9th Edition: Reflections and Predictions for AM

[sairence]

The only one of our vehicles that will really be okay a being in combat is probably going to be the Hellhound I think. It's durable enough to last a bit and it's flamer-weapons will happily toast things.

 

Sentinels suffer a bit less than they used to if they bring Flamers but are too fragile to really stay in CC for long. And everything else really doesn't want to be in Cc, it wants to be free to pick its targets.

 

I'm not too impressed with Blast, it's not well balanced. You get min 3 shots against 5+ and suddenly max shots against 10+. There's no real scaling and it just means people will avoid going over 10 models whenever possible. It's nice for stuff like regular Mortars I guess, though how many more of those we'll see considering we don't need to fill up min-size detachments is another question.

 

Creed is a bit of a meh-thing...if you want to play Cadian definitely good, but personally I found that plays type very boring. Everyone having more will make our CP-regen traits better again, though I feel most armies have a way to boost CP further in one way or another by now, be that by flat bonus or regen.

 

The strategem disparity is definitely my biggest concern. We got some good ones in PA, but the core codex ones are definitely leaving something to be desired.

[duz_]

I'm not getting psyched out

Particularly with CP most games (tournaments) I went to I had about 13 to start with and managed to pull of most things I needed

The most expensive combo was the twin linked double shooting basilisk with a Relic + WL MoO at 6-10 CP.

We can burn through a bit of cp at the beginning with the various relics and army builds but that just offers more utility through the game.

 

As someone who usually took a double Battalion km 8th not wanting to waste FA slots for a Brigade. I am actually considering Brigades in 9th because Sentinels got a massive boost with being able to move and shoot without penalty. Similarly blast is gonna be a great improvement to leman Russ, its only a bonus! Sure they can't shoot in combat but they couldn't before, but Sponsons can!

 

Horde armies in 9th will probably suffer, that seems to be the intent though. The introduction of blast was because there were builds armies literally couldn't shoot through. Mass infantry guard being one of them.

 

Fortunately with the exception of conscripts and combining squads we will avoid the worst of changes to coherency, blasts and morale.

 

 

I wouldnt get too pessimistic yet particularly at the lack of cp there's plenty of other benefits in the meanwhile.

 

My only real concern so far is the cost including a Baneblade in my army :(

[Shamansky]

I think the time has come to paint my Kasrkin

[WarriorFish]

I'm waiting on the Errata to get a better idea of what 9th is going to be like for various armies, any rule/wargear/etc adjustments could be quite significant and of course points play no small part in building lists.

 

I'm thinking that while assault got some decent buffs, it also got more difficult in places so we'll need to see how full games of 9th go to get a better idea of where this stands. For Guard the core tenets will remain as true as ever, and for vehicles those hull heavy flamers will have a nice role to play should the enemy close... Always did like them

[War Angel]

Is there any leaks on our points? Or just marines?

[WarriorFish]

Only Marines as far as I'm aware, but one way or another not too long to wait :P

[Wassa]

Oh yeah and now we cant get a regimental doctrine for our Lord of War without a tank ace or bringing three of them

[duz_]

Oh yeah and now we cant get a regimental doctrine for our Lord of War without a tank ace or bringing three of them

This is a disappointment hopefully faq or new codex addresses this

[Phubar]

Oh yeah and now we cant get a regimental doctrine for our Lord of War without a tank ace or bringing three of them

With "now" do you mean 8th or 9th?

Because in 8th is like that.

[sairence]

 

Oh yeah and now we cant get a regimental doctrine for our Lord of War without a tank ace or bringing three of them

With "now" do you mean 8th or 9th?

Because in 8th is like that.

Nah, in 8th you can still include them in a Supreme Command detachment with 3HQs and get the doctrine. I would sometimes use that to bring 3 Tank Commanders + a superheavy. But that option will be gone in 9th. Edited July 8, 2020 by sairence

[jaxom]

I could see an argument for the non-transport variants getting tank commander like rules and becoming supreme commanders; aren’t we often told that baneblades are used by high-ranking officers?

[sairence]

One of the first things that came to mind was the Fortress of Arrogance. :P

 

Though with the way it's currently written you have to make the thing in that detachment your Warlord...which is rarely a good thing for our frail superheavies.

 

Though maybe WL is less relevant in some missions now, not sure.

[jaxom]

I had a thought; the “loyal 32” (or however many) are still going to be useful, but for non-competitive reasons. Guard don’t need a ton of CP. People with a Guard collection who want to get a new Imperium faction on the board just need to get a bare bones patrol together and fill out the rest with Guard. Just replace more and more of the Guard with the new faction as you can.

[Commissar Yossarian]

With the new unit coherency and charging rules I'm curious how optimized squads can get to avoid being tri-pointed.

While it will reduce the linear space the squad occupies, relatively deep units can potentially form up to provide a safe internal corridor to fall back into. Also, dangling models that are vulnerable to being tri-pointed should be much reduced.

