40k 9th Editon

Hellion Posts : 58 Join date : 2019-04-28

Deadly deceivers
Units with this obsession can charge in a turn in which
they Fell Back. When an enemy unit finishes a charge
move within 1 "of any units with this obsession, roll one
D6; on a 6, that enemy unit suffers 1 mortal wound.

In 9th it can be a good trait, you shoot, charges, less chance of losing a raider or venon by defensive fire. You spend the following turns trapping units. Vehicles can shoot you yes, but with -1. While one tries to go killing with melee (talos-groots-incubis) units the rest of enemy army.

Kabalite Warrior Posts : 120 Join date : 2017-11-16

Tau Faction Focus is up - and it has a small note confirming that the Fly keyword no longer allows a unit to Fall Back and Shoot.

Wych Posts : 521 Join date : 2012-12-30

OUCH.

It also confirms the -1 to hit cap, and the piece about the whole TAU army getting overwatch as part of the for the greater good rule.

That's a pretty significant change to Tau (or rather, they're not changing from current edition while everyone else is....)

Subject: Re: 40k 9th Editon Thu Jun 25 2020, 17:33

Well, since Tau got a pretty significant modification to their army rules via day 1 FAQ, I am hoping that we will get something useful as well. I suspect that the Raiding Party is going to get errata'd in some manner.

Hekatrix Posts : 1057 Join date : 2012-04-13

Yup, big preview today confirmed:
> Hit mods capped are clear: You can only get -1 or +1, never more. That basically means most if not all stacking Strategem/Trait/ability things we have goes out the window, with LFR being the biggest one as it cannot improve your defensive capabilities any further. You can still use these different things to upset other peeps strategems or whatever, but you're always going to be just -1.

The biggest losers here are our flyers.

> It's also clear that Fall Back + Fly means you cannot shoot, period.

So yeah.. start praying boys.

Sybarite Posts : 344 Join date : 2017-11-16

*deleted*

Missed a new page of replies.

Subject: Re: 40k 9th Editon Thu Jun 25 2020, 19:31

krayd wrote:: Well, since Tau got a pretty significant modification to their army rules via day 1 FAQ, I am hoping that we will get something useful as well.

What in our ENTIRE history of dealing with GW (Including the 11 year wait for a new codex...) makes you think hopeful thoughts and not thoughts along the lines of "Hope they use Vaseline".

Cause let me tell you... I wish I had your optimism. Instead, I think we are only getting two things for 9th...
Diddly
and his cousin, Squat!

Incubi Posts : 1505 Join date : 2017-09-12

Skulnbonz wrote:

krayd wrote:: Well, since Tau got a pretty significant modification to their army rules via day 1 FAQ, I am hoping that we will get something useful as well.

What in our ENTIRE history of dealing with GW (Including the 11 year wait for a new codex...) makes you think hopeful thoughts and not thoughts along the lines of "Hope they use Vaseline".

Cause let me tell you... I wish I had your optimism. Instead, I think we are only getting two things for 9th...
Diddly
and his cousin, Squat!

Two points:

We've never had longer than a seven year wait for a new Codex, unless you ignore the 3.5 update.

On the whole, 8th edition treated us relatively well (especially considering we're not a Marine faction). Yes, there are points of complaint, almost all of which have been discussed ad nauseam on this very forum. But I don't necessarily see a reason to assume that we're going to be completely discarded or screwed in 9th.

Subject: Re: 40k 9th Editon Thu Jun 25 2020, 20:09

If I may quote GW from their overwatch article: "The goal is to help balance melee-oriented versus shooty armies and inject a little more strategy on both sides."

Only a week has passed and GW has already sabotaged this goal.

I honestly believe that the restrictions of overwatch could have made Tau an actually interesting army to play. It's such a wasted opportunity.

Edit:

DevilDoll wrote:: I am convinced we are completely screwed till the codex... I reserve a slight optimism for the later and for some reason i am sure we will get a Vect model this edition... This is the time ^_^

Yep, I pretty much think so too.

Wych Posts : 523 Join date : 2013-08-16

Burnage wrote:

Skulnbonz wrote:

krayd wrote:: Well, since Tau got a pretty significant modification to their army rules via day 1 FAQ, I am hoping that we will get something useful as well.

What in our ENTIRE history of dealing with GW (Including the 11 year wait for a new codex...) makes you think hopeful thoughts and not thoughts along the lines of "Hope they use Vaseline".

Cause let me tell you... I wish I had your optimism. Instead, I think we are only getting two things for 9th...
Diddly
and his cousin, Squat!

Two points:

We've never had longer than a seven year wait for a new Codex, unless you ignore the 3.5 update.

On the whole, 8th edition treated us relatively well (especially considering we're not a Marine faction). Yes, there are points of complaint, almost all of which have been discussed ad nauseam on this very forum. But I don't necessarily see a reason to assume that we're going to be completely discarded or screwed in 9th.

