40k 9th Editon

LordSplata wrote:

Or we get some special rule allowing a Kabal, a coven and a cult being together (as the codex was designed this way)

Just like GW gave us rules to exempt Court of the Archon from the Rule of Three.

Or like how they gave us rules to exempt Archons from the Rule of Three.

Or like how we got rules to compensate for our minuscule HQ selection, like SMs, Harlequins etc. got.

HERO wrote:

LordSplata wrote:

Or we get some special rule allowing a Kabal, a coven and a cult being together (as the codex was designed this way)

I am hoping that useless patrol rule of ours turns into just this instead.

This might be useful for once

I have a suspicion we will be revisiting the value of our mercenaries when the detachment costs force us to play mono subfaction.

Soulless Samurai wrote:

LordSplata wrote:

Or we get some special rule allowing a Kabal, a coven and a cult being together (as the codex was designed this way)

Just like GW gave us rules to exempt Court of the Archon from the Rule of Three.

Or like how they gave us rules to exempt Archons from the Rule of Three.

Or like how we got rules to compensate for our minuscule HQ selection, like SMs, Harlequins etc. got.

They won't make exception for us. But they can make special rules in our codex.

dumpeal wrote:

Soulless Samurai wrote:

LordSplata wrote:

Or we get some special rule allowing a Kabal, a coven and a cult being together (as the codex was designed this way)

Just like GW gave us rules to exempt Court of the Archon from the Rule of Three.

Or like how they gave us rules to exempt Archons from the Rule of Three.

Or like how we got rules to compensate for our minuscule HQ selection, like SMs, Harlequins etc. got.

They won't make exception for us. But they can make special rules in our codex.

To do that, they first need to give us a Codex. But judging by the fact that current codexes (what is the plural for codes exactly?) will still work with 9th, I am guessing that might take a while.
So, who's ready for another year of waiting until we get a useful codex?

Gelmir wrote:

dumpeal wrote:

Soulless Samurai wrote:

LordSplata wrote:

Or we get some special rule allowing a Kabal, a coven and a cult being together (as the codex was designed this way)

Just like GW gave us rules to exempt Court of the Archon from the Rule of Three.

Or like how they gave us rules to exempt Archons from the Rule of Three.

Or like how we got rules to compensate for our minuscule HQ selection, like SMs, Harlequins etc. got.

They won't make exception for us. But they can make special rules in our codex.

To do that, they first need to give us a Codex. But judging by the fact that current codexes (what is the plural for codes exactly?) will still work with 9th, I am guessing that might take a while.
So, who's ready for another year of waiting until we get a useful codex?

well maybe, and thats a huge maybe, they will release the codexes in the same order as PA releases and also judging by the fact that we got BS while other factions got a bunch of stuff so we are among the first to get one? lol

It would be hilarious though if they start puking out space marine codexes again becasue you know every edition HAS to start and end with a speihs mahrins codex

They likely will have a new SM codex for those Primaris models to be released.

Quote :

(what is the plural for codes exactly?)

That would be 'codices'

As always I am hoping they release some nice Eldar related goodies, but I would be surprised

GW just had a studio Q&A. Some takeaways that I got from it.

Lucky shots are universal now (6s always hit).

Terrain has been completely reworked. Some types of terrain have the 'Obsured' tag, which means that they always block LOS, regardless of true LOS. Knights and monsters will be able to punch things that are within reach if they are on the 2nd floor of a building.

modifiers are capped at +1/-1 (I hope that Eldar flyers get some other sort of advantage that keeps them somewhat durable, otherwise they're going to be getting shot down really easily without the ability to stack any mods)

Monsters get the same 'shoot in melee' ability that tanks get.

Everyone starts with the same amount of CP, depending on the size of the game. You spend CP to unlock additional codices for allied forces, so mono-faction = more CP. You don't get additional CP from detachments.

You spend CP to place units in strategic reserve. This allows you to bring them on from the board edge. The longer you keep them in reserve, the more choice you have in where you can bring them in from. For example, if you wait enough turns, you can bring them in from your opponent's board edge.

The Morale system has been updated, but no specifics were given.

It's all looking good. The terrain in particular is a godsend, I'm looking forward to skulking in the shadows again

-CP is based on game size, there are 4 game sizes
-CP cost to soup units
-CP cost to put anything into reserves (multiple ways of coming onto the board)
-Blast weapon special rule coming back
-Mortal wounds stay the same
-No large changed to detachments
-Huge terrain changes, terrain will be marked (and easily noted) with special rules, such as 'Obsured' meaning it blocks LoS, no mention of other rules
-Knights/Monsters can fight up floors to a point
-MC's are getting vehicle rules for shooting while in combat, etc.. (MC might be better at some of these rules)
-Modifiers are capped to only +1/-1
-Flyers can go off and on the board and will have more special rules for them, also units will have special rules/strats to interact with flyers
-Moral is being rework
-Game phases are staying the same
-Lucky Shots is a core rule now
-Narrative into new codices
-3 ways to play is still in game and missions for each are different
-Missions are different and balanced for each point size game
-New Narrative is unit/army building with options such as "A dead Marine can be put into a Dreadnought"
-New special characters coming out into the future
-New codices will have what they think are the best (didn't way what they mean by best) of the old codices and new PA rules
-Penalty for leaving combat/Fallback
-Power levels will be looked at and adjusted (but in a different way to Points and for different reasons)


I think thats everything.

