9th Ed Speculation Thread

[Khornestar]

Everyone else is doing it.

 

I think many of us have been keeping up with the reveals and tidbits from the new edition.

 

Notable alleged changes include:

- Drastically improved terrain system, wherein a missile can no longer snake through the windows and bulletholes of every piece of terrain across the table. There will be keywords that apply to terrain and confer rules and such. Hiding in and behind terrain is supposed to be easier. Therefore, the likelihood of surviving to charge and deal damage will increase, which would be great.

- Morale supposedly matters more. Cool, maybe the plethora of Night Lords morale shenanigans will be worthwhile. Same with the currently laughable Word Bearers trait.

- Players start with the same number of CP based on game size. Pay to take allied detachments and different detachments. “Less soup” has been thrown around. Kinda not a fan, in theory, for chaos. Mingling of heretic astartes, daemons, and mortals is pretty ingrained in the way the faction wages war. It won’t be impossible; it will just cost CP. I suppose my biggest question here revolves around summoning. Already a wonky mechanic, really wondering how it will work in 9th.

- Changes to reserves, supposedly in ways that prevent a game-ending alpha strike. Sounds like the old Outflank rule to some degree. If so, great, really might help our assault units survive, our CSM pop onto objectives, and so on. One hopes the ability to charge from reserves isn’t removed.

 

There are others, but typing on my phone is not fun and I’ll let others expand the list.

 

I’m optimistic. I barely play or have time for anything hobby related right now, but still, I’m looking forward to this edition. I’m really hoping THIS TIME Word Bearers aren’t just the worst.

 

What are your thoughts?

[Marshal Loss]

I’m really hoping THIS TIME Word Bearers aren’t just the worst.

I mean, we're still going to have to wait for them to get a trait that all loyal Space Marines don't already get in addition to another trait :P But yeah I share this hope.

 

I'm pretty optimistic so far. CP changes sound good (although until we see the numbers, it's impossible to say how effective these changes will be), terrain changes sound good. I'd like to see summoning tweaked to be a bit more viable.

 

My big hope though, an EC release aside (pls pls pls), is that CSM aren't one of the first books in the new edition, simply so we don't immediately get kicked in the knee by power creep, as is tradition.

[BadgersinHills]

I'm hoping for Night Lord morale tactics to be useful, and for flamers and meltas to be a bit more useful.  They're cool, dang it! (Though I'm not very knowledgeable about the competitive scene, I'm not sure flamers and meltas are widespread).

 

Was planning to run my Chaos Marines as Chosen to get the option of bolter and chainsword, so more CP sounds great. Abbadon and Terminator friends lists might be more viable then. 

Edited May 31, 2020 by BadgersinHills

[Cheex]

Probably the biggest change announced so far for me and my World Eaters (and Khorne Daemons, for that matter) is CP generation. Every time I go to write a list, I find myself having to shoehorn in another Battallion just so I can keep up with everyone else. And for my World Eaters, that means that I end up spending more points on characters and cultists than I'd like. I keep looking at my recent lists and thinking that they would work much better without these tax units.

 

I am a little sad about what this means for Daemons, though. Daemons still feel like an empty book. Here's hoping there will be some mechanic to allow for mixed faction armies without costing CPs as long as everything has the same Mark/Allegiance, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

But for the most part, I am optimistic about the changes announced so far.

[Special Officer Doofy]

With what has been teased and released about 9th so far, it's not looking well for chaos compared to loyalist. Loyalist already get a mono bonus, and for chaos to stay competitive have to soup. Now loyalist are being rewarded even further for being mono faction because to take another faction/Detatchment it's going to cost CP. Seems like spitting in the wound to me. Loyalist already have more choices in every slot than any other codex, so it's easier for them to cover every angle with one book.