 

Something like: 

X      X                  X      X

    X       X       X        X

        X        X       X

 

You give up some lateral space, but I think if a smallish squad moves into the middle then they will have a hard time wrapping around, and if they attack a flank then you have a middle corridor to flee through. 

 

I'm also curious about how useful it will be to bait chargers into a squad and use unit coherency to kill off a bunch of extra models to pull yourself out of combat after they have consolidated? I think it'll be very useful to purposefully trip the unit coherency rules and remove models purposefully to get down to 5 models. It potentially pulls your squad some 12" in a direction. Or if completely surrounded and you fail a moral check (even better with Commissar around to shoot a 2nd) you can purposefully cleave rather large chunks of your squad out. Then on your turn fall back into the new pocket so you are outside of 1" from the enemy and they can be shot. Probably even worth killing the sarge so you can get down to LD 6, and with a re-roll have a 82.6% chance of failing the moral test.

[sairence]

Played my first game with the leaked missions today. 1k point incursion against an Elder friend who mostly sat out 8th.

 

Hellhounds feel really good now. The small board size and their good speed meant they were at his deployment zone T1 and had everything on their side in flame range. With 2 of them I cleared out most of his left flank and then even charged one in for some more range. I figured if be stays in CC I just flame him more in my next turn.

 

Their threat range was just great. With 30" width and deploying on long sides their 28" threat range was amazing. Even paying for the hull heavy flamer, which was rarely came close enough to be of use for me in 8th, was more than worth it.

[DarthWaffle]

Played my first game with the leaked missions today. 1k point incursion against an Elder friend who mostly sat out 8th.

 

Hellhounds feel really good now. The small board size and their good speed meant they were at his deployment zone T1 and had everything on their side in flame range. With 2 of them I cleared out most of his left flank and then even charged one in for some more range. I figured if be stays in CC I just flame him more in my next turn.

 

Their threat range was just great. With 30" width and deploying on long sides their 28" threat range was amazing. Even paying for the hull heavy flamer, which was rarely came close enough to be of use for me in 8th, was more than worth it.

 

Seems like Hellhounds are going to be strong. I'm thinking Chimera's will be back in a similar roll with heavy flamers and dump a load of troops out the back to support. 

[Shamansky]

Many if not all units' probability to see the table in coming edition will depend on their points cost. If for instance Chimera will be cheaper than an Infantry squad i'm sure our glorious APC will come to battle. Otherwise it should get an undisputable advantage over taking another unit for the price.

[GuardDaddy]

@shamansky - yes true (please keep guardsman cheap cheap cheap GW....)

 

Do we have a date for points releases yet? is it launch day? Anyone know/link.

[sairence]

I would imagine it all drops on launch day, which I think was previewed as 25th of July.

 

One other thing from that game I observed was that my Manticore felt weird. Because the move and shoot penalty was gone it was suddenly super-mobile with its 12" move.

 

It was great, but felt weird. With Russes you still have the incentive for slow movement because of grinding advance, but artillery speeding around the battlefield lobbing shells in drive-by shootings just seems odd. On the other hand, it might be necessary for them to not be completely boned by the new terrain rules and ubiquous access to -1 to hit for being behind certain terrain pieces.

Edited July 9, 2020 by sairence

[duz_]

The said Chapter Approved will release with the new editing which will have the points in it

 

Interesting point about the manticore same goes for the basilisk too then. I'm OK with this :lol:

[jaxom]

App, with points, is supposed to launch on the Indomitus release date.

[Warhead01]

Question about those hellhounds, do we roll to hit or not now? 
Just looking through the rules under weapons descriptions and , unless my brain damage is acting up again, I don't see flamer weapons mentioned at all any more. 
If there's something that dropped in an article or something I didn't see it. 

Help? 

[Tyr13]

Question about those hellhounds, do we roll to hit or not now?

Just looking through the rules under weapons descriptions and , unless my brain damage is acting up again, I don't see flamer weapons mentioned at all any more.

If there's something that dropped in an article or something I didn't see it.

 

Help?

Theres no need for them to be covered. All relevant rules are in the actual weapons profile.

[Warhead01]

 

Question about those hellhounds, do we roll to hit or not now?

Just looking through the rules under weapons descriptions and , unless my brain damage is acting up again, I don't see flamer weapons mentioned at all any more.

If there's something that dropped in an article or something I didn't see it.

 

Help?

Theres no need for them to be covered. All relevant rules are in the actual weapons profile.

 

fair enough, I had just found myself wondering if they were going to be changed and no one noticed, it has happened before. 

I had partly wondered if they were going to be under the blast weapon rule. But that would probable not go over well at all. Blood in the streets of the internet Id imagine.

 

Edit. I hadn't even looked at the stats page, I see flamers are assault weapons. I have played in over a year and had completely forgotten. 

Edited July 9, 2020 by Warhead01

[GuardDaddy]

It was great, but felt weird. With Russes you still have the incentive for slow movement because of grinding advance, but artillery speeding around the battlefield lobbing shells in drive-by shootings just seems odd.

 

Hmm - that enhances the direct fire strat that gives +1 to hit.