9th Ed. Wishlist?

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I walked into a retail Warhammer store today and the guy working there says he expects the new Guard codex late Q2 or Q3 2022 with a heavy emphasis on new plastic Krieg.

I feel like malcadors fit the krieg theme pretty well lol

[OldWherewolf]

I walked into a retail Warhammer store today and the guy working there says he expects the new Guard codex late Q2 or Q3 2022 with a heavy emphasis on new plastic Krieg.

That would really be nice.

 

One thing I was thinking about was with all the latest armies, there's sooo much -1D, -1 to wound, invulnerable saves, FNPs, ignore -1/-2AP and limited LOS that an AP2 D2 battle cannon is DOA before the codex even comes out.  Almost anything D2 is DOA.   With a BS of 4 against an opponent with a 5++ or 5+++, then every 6 shots is 2 hits, and at best 2 dead models, at worst, it's 2 damage total.  All of our big guns only get 7 shots on average.  With Gravis armored models, even D2 isn't a marine killer anymore, and is highly inefficient against 3W models, and worse if that 3W model has -1D.

 

I was trying to think of ways of countering this without just increasing the number of shots or doing MWs "just because".  Some thoughts I had:

1. Exploding wound rolls.  Something like needing a 2/3+ to wound, each wounding hit is 3 hits.  If you need a 4+, then each wounding hit is 2 wounding hits.  (we roll enough dice already)
2. Keep the 2D, but change the way damage is allocated to 1 at a time.  So if a single 2D battlecannon shot hits an wounds for 2D, then that becomes 2 wounding hits at 1D each.  So -1D does nothing, as each hit is 1D.  Invulnerable saves are slightly less valuable as it's tougher to spike 4x5++ vs 2x5++.  FNPs are unchanged
3. Some sort of crossfire rule that strips away durability layers.  Something like "if 2 AM units shoot at a single target, then invulnerables saves may not be taken.  if 3 AM units shoot, then neither invulnerable saves nor FNP saves may be taken.".  It would also need a no-split fire caveat, and all the units involved would have to declare their firing at the same time.

#1 & #2 just add dice, and it's a way of countering the durability.  But I like #3 more, as it adds more tactical depth to the game, and can make less valuable units still serve a purpose.  Like guardsmen won't need to be as effective, as they are paving the way for bigger hitters.

[The Pounder]

Really excited that the new Astra Militarum release will be Kriegcentric!!

 

#3 would definitely add more utility!

 

Just have to wait and see.

 

Hopefully not too long.

[brother_b]

Interesting ideas. I’ve got three Leman Russ tanks one will have the gattling cannon.

 

I’m guessing if they price tanks appropriately, we will have a chance to win by weight of fire.

 

I Think orders as we know them are gone, and will now likely only be available for core groups. I hope though that they add utility. Guard have been one of my long-term desires to play as an army.

Edited December 27, 2021 by brother_b

[OldWherewolf]

I was trying to think of ways of countering this without just increasing the number of shots or doing MWs "just because".  Some thoughts I had:

• Exploding wound rolls.  Something like needing a 2/3+ to wound, each wounding hit is 3 hits.  If you need a 4+, then each wounding hit is 2 wounding hits.  (we roll enough dice already)
• Keep the 2D, but change the way damage is allocated to 1 at a time.  So if a single 2D battlecannon shot hits an wounds for 2D, then that becomes 2 wounding hits at 1D each.  So -1D does nothing, as each hit is 1D.  Invulnerable saves are slightly less valuable as it's tougher to spike 4x5++ vs 2x5++.  FNPs are unchanged
• Some sort of crossfire rule that strips away durability layers.  Something like "if 2 AM units shoot at a single target, then invulnerables saves may not be taken.  if 3 AM units shoot, then neither invulnerable saves nor FNP saves may be taken.".  It would also need a no-split fire caveat, and all the units involved would have to declare their firing at the same time.

Ok, thinking about this more, I'd make #2 into the 'SHRAPNEL' keyword, and #1 the 'AIRBURST' keyword.  Then, we can give Demo Cannons D3+3 damage, Earthshakers D3+2 damage and give them both AIRBURST.  Then we give Battlecannons & manticores D2 (flat), then AIRBURST and SHRAPNEL.  Then we can keep the 2d6 shots flat across all models

 

Now Demo cannons and Earthshakers have play into hard targets with high damage, BCs and manticores into softer targets and 1W models.  So we have a reason to take both, so we're actually presented with a choice in list construction. 

