Prot's Take on BIG Changes for Deathwatch in 8th Edition

[Kargrym]

All these announcements are why I have 4 sprues of deathwatch sitting in a drawer until 8th drops. Still putting together transports, just a land raider to go.

Instead I have started painting a dirty xenos army I found unpaired cheap on eBay to have as an alt. I figure dark elder qualify.

[Ordo Xenos Inquisitor]

8th edition shooting phase:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/30/new-40k-shooting-phase-apr30gw-homepage-post-4/

First big nerf to DW - pistols? What pistols?

Unless DW get pistols in 8th.

Of course we do. We just don't use it as much when compared to the shotgun, even though our bolt pistols do have special ammo.

[Irbis]

Of course we do. We just don't use it as much when compared to the shotgun, even though our bolt pistols do have special ammo.

You might want to re-read the only troops unit we have, veterans entry in army book. Specifically, their wargear.

For bonus points, open SM codex on Sternguard and Tactical squad entries, and compare with what you'll see there.

Unless DW get pistols in 8th.

Only if GW drops that inane 'no bits, no rules' thing that started crippling their rule writing in last two years. Which, sadly, I doubt they will...

Also since swapping a Bolter is a thing, you never know how our lists may change.

Swapping bolter for bolt pistol? For what purpose?

Even assuming veterans no longer pay triple points for melee upgrades like vanguard do, and assuming you no longer get the above bits restriction, you still end up with slower, more expensive foot vanguard without melee centric rules vanguard have, losing biggest advantage vets have, their firepower, getting expensive, fragile, weakly punching unit that is 200% dependent on charge delivery system DW might or might not get.

Unless DW veterans get buffs on the wraithknight level in both rules and point pricing, it looks to me like an excellent way to lose even harder than we currently do...

[Ordo Xenos Inquisitor]

Hmmm you are right, and it was confirmed that they don't get it on the FAQ, too. But at least I can use grav or plasma pistols and that the Watch Cpt, the Librarian and the Chaplain as well as the Vanguards can. 

 

That being said, here's to hoping that the new set of rules will allow us to do so. It'll be such a waste. :(

[Black Cohort]

 

Unless DW get pistols in 8th.

Only if GW drops that inane 'no bits, no rules' thing that started crippling their rule writing in last two years. Which, sadly, I doubt they will...

I agree that rule is dumb, it kind of made sense when it was no base model no rules. But taken to its logical extreme with their current system, tactical marines will soon only get 1 bolt pistol per 5 squad members.

[Prot]

I never bought into that rule. My Deathwatch sprues never had any meltaguns for instance. Nonetheless a lot of stuff that wasn't on the sprue was an army option.

 

Speaking of the new Shooting rules, it appears to be a minor tweak to us? I can't think of anything off the top of my head that really helps us here. I played a lot of games with assault weaponry, gravguns/melta/even plasma, and never worried about needing heavy weapons.

[Vel'Cona]

 

 

Unless DW get pistols in 8th.

Only if GW drops that inane 'no bits, no rules' thing that started crippling their rule writing in last two years. Which, sadly, I doubt they will...

I agree that rule is dumb, it kind of made sense when it was no base model no rules. But taken to its logical extreme with their current system, tactical marines will soon only get 1 bolt pistol per 5 squad members.

 

 

I find holstered pistols handle this problem nicely.

[Ordo Xenos Inquisitor]

I never bought into that rule. My Deathwatch sprues never had any meltaguns for instance. Nonetheless a lot of stuff that wasn't on the sprue was an army option.

 

Speaking of the new Shooting rules, it appears to be a minor tweak to us? I can't think of anything off the top of my head that really helps us here. I played a lot of games with assault weaponry, gravguns/melta/even plasma, and never worried about needing heavy weapons.

 

 

Hmmm... what about Stalker Bolters? Rolling on 5s or higher is a teeny bit higher than having to roll on 6s after moving. 

[Prot]

Yea in the past I would just swap to bolter mode if I moved.

 

It kind of hurts the IHB a bit since it's a premium priced weapon for it's 'dual' (but conflicting) ability and assault weapon type.

 

Stalker bolters is a good point... so they would go from hitting on 3's to 4's on the move, right?

 

Actually that's a big point. In fact I stopped taking them because I felt like I burned at least one turn a game either getting them in position to start, or getting to an objective in mid game.

[Ordo Xenos Inquisitor]

Yea in the past I would just swap to bolter mode if I moved.

 

It kind of hurts the IHB a bit since it's a premium priced weapon for it's 'dual' (but conflicting) ability and assault weapon type.

 

Stalker bolters is a good point... so they would go from hitting on 3's to 4's on the move, right?

 

Actually that's a big point. In fact I stopped taking them because I felt like I burned at least one turn a game either getting them in position to start, or getting to an objective in mid game.

