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.

I think I’m really starting to like the Monolith.

Can have pretty solid shooting, though the Death Rays being Sustained Hits 3 is super swingy, they at least pack a decent enough punch to begin with.

Deep Strike sounds nice, but I’m not entirely sure we know it’s full rules yet. Beaming troops around is always going to be useful.

Particle Whip feels like a nice “anti-most-things” weapon. Certainly enough to retain flexibility once you’ve chosen between Death Rays or Flux Arc.

Of course time and experience and a clearer idea of the wider game will tell whether it’s tough enough to be something your opponent has to deal with. Could well be it deep strikes in, your opponent gives a polite applause, and then promptly deletes without too much trouble.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Can have pretty solid shooting, though the Death Rays being Sustained Hits 3 is super swingy, they at least pack a decent enough punch to begin with.

Then you'll be glad to know it is Sustained Hits D3, more dice rolling!

Remind me what Sustained Hits does exactly.

 AduroT wrote:
Remind me what Sustained Hits does exactly.

6s on a to-hit roll score X additional hits.

EightFoldPath wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Can have pretty solid shooting, though the Death Rays being Sustained Hits 3 is super swingy, they at least pack a decent enough punch to begin with.

Then you'll be glad to know it is Sustained Hits D3, more dice rolling!

Oh yeah 🤣🤣

I think I’d be annoyed if they weren’t a decent shooter to begin with. Certainly without knowledge of my dice result tinkering opportunities, I don’t think I’d ever be banking on those Sustained Hits. Which in turn could, I suppose, render them a bit pointless? Mainly if I’m focussing all four on the same target, it’s likely in trouble anyway, so those extra hits aren’t necessarily the boost they seem.

For riskier, more hopeful play, they could come into their own if I’m splitting fire though. For instance if I fancy a gamble on bagging a brace of Dreadnoughts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Speculating, if there’s a Stratagem which allows any To-Hit Roll to count as a 6? Death Rays definitely gain significant appeal.

 alextroy wrote:
To be fair, the Article is all about the Matched Play Mission rules. Narrative Play will certainly have a different look to it, as will Crusade (assuming they are slightly different things).

While it is true that the articles around missions have all been about Matched Play, there has also been no mention of Narrative missions being a thing in 10th. For all we know they may not be a feature, and games just use the Matched Play Mission decks.

 stonehorse wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
To be fair, the Article is all about the Matched Play Mission rules. Narrative Play will certainly have a different look to it, as will Crusade (assuming they are slightly different things).

While it is true that the articles around missions have all been about Matched Play, there has also been no mention of Narrative missions being a thing in 10th. For all we know they may not be a feature, and games just use the Matched Play Mission decks.

They could add agenda cards to the mix, either in addition or replacing the secondary objectives.

Or be it’s own thing. They could keep the old system for crusade/narrative play. It’s the place for wacky/asymmetrical missions.

Hopefully they give us an article on what the plan is. I really enjoyed crusade in 9th.

For those who have the new Monolith kit: Is a movement of 7" enough to allow it to move its length/width?

I was reviewing the CSM article last night, and I noticed that an Aspiring Champion can apparently be equipped with TWO heavy melee weapons.

Am I reading that right?

 Nevelon wrote:


Hopefully they give us an article on what the plan is. I really enjoyed crusade in 9th.

Well, we do know they plan on doing Crusade supplements(there's one included in the box that will be available separately) and that there's no more Crusade in the Codexes, relegating everything to the supplements. I want to say they said there were missions in the supplement, but I'd have to rewatch the stream to be sure.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
I was reviewing the CSM article last night, and I noticed that an Aspiring Champion can apparently be equipped with TWO heavy melee weapons.

Am I reading that right?

He can be equipped with it, but we don't know if he can use two at the same time, i.e. if 'Two-handed' or whatever is still a thing, or how two of the same weapon work in melee. We also do not know if there are general equipment rules that prevent equipping two two-handed weapons, those have been a thing in the past.

