BA and 9th Ed

[Panzer]

Since I plan to let my Assault Intercessors come in via Strategic Reserves turn 3 anyway, it doesn't matter whether they could have shot for two turns before that as regular Intercessors. They are my late game threat. ^^

Not to mention that regular Intercessors would have gotten shot of the board turn 1 or 2 already anyway since with the list I have in mind there wouldn't be many other targets for my opponent's anti-infantry stuff.

[Dont-Be-Haten]

The biggest interest to me is if assault intercessors can become veterans, if so they are going to be monsters in combat. Backed by a jp priest, they are going to have attacks in spades, even more than death company. And they are resilient enough to hang around.

 

If they don't get veterans, then autobolt rifles with a fist is still the gold standard for troops choice in BA with incursors right beside them.

[Hintzy]

At this point I don't believe they can become veterans, as they have the ASSAULT INTERCESSOR SQUAD keyword rather than just INTERCESSOR SQUAD.  We'll also have to wait who knows how many months for an FAQ or new datasheet with the multipart kit to be able to add a power weapon to the Sergeant.  They're certainly not a clear-cut winner just yet.

[Jolemai]

Playing the pdf rules this evening (with the leaks as a backup for things like terrain). Plays similar with some changes that will require getting used to.

 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/364862-wound-allocation-mixed-units-and-coherency/?do=findComment&comment=5555750

 

Very interesting thread, recommended reading.

[Morticon]

Played my first game of 9th yesterday with the BA. 

I played a distinctly "8th style" list - so nothing really took advantage of the new rules. 

 

We also played 1850 to account for the changes- although we should have probably even played 1800. 

 

 

Some Thoughts:

 

* No overwatch is very big. 

* The new order of attack operations is BIG - especially in the turn after the charges- so for BA this is a great boon.  It forces the enemy to have to deal with us. 

* Terrain is GREAT - complex, yes, but the fact that ruins for example can block LOS to vehicles is GREAT.  It makes GW terrain immersive and useful.

* Extra CP each turn is amazing- but frustrating knowing your opponent can always pull some shenanigans back. 

* HI units being a target is important.

* Multi-charge requirements are a BIG hit to us - but understandable.  I think Smashy's role will see some changes in that regard.

 

 

I will play some more games and let you know what I think! 

[Indefragable]

“HI units?”

[Blindhamster]

Heroic intervention

[Dolchiate Remembrancer]

Could you expand on how the order of attack operations impacted your game?

[Arkhanist]

After chargers are finished, defender (i.e. the player who's turn it isn't) picks first. So that means if a charging unit is A, and their target B, over two turns (and B doesn't fall back) the order potentially goes ABAB as in the 2nd turn, the chargers are now the defenders. In 8th, it was ABBA.

[Hintzy]

Just to provide an example to illustrate the potential massive impact of the change:

A Smash Captain charges a Knight and nearly kills it, then survives the returning stomps. On the next turn, assuming the knight doesn't fall back (it almost certainly would in reality, I know) the Captain now gets to swing again, probably finishing the Knight, before the Knight gets to swing.

Edited July 6, 2020 by Hintzy

[Indefragable]

Yea that is interesting. Hot take is that I kinda like it...on the surface it seems to reward players for making strong decisions in their turn and maximizing their own agency. Deemphasizes letting a unit get charged to swing back  in your turn...you know have to weather 2 full turns of attacks. Gives more value to charging, and even charging with non-melee units (like Devastators) if they have a snowball's chance in melee. I think we have a bit of an edge there. 

 

Also, I know have a certain Swedish quartet stuck in my head thanks to @Arkhanist's phrasing. 

[Panzer]

After chargers are finished, defender (i.e. the player who's turn it isn't) picks first. So that means if a charging unit is A, and their target B, over two turns (and B doesn't fall back) the order potentially goes ABAB as in the 2nd turn, the chargers are now the defenders. In 8th, it was ABBA.

 

Unless both have a rule that lets them strike first (or last). Then it's still ABBA, because GW is dumb and likes to make things unnecessarily complicated apparently. It's in the most recently leaked two pages about "rare rules". Makes "always strikes first" type of rules practically useless for the charging (again) and mostly a defensive ability but only if you survive the charge and don't fall back.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Panzer

[Morticon]

Yup! Explained perfectly above.  I had Mephy survive a round of counter attacks only to get to swing again next turn after surviving a charge from another unit.

 

I think it's quite big for BA

[Morticon]

Changes to the command reroll for charges are big too. No more one dice!  it's both! 