Can't say I'm thrilled by most of what I'm hearing, honestly.

I for sure am personally. 1/2 of those are things that i wanted anyways lol.

I do think that -1/+1 mod cap seems a little extreme. I was expecting/hoping for a -2/+2 mod cap.

krayd wrote:

I do think that -1/+1 mod cap seems a little extreme. I was expecting/hoping for a -2/+2 mod cap.

We don't know the rules for cap yet, it could be cap per player, so i can be -1 but you can be -1 also for a total of -2 (like if i had my own rule and you had your own rule).

Also they said stacking cap, nit a -1/+1 cap, so if something said -2 from a single rule it assuming would still be -2.

krayd wrote:

I do think that -1/+1 mod cap seems a little extreme. I was expecting/hoping for a -2/+2 mod cap.

I wouldn't mind that at all if it only affected permanent rules such as "Hard to Hit" and "Fieldcraft" from the Alaitoc Craftworld.

But spending two CPs for Lightningfast Reactions to make an aircraft -2? That's really not over the top.

Also, am I the only one who is concerned that Tau can now even shoot in combat?

The Strange Dark One wrote:

krayd wrote:

I do think that -1/+1 mod cap seems a little extreme. I was expecting/hoping for a -2/+2 mod cap.

I wouldn't mind that at all if it only affected permanent rules such as "Hard to Hit" and "Fieldcraft" from the Alaitoc Craftworld.

But spending two CPs for Lightningfast Reactions to make an aircraft -2? That's really not over the top.

Also, am I the only one who is concerned that Tau can now even shoot in combat?

Hard to say right now b.c there is melee OW now, imagine Talos in combat, so what if they shoot them (depending on what is shooting that is). But lets say they really wanted to shoot our troops, at least now they have a hard choice, take a few wounds from the Talos or shoot the Talos.

We also don't know if shooting into combat has a Penalty or a set BS like OW.

I will be eagerly awaiting the morale phase rules changes. We are decently positioned to exploit a more dangerous morale phase.

On the other hand, seeing more tanks and monsters plays into our strengths, too.

Since blast weapons are getting bonuses vs. hordes, I'm hoping that certain dedicated anti-tank weapons *cough* dark lance *cough* get a damage bonus vs vehicles/monsters.

Mostly like what I'm seeing. Agree on the +1/-1 thing, being bad for us, but I'll reserve judgement until I see it all. That seems like one of those things that wouldn't last even if they did initially try to stick to it. Sooner or later they'd want to convey something being "extra sneaky" and will have a workaround. It's why you never want to be an early codex.

So from these rumors, I am seeing the following...

Eldar dark reapers will be shelved. Too expensive to hit on 3's when everything else hits on 4's.

DE Mandrakes may see a return as late game objective grabbers via coming in on opponents table edge

DE Reaper may become viable, even if the stupid "heavy" rule stays. The beam (good vs tanks) and Blast (Now very good vs troops) make it quite versatile.

Talos may become even more popular- expect a huge price hike.

Wyches... oh dear god. the 'no escape' rule... does that help or hurt them now? Ugh.

Skulnbonz wrote:

So from these rumors, I am seeing the following...

Eldar dark reapers will be shelved. Too expensive to hit on 3's when everything else hits on 4's.

DE Mandrakes may see a return as late game objective grabbers via coming in on opponents table edge

DE Reaper may become viable, even if the stupid "heavy" rule stays. The beam (good vs tanks) and Blast (Now very good vs troops) make it quite versatile.

Talos may become even more popular- expect a huge price hike.

Wyches... oh dear god. the 'no escape' rule... does that help or hurt them now? Ugh.

Disagree on the Dark Reapers.   Even if the opponent is only -1, don't forget that you'd be +1 harder to hit if you move as well.  So they're still better than any other heavy weapon toting unit by 2. (Not even sure what heavy weapon infantry unit you'd be replacing them with anyway?). Or at least the way I play them which is to hide in cover (which there will be more of now), move out to shoot and then fire and fade back into the cover.

On Wyches, not sure what you're concerned about on the no-escape rule.   I don't see which change impacts them (but I may just be missing it.).    No-escape only applies to infantry, so the change to tank rules won't matter as you couldn't be using it to keep the tank engaged with you anyway.

Interesting thinking on the mandrakes, but I don't think it's a huge change for them, you already can deep strike them.     I personally would be more thinking about possibilities of doing similar tactics with units that couldn't otherwise come in from reserves.

It's just to early to even think about those things. They said in June they will release more information weekly. So give it a couple weeks before we even think about what is good or bad. There could be little extra words/rules in places we don't know about that can completely change all of these things.

Look at it like this:
Any dice can never be modified more than once.
vs
A single player can not add more than one modifier to a dice roll.

Both of these fit what the GW staff said, but both are also played completely differently.

So based on previews we have seen so far, I get the impression that "big powerful" units will do well, while hordes and minimum 5-man squads may suffer.
What would a DE army look like made purely of the heavier units?
Something like: 3 ravagers, 5 planes, 6 talos. Or lots of gunboat Raiders.

Well depending on Cover MSU horde lists might be OP. So can't really say.