 

 

Oh right, I forgot that the -1 BS is a thing so the chances of actually hitting something is significantly better. Indeed. My plan for my Stalker Bolter users is to have them arrive by Deep Strike (preferrably on high ground, and shoot at the highest threats from a safe distance. 

[SnakeChisler]

Watched a bit of Warhamer tv on twitch last week one of the guys said he was building a Deathwatch force to showcase 8th ( V another guy who was doing nids)

 

There moving in a big way to showcase 8th before it comes out.

 

Pistol wise it would seem logical to remove them from everyone so that you have to swap it in for an extra attack & abandon rapid fire can't assault to streamline a models stats so standard SM vetrans go down to 2 attacks like us.

 

Overwatch is gonna stay and multiple overwatch as well so sending in a lone guy to chew up wall of death won't work anymore

 

I've played elite armies for the last 5+ years and the biggest change / problem for them has been the explosion in armour / cover ignoring firepower that GW has introduced, they've already said everything will be viable and the only way of doing that is to rejig weapon profiles as well as points.

An example already is bolters loosing any AP

[Prot]

I have a very strong feeling there is more to bolters than the statline tells us. Reece from Frontline gaming hinted heavily at that.

 

To hear someone 'in the know' is actually doing a Deathwatch army is very encouraging. I have to be honest since we don't really know what having our own "Faction" really means in 8th, I've had this underlying fear that we're basically a squad entry like Legion of the Damned.

 

The funny thing is I always get motivation, and fun from my armies with character types, and infantry. I don't miss using tons of vehicles with my Ultra's. A support Corvus or two, perhaps the Landraider... maybe some Rhino's. That's all I want. I've never been big on using a bunch of Preds and tanks, etc. Never big on speeders either.

 

I do foresee our lack of "Lascannon" might be a real downfall now that it is back to being a ranged vehicle / MC / GC killer. BUT the brightside is if/when we are forced/chose to put a Dread into our lists then that twin-linked Lascannon might be gold!

 

We still have no idea on the FragCannon which let's face it... is our bread and butter. Especially if Grav is turned down.

 

Close combat is so vague right now. I have no idea what to think. Their limited hints gave us a lot of questions.

[Vel'Cona]

 

To hear someone 'in the know' is actually doing a Deathwatch army is very encouraging. I have to be honest since we don't really know what having our own "Faction" really means in 8th, I've had this underlying fear that we're basically a squad entry like Legion of the Damned.

 

Based on what we know from AoS (which, let's face it, is a strong indicator of what will be happening in 8th), every model has a set of keywords.  In most cases, these are used for special rule interactions, but there are several that indicate allegiance.  There are 4 major allegiances (factions, if you will) in the form of Order, Chaos, Destruction and Death.  Assuming this plays into 40k, what we're likely to see are 3 major allegiances (Imperium, Chaos and Xenos), which will then segment into a myriad of minor allegiances.  For example, we can expect a Tactical Marine to have the keywords Imperial, Space Marine, Infantry, Tactical Marine (probably not in that exact order).  Deathwatch Veterans would probably add the keywords Ordo Xenos, Deathwatch, and replace Tactical Marine with Veteran.

 

What this means is you could declare "Imperial" allegiance and take literally anything Imperial keyword, but you could whittle this down and declare "Ordo Xenos" allegiance, allowing access to Inquisitors/Retinues, or go a step further and declare "Deathwatch" which would just be purely the DW chapter.  The problem AoS has had is that the larger allegiances have significantly better buffs than MOST minor allegiances, meaning some of the strongest armies end up being a goofy mashup of Elves, Stormcast, and Lizardmen (Seraphon), for example.  Thankfully, GW seem to have acknowledged this issue with 8th edition 40k with their blurb about wanting to make "thematic" armies viable and competitive, so here's hoping the much-vaunted and incredibly vague Command Points system is as good as they say . . .

[SnakeChisler]

I have a very strong feeling there is more to bolters than the statline tells us. Reece from Frontline gaming hinted heavily at that.

 

To hear someone 'in the know' is actually doing a Deathwatch army is very encouraging. I have to be honest since we don't really know what having our own "Faction" really means in 8th, I've had this underlying fear that we're basically a squad entry like Legion of the Damned.

 

Word is they went over to the states to do a bucket full of testing with real people to get the full SP on how races stacked against each other so its highly likely Reece wasn't just involved at the discussion level but had a lot of play test input.

 

From a marketing prospective involving key outlets that promote your game is just a win win situation

 

What were seeing now with teasers and community involvement is a complete about turn from GW

 

In terms of the Faction / Keyword stuff I don't see 3 main factions  Xenos / Imperials / Chaos all fitting into a tree like structure, what they did with Sigmar is blow the whole lot up what we have in 40k is a lot more complex.