 

I know alot of people are excited about the new terrain rules and how it will help with assault, but it feels like it's just in time for all the new assault based Primaris models that will be coming out. The one advantage chaos has is going to shrink.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against 9th and the game evolving and changing. But it seems like it might just be the same issues in a different edition so far. I would love nothing more if when the new chaos codexes come out for the 9 Legions to get their traits reworked (alpha's is the only good one when compared to the new loyalist codex), make them army wide and some sort of mono bonus. But I feel some people at that point will cry "I don't want chaos to just be spikey marines". Neither do I. It's fun to be different. That's why I went Death Guard in 8th, to be even more different from regular chaos marines. But if different is always going to be worse, I rather just be spikey marines so I actually want to put down the models I've spent hundreds of dollars on and years painting on the table and actually play 40k without a large handicap and sour taste in my mouth.

 

I know it's too early and all the new stuff hasn't been shown yet, but what has been is not promising. The half truths of "PA was done with 9th edition" blows my mind. I highly doubt the Thousand Sons PA book was done with 9th in mind, otherwise it wouldn't have been so Detatchment based. Now Thousand Sons extra options (that's what they are, more options not a flat out buff like doctrines) are going to cost them CP to get more then one new spell, relic and warlord trait because of how the new stuff is going to work. I'm willing to bet Death Guard is going a similar route.

 

That's my 9th edition speculations so far. Hoping for the best but planning for the worst.

 

Edit: Grammar

Edited May 31, 2020 by Putrid Choir

[Khornestar]

Time will tell, but improved game mechanics benefit everyone, if nothing else.

 

I’m also skeptical about the PA books being designed for 9th in mind, because from what I read they will eventually include only bits and pieces of them integrated with the 8th Ed. codices and whatever else into the 9th Ed books.

 

Lack of a consistent design philosophy has been the worst thing about the rules for a long time. Decades, really. I doubt they will ever again release everyone’s rules at once the way they released the indices for 8th. They have an idea of what they want things to be like at launch, and the books released at that time (I.e. Chaos Space Marines :) ) will be left behind as they come up with cool new ideas for forthcoming books. Then a similar thing happens with supplements.

 

I stopped buying $50 rulebooks after daemons. Enough is enough. I’m happy rules get updated but keeping up with everything is not fun to me. Really looking forward to the app!

[Bulwyf]

Look at the imbalance in codexes. It happens every edition. There are so many armies that is impossible to balance them against each other. Worse, the power creep that takes place in every edition makes early codex armies completely powerless at the end of that edition. Or, worse, you wait so long in an edition to finally get your book (hello, I play Space Wolves too) and the book you finally get is straight up garbage. You don't get another book because the rules and writers at GW have already moved on to the future edition.

 

Your only hope then is piecemeal attention like CA or PA but those are not enough.  As someone that plays Death Guard, Emperor's Children and Night Lords  I am sick and tired of Chaos getting its ass kicked every edition. When old grognards like myself keep talking about 3.5 as this mystical time of legend what does that say to newer players? Hell, what does that to say to us grey beards?

 

I want Chaos in all its flavors to be SCARY to play against. Chaos is THE big bad in the ENTIRE canon of 40k. When someone plays you with a Chaos army you should be cringing inside and believing you are the underdog. I'm not asking for Chaos to be OP but can we at least be truly competitive? Is that too much to ask?

Edited June 1, 2020 by Bulwyf

[MegaVolt87]

Eh, it can only get better or stay the same for us as usual. Death of soup will kill our faction in 9th ed IMO and if the FW re-work won't point things sensibly like the initial FW index was mostly. The one thing we can hopefully count on is new EC + WE dexes and the demon primarchs, new kits. Seems like we are also the first book out the gate, along with DA for loyalists as a test bed. 

[Doom Herald]

Personally, I'm dreading vehicles and monsters shooting while in combat. GW likes to push Chaos as a melee army, but with vehicles and monsters shooting after you make your first round of attacks, it's going to be harder for us to take them down. I've been running a DP and Lord with Nurgle daemon weapon to destroy vehicles. Now, I'll have to pray they get it done in one round or I'll get shot to death. That was the big saving grace for my army was IF I got them into melee, I'm good. I can't compete with a lot of IG vehicles now if they will keep their firepower in melee. I can't compete with the firepower and I no longer have the safety of melee range to lean on. Supposedly rules to falling back are supposed to happen favoring melee units, but I dont know how much good it will do against a lot of armies.