Tsagualsa wrote:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
I was reviewing the CSM article last night, and I noticed that an Aspiring Champion can apparently be equipped with TWO heavy melee weapons.

Am I reading that right?

He can be equipped with it, but we don't know if he can use two at the same time, i.e. if 'Two-handed' or whatever is still a thing, or how two of the same weapon work in melee.

Considering we saw the weapon and everything seems to be now on the weapon.. yes i think they have shown off what ammounts to basically already being a fault.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
For those who have the new Monolith kit: Is a movement of 7" enough to allow it to move its length/width?

Yes, barely

Unless having two of the same weapon makes them "twin-linked".

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Unless having two of the same weapon makes them "twin-linked".

you could've called it a pair and given it bonus attacks.... like a better rules system also from the same company. somehow.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
For those who have the new Monolith kit: Is a movement of 7" enough to allow it to move its length/width?

Monolith itself is a 6” square, while the base is 160mm, so 6.3” diameter. Knocking its movement down from the current 8” to just 7” does nearly render Fly irrelevant since it won’t be able to clear any but the narrowest of walls it started its turn next to.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
I was reviewing the CSM article last night, and I noticed that an Aspiring Champion can apparently be equipped with TWO heavy melee weapons.

Am I reading that right?

Seeing as number of attacks, to hit roll, etc is tied to the weapon jow and not the model holding the weapon... I think they could use two. Which gives them a lot of punch.

Total of 6 attacks hitting on 3+ with strength 8, -2 ap, and 2 damage a piece. Would make the model be great at ripping through Marines like wet paper bags.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nevelon wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
To be fair, the Article is all about the Matched Play Mission rules. Narrative Play will certainly have a different look to it, as will Crusade (assuming they are slightly different things).

While it is true that the articles around missions have all been about Matched Play, there has also been no mention of Narrative missions being a thing in 10th. For all we know they may not be a feature, and games just use the Matched Play Mission decks.

They could add agenda cards to the mix, either in addition or replacing the secondary objectives.

Or be it’s own thing. They could keep the old system for crusade/narrative play. It’s the place for wacky/asymmetrical missions.

Hopefully they give us an article on what the plan is. I really enjoyed crusade in 9th.

I sort of zoned out in 9th so have no idea how Crusade plays, of it leans heavy into narrative play, I'd be all for it.

Agenda cards could also work, I prefer games where all players have different secret missions, it makes the game a bit more interesting. So hidden agenda cards would be a great idea.

 stonehorse wrote:


I sort of zoned out in 9th so have no idea how Crusade plays, of it leans heavy into narrative play, I'd be all for it.

Agenda cards could also work, I prefer games where all players have different secret missions, it makes the game a bit more interesting. So hidden agenda cards would be a great idea.

9th Crusade had it’s own missions, and instead of secondary objectives you had agendas. Each player chose their own, and they did not impact the win/loss of the game, but worked to give units bonus XP to level up, or other cross-mission meta goals like furthering the tyranid bioforming of the planet.

I think the best way to play to monolith is to drop midfield and blast away. And teleport your troops around.

 stonehorse wrote:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
I was reviewing the CSM article last night, and I noticed that an Aspiring Champion can apparently be equipped with TWO heavy melee weapons.

Am I reading that right?

Seeing as number of attacks, to hit roll, etc is tied to the weapon jow and not the model holding the weapon... I think they could use two. Which gives them a lot of punch.

Total of 6 attacks hitting on 3+ with strength 8, -2 ap, and 2 damage a piece. Would make the model be great at ripping through Marines like wet paper bags.

We lack clarity as to how many melee weapons a model gets to use during the fight phase. Two Heavy Melee Weapons could mean 6 attacks, or you could be restricted to only using 1 melee weapon period. You will note that all Legionaries are armed with a Close Combat Weapon, so even replacing just one of your guns with a melee weapon leaves you armed with two melee weapons.

Given this, my bet is on being restricted to 1 melee weapon when you fight. It is cleaner that way.

 Nevelon wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:


I sort of zoned out in 9th so have no idea how Crusade plays, of it leans heavy into narrative play, I'd be all for it.