I am convinced we are completely screwed till the codex... I reserve a slight optimism for the later and for some reason i am sure we will get a Vect model this edition... This is the time ^_^

Wych Posts : 523 Join date : 2013-08-16

The Strange Dark One wrote:: If I may quote GW from their overwatch article: "The goal is to help balance melee-oriented versus shooty armies and inject a little more strategy on both sides."

Only a week has passed and GW has already sabotaged this goal.

I honestly believe that the restrictions of overwatch could have made Tau an actually interesting army to play. It's such a wasted opportunity.

re-read the article... they actually use TAU as an example for the new stratagem and state that the greater good rule gives them "two-for-one overwatch fire- a brilliant use of a single command point" So they asume that TAU have to use the stratagem as well which today was proven to be completely false since they can fire overwatch without it. So either the author of the article has no clue about the rules or they are still changing them as they go...?

Wych Posts : 521 Join date : 2012-12-30

Burnage wrote:

Skulnbonz wrote:

krayd wrote:: Well, since Tau got a pretty significant modification to their army rules via day 1 FAQ, I am hoping that we will get something useful as well.

What in our ENTIRE history of dealing with GW (Including the 11 year wait for a new codex...) makes you think hopeful thoughts and not thoughts along the lines of "Hope they use Vaseline".

Cause let me tell you... I wish I had your optimism. Instead, I think we are only getting two things for 9th...
Diddly
and his cousin, Squat!

Two points:

We've never had longer than a seven year wait for a new Codex, unless you ignore the 3.5 update.

On the whole, 8th edition treated us relatively well (especially considering we're not a Marine faction). Yes, there are points of complaint, almost all of which have been discussed ad nauseam on this very forum. But I don't necessarily see a reason to assume that we're going to be completely discarded or screwed in 9th.

I'm with Burnage on this one. I've had a very strong win record in 8th edition since our codex came out (I did lose a LOT before then in 8th). For a while there we were a top tier army, and we're still competitive overall

Each new edition I have had to change my play style due to the rule changes and changes in our codex.

For those of you who TRULY think we've only EVER had bad things to our army. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion, and for each of us our opinion is absolutely objectively true. The fact that we perceive things and the impacts on our army differently doesn't matter to the other person, we all have to be happy with how we play the game.

If I actually felt that negatively about GW, about our army, and about the evolution of the rules over the years, I personally would just stop playing (or change armies). I don't have time for that sort of negativity in myself.

Subject: Re: 40k 9th Editon Thu Jun 25 2020, 20:22

DevilDoll wrote:

The Strange Dark One wrote:: If I may quote GW from their overwatch article: "The goal is to help balance melee-oriented versus shooty armies and inject a little more strategy on both sides."

Only a week has passed and GW has already sabotaged this goal.

I honestly believe that the restrictions of overwatch could have made Tau an actually interesting army to play. It's such a wasted opportunity.

re-read the article... they actually use TAU as an example for the new stratagem and state that the greater good rule gives them "two-for-one overwatch fire- a brilliant use of a single command point" So they asume that TAU have to use the stratagem as well which today was proven to be completely false since they can fire overwatch without it. So either the author of the article has no clue about the rules or they are still changing them as they go...?

Every other day GW appears to me like a Hydra with a multiple personality disorder. One of them is a genius, the other one is a master craftsman, but then there are those maniacs that only spit acid and fire.

Seriously... what the heck?

Edit:

DevilDoll wrote:

The Strange Dark One wrote:: ...

re-read the article... they actually use TAU as an example for the new stratagem and state that the greater good rule gives them "two-for-one overwatch fire- a brilliant use of a single command point" So they asume that TAU have to use the stratagem as well which today was proven to be completely false since they can fire overwatch without it. So either the author of the article has no clue about the rules or they are still changing them as they go...?

... am I just blind, or did they delete that passage from the overwatch article?

Wych Posts : 523 Join date : 2013-08-16

The Strange Dark One wrote:

DevilDoll wrote:

The Strange Dark One wrote:: If I may quote GW from their overwatch article: "The goal is to help balance melee-oriented versus shooty armies and inject a little more strategy on both sides."

Only a week has passed and GW has already sabotaged this goal.

I honestly believe that the restrictions of overwatch could have made Tau an actually interesting army to play. It's such a wasted opportunity.

re-read the article... they actually use TAU as an example for the new stratagem and state that the greater good rule gives them "two-for-one overwatch fire- a brilliant use of a single command point" So they asume that TAU have to use the stratagem as well which today was proven to be completely false since they can fire overwatch without it. So either the author of the article has no clue about the rules or they are still changing them as they go...?

Every other day GW appears to me like a Hydra with a multiple personality disorder. One of them is a genius, the other one is a master craftsman, but then there are those maniacs that only spit acid and fire.

Seriously... what the heck?