 

I already know I'm going to have to redo my army for the new edition between the new shooting in combat rules and modifiers not stacking. I dont like it, but I have the feeling I'm going to have to lean on the Disco Lord and Venomcrawlers in 9th. That was something I've been trying to avoid.

 

That said, I wonder how the new detachment rules will be. They avoided directly saying if you would still need troops by saying detachments will still be a thing. If they keep the same detachments we have now, I'll rejoice at not having to take Cultists or CSM squads, but I'm not sure they won't switch back to having all your detachment options being the way the were in old editions with mandatory troops and HQs in all detachments.

Edited June 1, 2020 by Doom Herald

[Cheex]

Seems like we are also the first book out the gate, along with DA for loyalists as a test bed. 

 

Where's this information from? I haven't seen anything about the first codexes out the gate, but assumed Necrons would be amongst the first since they're the Big Bad this season.

[Khornestar]

 

 

Seems like we are also the first book out the gate, along with DA for loyalists as a test bed.

Where's this information from? I haven't seen anything about the first codexes out the gate, but assumed Necrons would be amongst the first since they're the Big Bad this season.

I think that applies to the past two editions at least, though not hinted at in any way at so far.

[Medjugorje]

anyone understand what did they say in ths preview? I wasnot able to hear the last 5-10 minutes.

 

I just saw the Necron "release". I am very disappointed that they didn t said anything towards 9th Edition (as far as I realized)

[Prot]

For CSM I feel like Marks have to have a come back to some degree. 

 

I can't see any other way for the common CSM troop to have an effect in game that 1) makes a marked improvement on their performance, but 2) does not improve loyalist marine troops which would impede Primaris sales.

 

For CSM I am guessing our Primaris (related to above comment) will not be 'troops'. Our CSM plastics (troops) are still very new, very good looking sculpts. My guess is Psychic awakening takes the reverse bio-engineering of Fabius Bile and turns into a new 'elite'... possessed models? Something of that nature.

 

I see our biggest change coming in the form of vehicles. Large, expensive models that fill gaps. Everyone will need 1 (or 3). I can be a single box making 3 subtypes, and probably fills a void left by Landradiers, Defilers, and/or Predators. (I think GW has run the idea into the ground of a mega-character blister being a must have, very large net profit item.)

 

Ruleswise there's a few changes I've wanted to see for a while. I personally think for Chaos especially the Assault Phase needs a sizable cleanup.

 

Ruleswise I've always been shocked there is no "Shooting Interrupt". Why is there an assault interrupt? Why can't your opponent spend 2 CP to shoot in your turn, after your first unit has fired in the shooting phase??? Especially considering the game has been constructed to be incredibly killy, enabling larger, expensive games to be concluded in roughly the same time. If there is one defining moment in most games, it is the very first firing phase of (most) games. 

 

Ruleswise we don't know the mechanical changes to the turn though it has been stated by the writers that they did not change much of those mechanics as they felt just tweaks were needed.  So with that in mind I see the greatest inherent change to the entire system is Terrain. This one sweeping change will affect deployment, list structure, and weapon / armament decisions.  We've gone through very large swings in decision making on how terrain affects games. Everything from needing a "Frag Grenade", and utilizing an "Initiative" trait to our current (8th ed) "true LoS" system which over simplified to the cost of many enriching elements from submersion to tactical game play in 40K. 

 

Ruleswise - the mention of 'not needing troops' is interesting as it no longer means a 'tax' requirement to access the pay to win system of Command Points. If all detachments are treated equal (in CP currency) this means that in order to sell "Troop" models and box sets will require a heavy emphasis on their role. I'd imagine this will translate into a heavier game system reliant on a troop to perform an action. Holding an objective is one thing, but if it literally tips the balance in many games, this will instill the fact you need to have detachments that have you deploying large (hopefully useful) troop selections.