 

Is Imperial agents a better view of a diverse force?

 

One thing I don't want to see on a comp table top is Tau with Eldar or Tau with Sisters of Silence or Nids with Legion of the Damned, I saw a Vid the other day on Youtube reviewing SOS and my heart sank as the guy eulogised how great they would be with Tau to close down Psychic deathstars, Role on 8th I can't wait.

[Vel'Cona]

 

One thing I don't want to see on a comp table top is Tau with Eldar or Tau with Sisters of Silence or Nids with Legion of the Damned, I saw a Vid the other day on Youtube reviewing SOS and my heart sank as the guy eulogised how great they would be with Tau to close down Psychic deathstars, Role on 8th I can't wait.

 

While it's off-topic to the DW discussion, I 100% agree on this point, Snake.  I despise the goofy mashup armies that have come out of 7th edition powergaming/WAAC, simply because it's a mess to face and the army on the table looks incoherently ugly.  I'd honestly take it a step further and say that I'm not a huge fan of Celestine being in every DW list, or Cawl being in every IG/SM list, as examples.  I think if you want to ally with friendly faction stuff, that should be provided for players that want to do so but you shouldn't gain ANY outside benefit for doing so (or at least an inferior one to playing a "pure" thematic list).  The benefit to playing "big faction" is the flexibility to take what you want and create "dream combos", but that should be all the player gets.

 

But that's me, and I'm a grognard purist.  :P

[Prot]

 

 

What this means is you could declare "Imperial" allegiance and take literally anything Imperial keyword, but you could whittle this down and declare "Ordo Xenos" allegiance, allowing access to Inquisitors/Retinues, or go a step further and declare "Deathwatch" which would just be purely the DW chapter.  .

 

 

^This sounds really good. I'd like to think I can play pure Deathwatch (gain super DW benefits), or play Deathwatch with an Inqusitorial detachment (Medium DW benefits + minor Inq. Benefits). Stuff like that sounds great.

 

But I see what you mean. if playing just "Ultramarines" or "Astartes" or whatever it is, grants you supreme abilities it won't really matter.

 

 

 

 

Word is they went over to the states to do a bucket full of testing with real people to get the full SP on how races stacked against each other so its highly likely Reece wasn't just involved at the discussion level but had a lot of play test input.

 

From a marketing prospective involving key outlets that promote your game is just a win win situation

 

 

 

 

^Apparently this is the case. Reece/Franky pretty much admitted to playtesting for quite a while. As have ETC, Adepticon organizers, etc. I agree it's something that had to happen. They had to get out of the fishbowl to see how sharks work.

 

 

 

Is Imperial agents a better view of a diverse force?

 

 

^ The million dollar question.  Do we see an interesting, specialized force of highly trained Astartes with special weaponry, and (possibly) assisted by Inquisitorial Forces. (Perhaps this even includes the likes of Celestine). -OR- do we transition into a pigeon holed 'fancy' marine with very limited capabilities and cost factor?  This is the big question. Because if we recall the way 'competitive' marines work now, basically all you see at tournaments is White Scars simply because they had the best 'keywords'? (Hit and run/Scout).

 

 

     One thing I don't want to see on a comp table top is Tau with Eldar or Tau with Sisters of Silence or Nids with Legion of the Damned, I saw a Vid the other day on Youtube reviewing SOS and my heart sank as the guy eulogised how great they would be with Tau to close down Psychic deathstars, Role on 8th I can't wait.

 

 

^Actually I've seen a variant of this in play. An ITC Tau player uses Surges/Ripwing/etc and 'hides' SoS in tunnels that pop out about 25% up the table and confront psykers.

 

To me there most be a line drawn even at the cost of selling SoS models to Fish-people. There's just no room for it in the background. SoS are too close to the Emperor's 10,000. The idea of them working with Tau is simply a mechanism of winning a game and nothing else.

 

I've never crossed those lines myself, but it's really up to GW if this is how they want to have their game played. I did hear on their own FAQ video that they specifically said: Abusing rules, and mixing factions to play them game in a way that was -never- intended.... is something they wanted to address. Those are nearly the exact words they used.

[sockwithaticket]

It's pleasing that they acknowledge the problem.

It's cool and fluffy to be able to pair up Inquisition stuff with Deathwatch, but not if that being possible also means a lot of the abominations you read about on the interwebs.

[Vel'Cona]

It's pleasing that they acknowledge the problem.

 

It's cool and fluffy to be able to pair up Inquisition stuff with Deathwatch, but not if that being possible also means a lot of the abominations you read about on the interwebs.