Edit:

DevilDoll wrote:

The Strange Dark One wrote:: ...

re-read the article... they actually use TAU as an example for the new stratagem and state that the greater good rule gives them "two-for-one overwatch fire- a brilliant use of a single command point" So they asume that TAU have to use the stratagem as well which today was proven to be completely false since they can fire overwatch without it. So either the author of the article has no clue about the rules or they are still changing them as they go...?

... am I just blind, or did they delete that passage from the overwatch article?

oh WOW they really did change it lol....!
here is a screenshot of the original i took the day they posted it becasue i wanted to show to a friend....
https://imgur.com/a/59I6Rrl
man amazing... i have no words they actually removed the part about the single command point now

Subject: Re: 40k 9th Editon Thu Jun 25 2020, 21:37

I'm guessing that whoever wrote the first overwatch article either had no knowledge of the errata changes to the T'au codex, or might have only been familiar with an earlier version of their rules, that was later changed.

Hekatrix Posts : 1057 Join date : 2012-04-13

krayd wrote:: I'm guessing that whoever wrote the first overwatch article either had no knowledge of the errata changes to the T'au codex, or might have only been familiar with an earlier version of their rules, that was later changed.

Doesn't surprise me at all. GW designers are not the same peeps running the website/community/marketing.

Wych Posts : 630 Join date : 2018-03-04 Location : maybe

Who remembers the blisteringly fast raiders in our 8th faction focus?
And then the wave serpent got 3" faster lol

Wych Posts : 609 Join date : 2014-02-09

In the comments section at FLG, Reece said there is a really big change coming that they haven't revealed yet that will affect how armies play. Has anyone heard any rumors of what that might be?

Edit: the only other rumor I've heard that might be what he's talking about is that games in 9th will only be 5 turns (no rolling to see if it continues) in keeping with GWs desire to make games shorter.

Hekatrix Posts : 1057 Join date : 2012-04-13

sweetbacon wrote:: In the comments section at FLG, Reece said there is a really big change coming that they haven't revealed yet that will affect how armies play. Has anyone heard any rumors of what that might be?

Edit: the only other rumor I've heard that might be what he's talking about is that games in 9th will only be 5 turns (no rolling to see if it continues) in keeping with GWs desire to make games shorter.

Cool, this is bad for us too. Eldar's strength is maneuverability so we can grab/contest points with our speed the later the game goes.

Immediate predictions:
Beefy boy units will be the name of the game in 9th,
Get those Meat Mountains ready.

Archon Posts : 4436 Join date : 2014-10-04 Location : Ohio

They may also not wanted to give away Tau information. But this makes me question everything now for sure.....

Subject: Re: 40k 9th Editon Fri Jun 26 2020, 05:35

HERO wrote:

sweetbacon wrote:: In the comments section at FLG, Reece said there is a really big change coming that they haven't revealed yet that will affect how armies play. Has anyone heard any rumors of what that might be?

Edit: the only other rumor I've heard that might be what he's talking about is that games in 9th will only be 5 turns (no rolling to see if it continues) in keeping with GWs desire to make games shorter.

Cool, this is bad for us too. Eldar's strength is maneuverability so we can grab/contest points with our speed the later the game goes.

Immediate predictions:
Beefy boy units will be the name of the game in 9th,
Get those Meat Mountains ready.

A set number of turns might actually be *good* for us, because it tells us precisely when we need to swoop in with fast moving units to take/contest objectives on the final turn.

Sybarite Posts : 344 Join date : 2017-11-16

If you've been playing ITC you've been playing 6 set turns already. By the 6th turn I'm usually hanging onto a points lead I've taken early doors with my speed. Being made of paper means you don't have a great deal left after that many turns of contesting a game. Going a turn shorter is fine by me, I think that's a boost to us overall but I guess that depends on tactics and playstyle as much as being army specific.

Hekatrix Posts : 1057 Join date : 2012-04-13

I wrote a big ass article on meta predictions and Eldar ramblings:
https://lkhero.blogspot.com/2020/06/9th-ed-40k-and-how-it-affects-all-eldar.html#more

Since I've been negatively ranting on this thread for a bit, I figured it would just be better sit back, get all the data in front of us and present it a little better.

TLDR: We're not entirely shafted, but its gonna be weird in the future.

Archon Posts : 4436 Join date : 2014-10-04 Location : Ohio

I'm waiting for more rules to care. We've already seen rules change in the articles.

Wych Posts : 523 Join date : 2013-08-16

HERO wrote:: I wrote a big ass article on meta predictions and Eldar ramblings:
https://lkhero.blogspot.com/2020/06/9th-ed-40k-and-how-it-affects-all-eldar.html#more

Since I've been negatively ranting on this thread for a bit, I figured it would just be better sit back, get all the data in front of us and present it a little better.

TLDR: We're not entirely shafted, but its gonna be weird in the future.

Cant say im a fan of predicitions before we have the whole picture but man impressive work nonetheless...!