 

Chaos in theory, has a lot of options for game play style. More than most in my opinion. The problem for many editions has been their ineffectual nature. A great deal of the models are in bad spot, aesthetically and functionally. My hope would be to see this change dramatically for those models over the next 18 months to coincide with the changes above.

[Lord Raven 19]

Anyone think the game might be changed so only troops can hold objectives (barring things like relics and WTs that give Obsec to others)

[WarriorFish]

It would be nice for Marks to mean something, especially given that some armies are restricted by them and gain nothing for it but that's more a codex thing - I'm not sure how much we can expect from the first FAQs other than any corrections needed to fit what 9th brings? I'm expecting a shot in the arm for combat in 9th as something that has long been lacking by comparison. With vehicles no longer suffering as much from being in combat that does mean it needs to be that much more for it, though (this is still a fix needed for vehicles).

 

There is much to come I'm sure, long as combat becomes decently viable I will be happier. I'd prefer it to be more than just being more killy, 8th will not be improved by removing models faster. Perhaps an aid to combat armies could be consolidating into another unit without then getting slapped about by them in some way? Would let you put the pressure on shooting armies more.

 

I hope we don't have to wait too long to start finding out the meaty changes as currently we know too little to say much on how it'll pan out. So far it's the very start and while it has some encouraging bits they also furnish us with questions :P

[Khornestar]

The fellas at Frontline Gaming mentioned that one of the guiding principles of the new edition was making games play faster. Whatever that encompasses, I could only guess.

 

As for troops/detachments, they suggest troops are still very much relevant to the game. Couldn't give details. As for detachments, it sounds like you now have to pay for them beyond whatever the standard FOC is. If there is one. Too vague at this point to really know anything.

[Prot]

The fellas at Frontline Gaming mentioned that one of the guiding principles of the new edition was making games play faster. Whatever that encompasses, I could only guess.

 

As for troops/detachments, they suggest troops are still very much relevant to the game. Couldn't give details. As for detachments, it sounds like you now have to pay for them beyond whatever the standard FOC is. If there is one. Too vague at this point to really know anything.

 

This might be an oversimplification, but I think one of the easiest ways to do that is to get rid of the deprecating performance scale on anything under a Super Heavy. Especially with Chaos. Have you ever seen a newer player use a Disco Lord that's been damaged?  I can bake a cake in the time it can take for a new player to wrap their head around that and get through their assault phase. It's just really an unnecessary slow down. 

 

Second is overwatch. They say they've 'slightly modified' it.  This is pretty big for Chaos. We have no idea what the modification is, but a largely assault based force is going to really try to mitigate overwatch. So in other words that could be another list building rule change... let's say you can't overwatch a unit of 3 or less models (not including Vehicles/Monsters) or something like that? What if it's 'flat shots' per model that is assaulting you? What if it's a "time' or "space" based modification? (IE: you can't overwatch anything 6" or less away from your defending unit?) 

 

Those types of changes will affect list design as well.  Chaos has access to units that can be dynamic in the aspect of shortening distances for assault, or perhaps are more effective in smaller units. 

 

But as it stands right now Overwatch can take a substantial amount of time and zap some games of their momentum and fun. (This is always one of the big negatives in clocked games for me.... overwatch can take a dog's age with some armies, often to negligible effects.) Playing Chaos I run into that probably more than most my armies.

Edited June 1, 2020 by Prot

[MegaVolt87]

I would be happy to somehow get chosen as a troops choice + scoring unit similar how the vet squad in HH can be in the troop section and a scoring unit via rules. Also mutilators could be fixed with an increased squad size and twin linked conventional weapons options (plasma, melta, flamer, combi boolter(s) ), they should be our assault centurion equivilent, oblits should return to 36-48 inch ranged weapons options to be like dev cents. I would like an excuse to convert my new fugly plastic oblits + reason to paint up the classic ones.