[Karhedron]

Changes to the command reroll for charges are big too. No more one dice!  it's both!

It is a big change but I suspect it is neutral overall in impact. Whilst it makes it a lot more risky to reroll a 1 and 6, we now have the option to reroll snake-eyes. So it will be less reliable but we will be able to make rerolls in scenarios when previously we would not have been able to.

[Rhavien]

Changes to the command reroll for charges are big too. No more one dice! it's both!

Could swing in both directions, though. Imagine needing an eight after dropping in and you roll 1 and 6. But I would guess it's helpful to roll them both again in most of the cases. On the other side I often felt confident dropping in with DC and Lemartes and either use the command reroll if I get one high and one low roll or use lemmys ability to reroll both. Doesn't the icon of the angel let you choose to reroll a single dice or both? Could become more handy after overwatch isn't the big boogeyman anymore.

[Quixus]

Where can I find this change? Searching command reroll in here does not yield any results. Edited July 7, 2020 by Quixus

[Rhavien]

Where can I find this change? Searching command reroll in here does not yield any results.

Page 5 under Dice > Re Rolls

 

RE-ROLLS

Some rules allow you to re-roll a dice roll, which means you get to roll some or all of the dice again. If a rule allows you to re-roll a dice roll that was made by adding several dice together (2D6, 3D6 etc.) then, unless otherwise stated, you must re-roll all of those dice again.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Rhavien

[redshadow]

We still have icon of the angel for rerolling one die

[Panzer]

 

Changes to the command reroll for charges are big too. No more one dice!  it's both!

It is a big change but I suspect it is neutral overall in impact. Whilst it makes it a lot more risky to reroll a 1 and 6, we now have the option to reroll snake-eyes. So it will be less reliable but we will be able to make rerolls in scenarios when previously we would not have been able to.

 

 

On average re-rolling both dice is worse than re-rolling only one dice.

[Quixus]

Page 5 under Dice > Re Rolls

I forgot the hyphen.

 

Unless I am missing something again it is not clear (yet). We do not have the rules for the command re-roll yet. So we do not know if that rule specifies that you can (only) re-roll one die of a roll that consists of multiple dice. In fact we do not even know if we can still use CP to re-roll a die (or several)

Edited July 7, 2020 by Quixus

[Rhavien]

 

Page 5 under Dice > Re Rolls

I forgot the hyphen.

 

Unless I am missing something again it is not clear (yet). We do not have the rules for the command re-roll yet. So we do not know if that rule specifies that you can (only) re-roll one die of a roll that consists of multiple dice. In fact we do not even know if we can still use CP to re-roll a die (or several)

I remember seeing it in the leaks we got from the full book and also if seen it being mentioned in two or three 9th edition batreps I've watched. They had the full book, too. That's the way it works now.

[Morticon]

 

Unless I am missing something again it is not clear (yet). We do not have the rules for the command re-roll yet. So we do not know if that rule specifies that you can (only) re-roll one die of a roll that consists of multiple dice. In fact we do not even know if we can still use CP to re-roll a die (or several)

 

 

Im  afraid we do...and they do!

 

It's actually now VERY specific on what we can reroll, too.  No more FNP, no more damage. 

Edited July 8, 2020 by Morticon

[Arkhanist]

 

 

Changes to the command reroll for charges are big too. No more one dice!  it's both!

It is a big change but I suspect it is neutral overall in impact. Whilst it makes it a lot more risky to reroll a 1 and 6, we now have the option to reroll snake-eyes. So it will be less reliable but we will be able to make rerolls in scenarios when previously we would not have been able to.

 

 

On average re-rolling both dice is worse than re-rolling only one dice.

 

Only slightly.

 

I was curious, so I calculated it. Assuming if you failed you keep the highest and reroll the other, ala 8th edition, you had a 52.3% chance of 9 or greater, i.e. a successful charge.

With a full reroll of both if you fail, you have a 47.8% chance of success.

 

With the new red thirst +1" to charge, it changes from a 68% chance of success to make a 9" charge with the old cmd reroll to 66% with reroll both, e.g. new cmd re-roll or lemartes.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Arkhanist

[Quixus]

This may be true for getting a 9, but if the target number is higher, it gets considerably worse if one die is high. Of course with the old rules there often was no point in rerolling snake eyes or similar low rolls. The old rolls added reliability, the new rules just give you a new roll - with the same chance as before. And reliability is something the d6 rules generally lack. No need to improve chances on Hail Marys.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Quixus