Edited January 3, 2022 by Brainpsyk

[Phubar]

The new Tau railgun can be an hint of what we will get with the Vanquisher? Obviusly the Vanq will have some smaller numbers somewhere.

[Diagramdude]

I’m not exactly sure how the vanquisher stacks up against the rail gun in the lore but any combination of these new features like ignore invulnerable, d3+X damage, cause additional mortal wounds on a successful wound etc would help immensely toward wanting to actually include Vanquishers in a list, plus it’s not a blast weapon so could disintegrate a single enemy that tries tying it up.

[Shamansky]

Would be good to get anything for Vanquisher that makes it more useful than other weapons. But i would not start opening champagne yet. Since tau always had 'weird-science' guns in the past. And that was not influencing imperial guns in any way

Edited December 30, 2021 by Shamansky

[Plague _Lord]

The thing is the vanquisher cannon is still an explosive munitions type weapon, while the railgun on the other hand does most of it's damage frm kinetic energy. The mortal wounds part of the profile makes sense... what doesn't is the silly ignore invuls part. 

 

The vanquisher profile should look like this imo - 1d3 shots range 72'', str 12, ap -4, 3d3 damage and inbuilt +1 to hit. Heavy tanks still have a chance against it but when it goes through they can receive a lot of damage.  This profile paired with the double shot deals an average of 9 wounds off a leman russ, so it cripples it but isn't a guaranteed kill and this is how a tank killer should work - their should be a margin of error but it should still be effective.

[sairence]

Honestly, as Guard players we shouldn't worry about ignore invun abilities. We should welcome them and want more, cause we don't get invuns anyway.

[The Pounder]

I’d say the most likely route forward for the Vanquisher will be similar to the Macharius Vanquisher cannon.

 

Str16 AP-4 with a flat damage of 9

 

Throw in a +1 to hit Vehicles or Monsters as well as Grinding Advance and I think we’ll be somewhere handy!

 

Though I do like Plague_Lord’s idea of D3 shots.

[Diagramdude]

the shot profile would have to balance out against whether the russ retains the shoot twice ability, because getting to shoot d3 shots twice with a 9 damage weapon would be a bit nutty

[Plague _Lord]

Yeah it's either high set damage and few shots or more shots and random damage. In this case I'd rather have more shots and random damage, since it get's us less chances of the vechicle doing 0 damage.

[Phubar]

I think that Vanq could be few shots at high AP and damage as it is a tank/monster killer so having the chance to oneshot (kill or cripple) is more fluffy than having it doing a good average that needs more shots to kill a target.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Still hoping they make the exterminator unique and interesting enough to compete with the other Russ options, and not just relegate it to a cool fluff option.

[OldWherewolf]

Agreed on the Exterminator.  The sad thing is that it's going to be tough because of all the -1D and ignore -1AP in the game right now.  Making the gun -2AP 2D brings it on par with the battlecannon. 

 

Now 4d3 shots at -1AP 3D (Just like the predatorx2) is interesting.  That gives good punch into tougher targets, and against -1D and 5+++ its a reliable 2D.  If the BC gets Airburst & Shrapnel, then we've got 2 very different weapons serving different purposes.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Agreed on the Exterminator. The sad thing is that it's going to be tough because of all the -1D and ignore -1AP in the game right now. Making the gun -2AP 2D brings it on par with the battlecannon.

 

Now 4d3 shots at -1AP 3D (Just like the predatorx2) is interesting. That gives good punch into tougher targets, and against -1D and 5+++ its a reliable 2D. If the BC gets Airburst & Shrapnel, then we've got 2 very different weapons serving different purposes.

i think making it heavy6 or giving it, the old school twinlinked rule might help if it was the cheapest variant.

[OldWherewolf]

Twin linked is just double shots, and the predator is 2d3, so the 4d3 is the same as Twin linked predator autocannons.

 

I'd prefer the re-roll comes from other sources, as a built in re-roll is really the same as a BS improvement.

 

The 2d3 3D AC opens up other possibilities, especially for the hydra at 8d3. The hydra is only T6, so it is different than the LR, with different options. It also opens up a 2-shot 3D AC for the HWT, so we have differentiation there as well.

 

So we get different capabilities and durability betwwen units, while boosting output.

[jarms48]

Twin linked is just double shots, and the predator is 2d3, so the 4d3 is the same as Twin linked predator autocannons.