[BadgersinHills]

Too much to hope for but I've mentioned earlier about my want for CSM with bolters and chainswords. If Marks become more relevant, that's really cool too. Not sure if there will be any new kits this edition, but lots of things are possible. 

[MasterDeath]

Well the Vehicles shooting while in combat rule will be good for chaos. Defilers, Soulgrinder, etc. can (I assume) smash and shoot at the same time. I think they mentioned fallback changes? (could be my wishlist) Cant be worse than now, right? Making Morale matter? Chaos has the tools. In the end: I have to read these rules.

 

Edit: Most interesting thing so far "The Command phase is a quick new addition to the turn sequence. In this phase, Battle-forged armies will acquire new Command points and spend the ones they have on certain Stratagems."

 

So I assume you start with less, but get some back over the rounds.

Edited June 2, 2020 by MasterDeath

[Azekai]

Well the Vehicles shooting while in combat rule will be good for chaos. Defilers, Soulgrinder, etc. can (I assume) smash and shoot at the same time.

Yeah, no, I am going to be spamming traitor guard if that is what happens. Daemon engine guns are thoroughly meh. But other vehicles, like those of the IG and space marines tanks, are going to be unstoppable. Can’t wait to be shot by Pask and his tank commander buddies with vengeance for Cadia, even after making an assault.

 

One of the issues with knights is that there is no good way to approach them; they are reasonably good at shooting and assault, and cannot be locked under normal circumstances. Taking this and extending it to every vehicle and monster just means the really mean ones are even harder to deal with; the lackluster ones will still be lackluster.

 

Unless assault armies are vastly cheaper in points or do lots more damage for free, this will still very much be a shooting edition, terrain changes be damned. There is simply very little incentive to footslog.

[Khornestar]

I don't disagree that assault armies will perpetually be at a disadvantage, but the terrain rules seemingly have to make a huge difference. Can't shoot through/into certain terrain features any more? Can't shoot the target behind/in it. Obviously depends on how these rules function.

 

Too many details unknown at the moment, we may end up being surprised. Buuuut... probably still going to be dominated by shooting units. That's kinda just the game.

[Bulwyf]

I asked Lawrence Baker who runs Tabletop tactics as a 9th playtester if combat armies are viable. He said they are very viable in 9th edition. If you watch their shows you know TT is a very balanced and entertaining group of players that have complained about the lack of combat army viability all of 8th edition.

[Schurge]

Thanks to the introduction of Faith & Fury I've felt content with my Khorne marines for the first time in a decade. I'm optimistic about 9th edition and it's focus on improving assault, though I do expect that assault Primaris are going to be irritatingly good if not objectively better then our assault equivalents. I think that other Codex: Chaos Space Marine warbands / legions at the very least can't get any worse as they were already largely shafted by Faith & Fury anyway.

 

I am ignoring Chaos soup but I always thought running soup was selling out anyway. 

Edited June 2, 2020 by Schurge

[Prot]

The "command phase" in my personal opinion is just official recognition of the 'stuff that happens before the game'. It's now a real phase, but I don't think it's really as big as people are making it out to be. Right now we have a 'mustering' of our forces, we spend CP on pregame strats (which as of now are not unique unless stated). We pick relics (depending on format), etc, etc.

 

I did have a thought though... a crazy thought, even crazier than my "Let's have a Shooting Interrupt for 2 CP" (which BTW I still really want to see!). What if you get these predetermined CP based on battleforged army points size. Then.... you still adjust as normal in the 'command phase'. So Abaddon gets me my 2 per usual. 

 

Taking this deeper, how about a standard 1 CP *bonus* for every minimum 5 man Marine Troop squad up to 5 CP or something like that? I mean if they don't change how troops work, how chaos marines work, there has to be -something-. Even as it stands the only time you really see marines in any semi-competitive environment is Red Corsairs (?) For the 3 CP bonus. I think if we made that a rule across the board it would help. Would it be enough? Probably not, but I think I'd like to see that sort of manipulation of CP in our lists.