 

That is an interesting point, sockwithaticket.  A lot of those really beardy, thematically-bankrupt armies I've read about seem to be mostly theoretical.  Locally, almost everyone plays single faction, with light allies along the lines of what you'd expect (GK in Imperial armies, Harlequins in Eldar, etc.).  I would NEVER tell someone else how to play their game as long as they're not obviously cheating, but I'd love it if the rules reflected what GW and the background material has established as "credible" and "thematic" armies, rather than encouraging optimization and min-maxing.

[Prot]

I'd say the same is true here... until you play certain groups. And if it gets close to a tournament I see some really nasty stuff. I've had friends try to tell me to 'break' those personal rules I have, and I won't do it. I'll play against them, no problem, but I won't engage in it myself.

 

I was doing paint judging at a local ITC event. I actually saw such a ridiculous combination of models I mistakingly thought it was three armies that weren't completely finished unpacking so I didn't score it for painting.... I was shocked to see it in play later that after noon and made a mental note of my error.

 

I agree most do play one faction or perhaps a little side ally but usually in 'theme', but I still find a large base of players that want their ITC points and it's by any means necessary. I don't hold it against these guys, I hold GW accountable for it. And by their own admission it might be coming to an end which is awesome.

 

Things I hope that are acceptable for my DW include:

- Inquistorial chararacters/retinues to accompany the DW (reminds me of the Beast Arises books)

- A Knight (or more) with my DW: (This reminds me of Kauyon... stinky Tau!)

- Grey Knights and GK working together. (There's actually a novel like this by David Annandale. There's so much death the GK think that Khorne is involved... turns out it was Orks.)

 

I'm really dying to see what the 'full' benefits of being a pure DW army are. I imagine it's probably the 'best stuff' at that point. Things like re-rolling wounds ,etc.

[Vel'Cona]

I'd say the same is true here... until you play certain groups. And if it gets close to a tournament I see some really nasty stuff. I've had friends try to tell me to 'break' those personal rules I have, and I won't do it. I'll play against them, no problem, but I won't engage in it myself.

 

Me neither, I count it as a point of pride that all of my armies are thematic and employ limited allies within reasonable confines.  But I also dislike large tournaments for that precise reason, and haven't been to one since 4th edition.  Locally, I'm extremely careful which events I go to because there's a small cadre of players that seem to really like to push the limits and I find playing against them painful at best.

 

In either case, I share the fervent hope that GW will make thematic, pure or semi-pure lists competitive enough that there's an argument to be made for both sides.  As I said, I'd never want to tell someone how to play or enjoy their game, but I'd like to see it encouraged to keep armies "real" and make them your own.

[Moostick]

Morale change is a huge positive for DW.

 

It essentially doesn't really affect us. With squads typically at 5 models, we almost always either auto pass or need to roll a 6 for it to affect us.

[robofish7591]

Don't forget that being veterans we will probably have a higher leadership stat too!

[Irbis]

The org chart is a big problem, though. Filling 'Battalion' FOC with minimum, bare required units costs 550 pts currently. That is manageable, though. 'Brigade' is 1000 pts in troops/HQ alone, though if they keep single model squads filling all these elite/fast attack slots will be hilariously easy (though I am not really convinced if so many single man models in army is in any way fluffy).

 

Then comes real kicker, though. Brigade requires 3 heavy support slots. Have fun buying 3 land raiders which are going to be ~1/3 of army points at sub-3000 pts games. If DW doesn't get any other heavy support unit (ranged Dreadnought?), or if land raider doesn't get heavy buff, DW will be pretty much reduced to fielding Battalions and suffer in command point area...

[Prot]

We just don't know enough.... what if Termies with Missile launchers became heavy for us? 

 

What if "Keyword" Deathwatch lets you take something as a heavy choice? Dreads? 

 

One thing I am really starting to dislike about the rules stuff they are giving us is they are so incomplete it causes us endless speculation. I just wish they'd spill the beans already. :)

[Ordo Xenos Inquisitor]

The org chart is a big problem, though. Filling 'Battalion' FOC with minimum, bare required units costs 550 pts currently. That is manageable, though. 'Brigade' is 1000 pts in troops/HQ alone, though if they keep single model squads filling all these elite/fast attack slots will be hilariously easy (though I am not really convinced if so many single man models in army is in any way fluffy).

 

Then comes real kicker, though. Brigade requires 3 heavy support slots. Have fun buying 3 land raiders which are going to be ~1/3 of army points at sub-3000 pts games. If DW doesn't get any other heavy support unit (ranged Dreadnought?), or if land raider doesn't get heavy buff, DW will be pretty much reduced to fielding Battalions and suffer in command point area...

 

 

It can be in my opinion. I see Deathwatch as the equivalent of the ARC Troopers from Star Wars. Sometimes, small forces or even single-man units can be damn useful. :D