 

I'd prefer the re-roll comes from other sources, as a built in re-roll is really the same as a BS improvement.

 

The 2d3 3D AC opens up other possibilities, especially for the hydra at 8d3. The hydra is only T6, so it is different than the LR, with different options. It also opens up a 2-shot 3D AC for the HWT, so we have differentiation there as well.

 

So we get different capabilities and durability betwwen units, while boosting output.

 

4D3 exterminator autocannon with no grinding advance would be fine. It's the same as the Castigators twin autocannons. I'd leave it at damage 2 though, like the Castigator. 

 

The Hydra could probably get damage 3 autocannons though, they're so much larger, and autocannons are terrible AA weapons so the additional damage helps. 

 

 

I think that Vanq could be few shots at high AP and damage as it is a tank/monster killer so having the chance to oneshot (kill or cripple) is more fluffy than having it doing a good average that needs more shots to kill a target.

 

I imagine the vanquisher will be similar to the railgun when the Guard codex ever drops. 

Edited January 5, 2022 by jarms48

[Slave to Darkness]

I walked into a retail Warhammer store today and the guy working there says he expects the new Guard codex late Q2 or Q3 2022 with a heavy emphasis on new plastic Krieg.

I just asked about this in my store and she claimed no such rumours have come from GW as she has not heard anything. But she also denied plastic Mk6 is coming like she has full access to the future GW releases. :lol:

[sairence]

From what I've gathered over the years, the store owners don't really know much more than a well-informed internet denizen.

[OldWherewolf]

4D3 exterminator autocannon with no grinding advance would be fine. It's the same as the Castigators twin autocannons. I'd leave it at damage 2 though, like the Castigator.

I wouldn't.

1 - the Castigator isn't taken because it comparatively sucks

2 - the Castigator is 160 points with 3 HBs and BS of 3 compared to a normal LRExterminator with BS of 4. Ya, we get T8 & 12W vs. T7 and 11W, but in 9th that really doesn't mean anything.  We'd have to drop to ~140 points to be comparable to a tank that isn't taken, and I want the LRExterminator to be viable

3 - with the new GW recommended terrain layout (and the massive amount of terrain nowadays) and mission objectives, static gunlines are gone.  You need to be able to move into position and DELETE something, because the next turn you can kiss your tank goodbye.  If you haven't traded equally, you're losing the game.

 

The autocannon is supposed to be good against heavy infantry and light vehicles (T6/7, AV4/5ish), so I wouldn't use the Castigator as a reference, I'd use the AdMech Onager Dunecrawler (T7, 11W, 3+/5++) with Twin Heavy Phosphor Blaster (BS3 Heavy 8, S6 AP-2, D2) for 115 points as a baseline.   Sad thing is, even the Dunecrawler isn't taken that much because the other options are better.

 

 

Running the Dunecrawler against a generic T6 4+ tank, we're looking for a median average of 4.0 damage, just to be comparable to a 115 point tank, not including the HBs, from 6 months ago.   Codex creep means we should beat that, especially since AdMech aren't kings of the hill anymore.

 

with

- 8 shots at 2D:  Median 2.0, Avg 2.6  (e.g. 1 shot hits, wounds and penetrates)

- 8 shots at 3D:  Median 3.0, avg 4.0  (e.g. 1 shot hits, wounds and penetrates)

- 10 shots at 3D Median 6.0, Avg 5.0 (~2 shots)

 

 

So 8 shots a 3D barely brings us up to par with a tank that isn't taken.  With all the ignore -1AP and -1D, anything 2D is really DOA nowadays.  But I do agree on dropping the Grinding Advance, it cripples our already laughable shooting.

[jarms48]

 

I wouldn't.

1 - the Castigator isn't taken because it comparatively sucks

2 - the Castigator is 160 points with 3 HBs and BS of 3 compared to a normal LRExterminator with BS of 4. Ya, we get T8 & 12W vs. T7 and 11W, but in 9th that really doesn't mean anything.  We'd have to drop to ~140 points to be comparable to a tank that isn't taken, and I want the LRExterminator to be viable

3 - with the new GW recommended terrain layout (and the massive amount of terrain nowadays) and mission objectives, static gunlines are gone.  You need to be able to move into position and DELETE something, because the next turn you can kiss your tank goodbye.  If you haven't traded equally, you're losing the game.

 

The Castigator would be alright at about 145 points. Each of those heavy bolters are valued at 15 points according to GW, not 10 that Infantry pay instead. So just tweaking those costs we get a nice 15 point reduction. 

 

The other issue with the Castigator is that Retributors are just too good for their cost, and take up the same Heavy Support slot. They need their Armorium Cherub upgrade to go up to at least 10 points, and/or their base cost increased to 14 per model. 

 

 

The autocannon is supposed to be good against heavy infantry and light vehicles (T6/7, AV4/5ish), so I wouldn't use the Castigator as a reference, I'd use the AdMech Onager Dunecrawler (T7, 11W, 3+/5++) with Twin Heavy Phosphor Blaster (BS3 Heavy 8, S6 AP-2, D2) for 115 points as a baseline.   Sad thing is, even the Dunecrawler isn't taken that much because the other options are better.

 

 

Running the Dunecrawler against a generic T6 4+ tank, we're looking for a median average of 4.0 damage, just to be comparable to a 115 point tank, not including the HBs, from 6 months ago.   Codex creep means we should beat that, especially since AdMech aren't kings of the hill anymore.

 

Dunecrawler has never been good in 9th. Their issue is base size, they're massive models for their cost. They also don't really have much firepower for how large they are either. Their other issue, is lack of buffs. They don't have core, meaning any appeal they might have had is lost because units that might have originally been less efficient than them can become many factors more efficient because of stacking buffs. 

 

 

Honestly, if the Leman Russ Exterminator was about 130 points with no grinding advance and the Castigators autocannon it'd be alright. Then GW just need to reduce sponson costs to match the infantries, that way 2 heavy bolters cost 20 not 30. 

Edited January 7, 2022 by jarms48

[OldWherewolf]

The 130 point LRExterminator with 3 HBs would help, but it's not going far enough.  Anything with AP -1 and D2 as the primary weapon is pretty much DOA.

 

Looking at the GSC Goliath, the Autocannon is unchanged, so a heavy bolter is better in every scenario except against a T7 model.  You're better off taking the Punisher.

against T6/3+ tank (at baseline, double the result for grinding advance):
- Punisher: median 1, Avg 1.1 dmg

- Exterminator: median 2, avg 1.3

 

against an intercessor: 

- Punisher: median 2.0, avg 2.2

- Exterminator: median 2.0, avg 1.3

 

The AC can't even kill what it's supposed to be good against, and does worse against AP-1 and/or -1D.  Even making the LRE 130 points (that includes the 3 HBs), you're taking the tank for it's HBs, not for the ACs.  Shooting twice (without Grinding advance) is the minimum, and then you're still not going to take the Exterminator, as you're taking the tank for it's HBs.

 

If you've noticed, we only play in the shooting phase, and lose the game in the 10 melee phases we do nothing in.  As soon as we're in melee, the game is over and we've lost.  That's why our TCs are the only thing holding our win rate, it's because they can pick up a unit, ANY unit, in 1 go (or at least cripple the target unit so they don't wipe us out). 

 

If you compare our units to anything published in the last year, we're 40% over costed, with HALF the firepower, and no melee.  Furthermore, even abilities like "Back Pedal" only help a little, because abilities like prevent fall-back become gate-keeper lists for us, because we can't get out of melee to shoot.  So we have to over-expose our units to kill something giving our opponents juicy targets to kill, or not kill what we need to kill.

 

As things stand today, if you come up against one of these armies, you've lost (well, probably about a 20% win rate), these are our gatekeepers:

• -1 damage (all our HBs, ACs, Plasma Cannons, BCs, which is 50% of our killing power) does nothing
• Ignore -1 AP (HBs, ACs), our primary Troop killers
• Prevent fall-back (as long as 1 model is left in the screening unit, we can't shoot what's murdering us)
• Armies that out-shoot us.
• Fast moving armies that out-melee us. 

So we have to have the firepower to overcome all of that, or just throw our army in the trash.  And 4 (even 8) shots from an AC won't even come close. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Twin linked is just double shots, and the predator is 2d3, so the 4d3 is the same as Twin linked predator autocannons.

 

I'd prefer the re-roll comes from other sources, as a built in re-roll is really the same as a BS improvement.

 

The 2d3 3D AC opens up other possibilities, especially for the hydra at 8d3. The hydra is only T6, so it is different than the LR, with different options. It also opens up a 2-shot 3D AC for the HWT, so we have differentiation there as well.

 

So we get different capabilities and durability betwwen units, while boosting output.

no there was more to it than that. Maybe they changed it in later editions, but it used to include rerolling misses.