Agenda cards could also work, I prefer games where all players have different secret missions, it makes the game a bit more interesting. So hidden agenda cards would be a great idea.

9th Crusade had it’s own missions, and instead of secondary objectives you had agendas. Each player chose their own, and they did not impact the win/loss of the game, but worked to give units bonus XP to level up, or other cross-mission meta goals like furthering the tyranid bioforming of the planet.

OK, that sounds cool.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 alextroy wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
I was reviewing the CSM article last night, and I noticed that an Aspiring Champion can apparently be equipped with TWO heavy melee weapons.

Am I reading that right?

Seeing as number of attacks, to hit roll, etc is tied to the weapon jow and not the model holding the weapon... I think they could use two. Which gives them a lot of punch.

Total of 6 attacks hitting on 3+ with strength 8, -2 ap, and 2 damage a piece. Would make the model be great at ripping through Marines like wet paper bags.

We lack clarity as to how many melee weapons a model gets to use during the fight phase. Two Heavy Melee Weapons could mean 6 attacks, or you could be restricted to only using 1 melee weapon period. You will note that all Legionaries are armed with a Close Combat Weapon, so even replacing just one of your guns with a melee weapon leaves you armed with two melee weapons.

Given this, my bet is on being restricted to 1 melee weapon when you fight. It is cleaner that way.

Apply that same logic to vehicles, or other things with several ranged weapons. I suspect that 10th is going to be an edition where units kick out a lot of attacks, but have little ap. So mass volume is what takes things out of action.

Almost surely ranged weapons don't have that limitation.
Only melee will have to select one weapon to make the attacks.

Currently you can attack with all your Ranged Weapons, but only one Melee Weapon per attack. It can easily remain that way in 10th.

 alextroy wrote:
Currently you can attack with all your Ranged Weapons, but only one Melee Weapon per attack. It can easily remain that way in 10th.

Unit profiles don't have an Attacks stat anymore, so that doesn't work anymore.

Which would lead to the possibility that you can only attack with one weapon.

 alextroy wrote:
Which would lead to the possibility that you can only attack with one weapon.

It's 50/50 atm but logic says it'll be pick 1 melee qeapon the model is armed with imo.

Dudeface wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Which would lead to the possibility that you can only attack with one weapon.

It's 50/50 atm but logic says it'll be pick 1 melee weapon the model is armed with imo.

Agreed, just based on Roboute Guilliman / Abbadon for me currently. Along with the Void Dragon having to pick one of the two profiles for their spear.

 Dawnbringer wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Which would lead to the possibility that you can only attack with one weapon.

It's 50/50 atm but logic says it'll be pick 1 melee weapon the model is armed with imo.

Agreed, just based on Roboute Guilliman / Abbadon for me currently. Along with the Void Dragon having to pick one of the two profiles for their spear.

But the Void Dragon has a single weapon that specifically says to select one of the two available profiles. Guilliman and Abaddon don't have that on their datasheets, so we'd need to see the rules to know for certain. Personally, I'm in the 'one weapon camp' as well, but with GW, not even Tzeentch knows what they're going to do next.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 Dawnbringer wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Which would lead to the possibility that you can only attack with one weapon.

It's 50/50 atm but logic says it'll be pick 1 melee weapon the model is armed with imo.

Agreed, just based on Roboute Guilliman / Abbadon for me currently. Along with the Void Dragon having to pick one of the two profiles for their spear.

But the Void Dragon has a single weapon that specifically says to select one of the two available profiles. Guilliman and Abaddon don't have that on their datasheets, so we'd need to see the rules to know for certain. Personally, I'm in the 'one weapon camp' as well, but with GW, not even Tzeentch knows what they're going to do next.

It could very well be the case that the difference between having two weapons with distinct profiles and one weapon with two modes for CC is just down to WYSIWYG and fluff, that sounds like one of the things GW would do from their 'models first and second, rules a distant third' approach.

We also didn’t see the Void Dragon’s sheet, just a blurb about their melee stats.