WILL face competitive marines.

It's a basic metagame pick to skew hard vs power armor and strip away all your antihorde defenses.


It's always been the case to expect to have to kill Marines. You can kill a Marine? Then you can kill anything else. (it's like that line from Dodgeball: "If you can dodge a wrench....")
But that's never been a good excuse to not also bring a healthy dose of AT/AH to deal with those types.
Currently? If there's Ork players about, then you KNOW someone's bringing the Green Horde. Assume you're going to be the unlucky guy who draws that match-up & plan for it. That doesn't mean you have to give up all you're anti-marine capability btw.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I've been taking a break from 40k and surprised myself by actually getting into and enjoying AoS, something I thought would never happen. I still find the overarching lore and setup lame, but I've come to appreciate the creativity inherent in a lot of the more small-scale world-building and army design.

In most ways it feels like a more exciting game to be playing, precisely because the frontiers are still so open and they are taking a lot more risks with it than they are with 40k.

I have even learned not to hate the double turn mechanic - while it undoubtedly injects a lot more variance into the game than 40k has, I've come to appreciate the way that it shakes things up too, forcing you to plan for multiple contingencies and make hard choices about which course of action to take. 40k feels a lot more predictable and "solved" in the sense that the ideal course of action is usually pretty clear if you're an experienced player, and it's mainly just a matter of execution.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: