New rumors - updated 12-Oct

[Captain Caine 24th]

I'm still in the camp that IG/AM infantry should be around 45 points. The rumored 60, 65, and 80 is getting really high. But points increases suggest a new role. Which in turn means my view is biased - seeing them as they were while discussing what they do now. And I think there are going to be a lot of cool options in the codex. Of course I could be wrong, they may very well be garbage, but let's look at a few points.

• In 8th cheap infantry were essential to fill out the force organization chart, which at the time could be used to obtain more CP (even exploited). In 9th Ed force organization is sill filled as an army list necessity, but there isn't the advantage of gaining CP. They had some notoriety or meme status as the 'loyal 32.' [Loss]
• In 8th Ed. there was a time where allies reigned supreme. For better or worse that's all but a distant memory (probably to return in 11th or 12th ed, if history is any guide). Still, infantry being so very valuable and cheap had great synergy with the very best units of other armies. One could make a mixed army of only the very best units. With constrictions on allies, picking and choosing the best imperium units isn't available. There's a comparative loss on value. 
• The free heavy weapons and special weapons are a way to get a lot of value into the squad. But the points increase didn't increase survivability. And as a required unit, it squeezed concessions out of other unit options in the army. This was somewhat problematic as for many the infantry squad was not used as a damage-dealing unit, having 4+ BS. Similarly having low survivability, a direct fire heavy weapon platform is dangerous. That is, I have four more lascannons on the field now, but none really do anything. 
• The rumored 2 special for shock troops or 3 for krieg could be interesting if free. However the rumor is also that only 1x per type is allowed for each squad. A spare meltagun could always be handy. But, there's a difference between having an army that's just a pile of tools on the table, and an army where each piece is part of the intentional design, actively contributing to goals.   
• Hammer of the Emperor (HotE) getting auto wounds actually has had a noticeable impact. Not so noticeable if shooting only demolisher cannons. Very noticeable if shooting high volume lasgun shots. The confirmed Parade Drill, etc., style infantry might very well be a way to maximize this mechanic. 
• However, a very real problem is the proliferation of Armor of Contempt (AoC) or similar rules reducing AP. Whatever benefit there is to the CORE rule shift to an everything can be wounded on a 6+ is mitigated seriously. Still the humble lasgun having no AP is not at a loss. Other weapons like the punisher or multi-laser which previously had no AP, now rumored to be S6 AP-1 got a downgrade, not side grade. Rather the weapon profile is better, so points are increased, but the operating environment has changed. 
• The 60 (65mm) base isn't well suited to hide or traverse dense or narrow terrain.  The rumored (and apparently confirmed 50mm) base will be very helpful. Alas, it is personally a problem for my diorama style bases already built. 
• With the addition of auras, better psychic, and orders all in aggregate, there certainly will be some great potential for infantry squads (which is where I suspect the points increase comes from. However, there is a hidden cost here. Many standard builds largely focus on a company commander, platoon commander, or tank commander. If the rules encourage including a castellan and commissar, lord solar, etc... that's a lot of implicit/hidden points costs directed to buffing a lot of cheap units. It's one thing if an expensive commander can buff three baneblades - it's another if additional HQ units are just helping plain infantry. 
• At first new options for catachans looked like a buff, but even auspex tactics has soured on the rumored points cost. The catachan horde led by straken (which according to best coast pairings has had success at various points throughout 8th and 9th) may be at a loss here as they'll be short a few units of infantry with the points hike.
• With the turret rule, maybe tank commanders are pointless. Maybe I just want the cheapest lemans with a heavy bolter, no sponsons. If true, then a points hike in infantry might be a wash with reduced points elsewhere. 
• I will miss Move Move Move - launching infantry like jetbikes was actually very useful to get points, table quarters, or to screen out empty flanks (to prevent their reserves or clearing out for mine). A quick reaction force is always valuable. I suppose the nerf isn't terrible. And this might mean I go for other units to cover my need for quick reaction. Maybe a Valkyrie & kasrkin. OBJ secured leman russ's (who should absolutely not be in front line hand to hand combat) might have an interesting value on backfield objectives, with line of sight. Even sentinels with rumored OBSEC & move-shoot-move strat could be really interesting on objectives. 

I don't forecast doom yet, just the structure of an 'at least enjoyable tournament army' will have changed. New rules have been sort of a monkey's paw/djinn situation lately. Wishes are granted in an some unexpected, if not unwanted way. Also, there's supposedly a points change coming down in January. And while we all know my dear malcador infernus isn't going to be getting any buffs in that, we can be sure that if there are problems with the rogal dorn, castellan, sentinel, kasrkin, they'll get some attention. 

[greatcrusade08]

any rumours concerning the humble greande launcher. i hope they make them usable

 

[TCC]

1 hour ago, TCC said:

Have there been leaks for tank aces? Or do we think tank aces do not exist anymore?

asked on the Mordian Glory Discord and he had already done a live stream on them - I even watched it but forget they were tank aces. 
 

>tank aces; if you contain any astra militarum, can upgrade any battle tank / super heavy by making them a tank ace - no points costs attached
each time you select a model increase points / pl
no name given; super heavy only - this model gains officer keyword, and knows tank orders, can issue 1 order and can issue to titanic units
meticulous calibrator; ignore benefits of cover
mechanical pack-rat; each time attack is made against this model unmodified wound of 1-3 fails (transhuman tanks)
veteran commander; when you add this model to your army, select a doctrine no other model has, add it to the currently active ones
knight of piety; 5+ invuln, 5+++ vs mortals
"master of camoflage; over 12"" away, get light cover, if titanic over 18"" away"
steel commissar; this model knows prefectus orders in addition to mech orders, can issue 1 prefectus order in addition to a tank order, can issue orders to abhuman / officer

 

Pretty disappointing considering the ones I ever used were, full payload, the extra AP one and the super heavy hill down deployment 

 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

1 hour ago, Captain Caine 24th said:

I'm still in the camp that IG/AM infantry should be around 45 points. The rumored 60, 65, and 80 is getting really high. But points increases suggest a new role. Which in turn means my view is biased - seeing them as they were while discussing what they do now. And I think there are going to be a lot of cool options in the codex. Of course I could be wrong, they may very well be garbage, but let's look at a few points.

• In 8th cheap infantry were essential to fill out the force organization chart, which at the time could be used to obtain more CP (even exploited). In 9th Ed force organization is sill filled as an army list necessity, but there isn't the advantage of gaining CP. They had some notoriety or meme status as the 'loyal 32.' [Loss]
• In 8th Ed. there was a time where allies reigned supreme. For better or worse that's all but a distant memory (probably to return in 11th or 12th ed, if history is any guide). Still, infantry being so very valuable and cheap had great synergy with the very best units of other armies. One could make a mixed army of only the very best units. With constrictions on allies, picking and choosing the best imperium units isn't available. There's a comparative loss on value. 
• The free heavy weapons and special weapons are a way to get a lot of value into the squad. But the points increase didn't increase survivability. And as a required unit, it squeezed concessions out of other unit options in the army. This was somewhat problematic as for many the infantry squad was not used as a damage-dealing unit, having 4+ BS. Similarly having low survivability, a direct fire heavy weapon platform is dangerous. That is, I have four more lascannons on the field now, but none really do anything. 
• The rumored 2 special for shock troops or 3 for krieg could be interesting if free. However the rumor is also that only 1x per type is allowed for each squad. A spare meltagun could always be handy. But, there's a difference between having an army that's just a pile of tools on the table, and an army where each piece is part of the intentional design, actively contributing to goals.   
• Hammer of the Emperor (HotE) getting auto wounds actually has had a noticeable impact. Not so noticeable if shooting only demolisher cannons. Very noticeable if shooting high volume lasgun shots. The confirmed Parade Drill, etc., style infantry might very well be a way to maximize this mechanic. 
• However, a very real problem is the proliferation of Armor of Contempt (AoC) or similar rules reducing AP. Whatever benefit there is to the CORE rule shift to an everything can be wounded on a 6+ is mitigated seriously. Still the humble lasgun having no AP is not at a loss. Other weapons like the punisher or multi-laser which previously had no AP, now rumored to be S6 AP-1 got a downgrade, not side grade. Rather the weapon profile is better, so points are increased, but the operating environment has changed. 
• The 60 (65mm) base isn't well suited to hide or traverse dense or narrow terrain.  The rumored (and apparently confirmed 50mm) base will be very helpful. Alas, it is personally a problem for my diorama style bases already built. 
• With the addition of auras, better psychic, and orders all in aggregate, there certainly will be some great potential for infantry squads (which is where I suspect the points increase comes from. However, there is a hidden cost here. Many standard builds largely focus on a company commander, platoon commander, or tank commander. If the rules encourage including a castellan and commissar, lord solar, etc... that's a lot of implicit/hidden points costs directed to buffing a lot of cheap units. It's one thing if an expensive commander can buff three baneblades - it's another if additional HQ units are just helping plain infantry. 
• At first new options for catachans looked like a buff, but even auspex tactics has soured on the rumored points cost. The catachan horde led by straken (which according to best coast pairings has had success at various points throughout 8th and 9th) may be at a loss here as they'll be short a few units of infantry with the points hike.
• With the turret rule, maybe tank commanders are pointless. Maybe I just want the cheapest lemans with a heavy bolter, no sponsons. If true, then a points hike in infantry might be a wash with reduced points elsewhere. 
• I will miss Move Move Move - launching infantry like jetbikes was actually very useful to get points, table quarters, or to screen out empty flanks (to prevent their reserves or clearing out for mine). A quick reaction force is always valuable. I suppose the nerf isn't terrible. And this might mean I go for other units to cover my need for quick reaction. Maybe a Valkyrie & kasrkin. OBJ secured leman russ's (who should absolutely not be in front line hand to hand combat) might have an interesting value on backfield objectives, with line of sight. Even sentinels with rumored OBSEC & move-shoot-move strat could be really interesting on objectives. 

I don't forecast doom yet, just the structure of an 'at least enjoyable tournament army' will have changed. New rules have been sort of a monkey's paw/djinn situation lately. Wishes are granted in an some unexpected, if not unwanted way. Also, there's supposedly a points change coming down in January. And while we all know my dear malcador infernus isn't going to be getting any buffs in that, we can be sure that if there are problems with the rogal dorn, castellan, sentinel, kasrkin, they'll get some attention. 

move move move is still there, and can still be used to great effect when paired with SATW, so you can still get infantry across the table quickly.

[sairence]

Not gonna lie, a lot of these posts remind me a lot of the attitude before the Custodes codex dropped, aka the army is unplayable and all the new stuff sucks.

 

There's a bunch of things in the leaks that look really cool to me and should make for some very nice armies. And if you don't like them, you can always console yourself with the fact that that it's from a year-old playtest book and we've really only seen things confirmed that are unlikely to fundamentally change between that and the final product. Especially points have probably gotten tweaked some more.

 

Honestly, the main thing that disappointed me was that the box wasn't in yesterday's pre-order announcement and we have to wait another week.

[TCC]

^^ I don’t feel anyone is being all doom and gloom or saying it’s unplayable.

 

What I have seen are fair assessments of the changes vs what we have currently. 
 

There will be loads of new combos and lists out there that will be high performers and I too cannot wait for the codex to try and find them for myself, bring on the 19th - I know I will not be playing the same lists I do now because the Meta has changed.

[OldWherewolf]

13 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Yes vehicles are more viable. A Russ can now hold an objective against up to 5 BGVs for example.

vehicles counting as multiple units is a massive buff.

 

People were complaining that you either take a big standard infantry squad for mobility, or you have a heavy weapon for some firepower. Now you can have infantry units with decent firepower without harming mobility or output. Heck you can have an IS with HWT, and still not lose out on anything.

 

The codex is more than unit or weapon stat lines, and where are you getting this idea non-turret weapons are hitting on 5s?

 

Between the ML buff, turret rule, officer rule, and army rules chimeras have gotten so much better and can be used in so many more ways.

 

mechanized is great. SATW is great. Brutal strength is great. These are all things that help to make the faction much more mobile.

combine armored superiority with mechanized and you can effectively get 15 models on an objective with 10 of them having obsec and hiding behind the vehicle.

You're not wrong, but you're trying to cite a specific example vs. a generality, When you start to include the various buffs of our units, you have to start including buffs/doctrines of other units as well.  So I just start with the baseline.  Yes, a 160 point LRBT, with a particular doctrine can hold an objective against 175 points of bladeguard of any doctrine.  But go deeper.  A new LRBT with a BC does 3.9W to Bladeguard per shooting phase, or 4 shooting phases.  BA Bladeguard on the charge with Assault Doctrine active (Guard get neither of these buffs) does 6.7W.  Twice the output, in twice as many phases.  How long can that 1 LRBT hold that objective vs. those 5 Bladeguard?  Care to run the numbers vs. Sanguinary Guard?

 

Comparing Doctrines, we have to compare SatW to Blood Angels +1 Attack, +1 to charge rolls and +1 to wound on a dedicated melee army.  SatW doesn't look so good now, does it?  Armored Superiority?  Then look at a Carnifex.  It takes 4 *NEW* LRBTs with Battle cannons to remove one Carnifex 50% of the time (3 LRBTs with DCs, 50% of the time).  With Transhuman, that number goes to 5 LRBTs.  The LRBT is 170 points.  It should take TWO, not 4.  What about the new Vanquisher?  Yep, still takes 3 Vanquishers to down 1 'Fex.

 

That's also why I calculate hull sponson weapons at BS4.  They don't get turret weapon rule, but if tagged, tanks shoot hull/sponsons at effectively 5s to hit (BS4, -1 for shooting a heavy weapon in melee).  You can stay in melee, but even 9 HBs on 5s kills 2 models (on the high side), which means 3 gretchin stop a 165 point tank.

 

I completely agree with you that with Armored Superiority we can put 15 ObSec bodies on an objective (which is what Guard should be doing).  But in doing so we give up 3-5 VPs.  2 from the Chimera for Bring It Down! and another 1 or 3 for No Prisoners/Grind Them Down respectively.  A Chimera just doesn't have the durability or the output to be worth 2 VPs.  Yes the extra shot on the ML is nice, but not for 5 points.  One of the reasons Marines struggle right now is they don't have cheap or durable bodies to throw on an objective.  We have to throw more points & units on that same objective and lose more VPs today, and it doesn't work today, the leaked codex doesn't fix any of that.   Take away Inflexible Command, which scores even when we're tabled, and the Guard WR% would be 35% at best.  Then drop the free 12 points from Boots on the Ground and Guard would be at a 25% WR.

 

Edit:

note the damage profiles on the chart I provided are uncapped, meaning the BC gets credit for the full 3W vs a 2W intercessor.  This helps account for 3W models like Bladeguard & Eradicators, or 2W -1D models like DG.

Edited November 6, 2022 by OldWherewolf

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

4 hours ago, OldWherewolf said:

You're not wrong, but you're trying to cite a specific example vs. a generality, When you start to include the various buffs of our units, you have to start including buffs/doctrines of other units as well.  So I just start with the baseline.  Yes, a 160 point LRBT, with a particular doctrine can hold an objective against 175 points of bladeguard of any doctrine.  But go deeper.  A new LRBT with a BC does 3.9W to Bladeguard per shooting phase, or 4 shooting phases.  BA Bladeguard on the charge with Assault Doctrine active (Guard get neither of these buffs) does 6.7W.  Twice the output, in twice as many phases.  How long can that 1 LRBT hold that objective vs. those 5 Bladeguard?  Care to run the numbers vs. Sanguinary Guard?

 

Comparing Doctrines, we have to compare SatW to Blood Angels +1 Attack, +1 to charge rolls and +1 to wound on a dedicated melee army.  SatW doesn't look so good now, does it?  Armored Superiority?  Then look at a Carnifex.  It takes 4 *NEW* LRBTs with Battle cannons to remove one Carnifex 50% of the time (3 LRBTs with DCs, 50% of the time).  With Transhuman, that number goes to 5 LRBTs.  The LRBT is 170 points.  It should take TWO, not 4.  What about the new Vanquisher?  Yep, still takes 3 Vanquishers to down 1 'Fex.

 

That's also why I calculate hull sponson weapons at BS4.  They don't get turret weapon rule, but if tagged, tanks shoot hull/sponsons at effectively 5s to hit (BS4, -1 for shooting a heavy weapon in melee).  You can stay in melee, but even 9 HBs on 5s kills 2 models (on the high side), which means 3 gretchin stop a 165 point tank.

 

I completely agree with you that with Armored Superiority we can put 15 ObSec bodies on an objective (which is what Guard should be doing).  But in doing so we give up 3-5 VPs.  2 from the Chimera for Bring It Down! and another 1 or 3 for No Prisoners/Grind Them Down respectively.  A Chimera just doesn't have the durability or the output to be worth 2 VPs.  Yes the extra shot on the ML is nice, but not for 5 points.  One of the reasons Marines struggle right now is they don't have cheap or durable bodies to throw on an objective.  We have to throw more points & units on that same objective and lose more VPs today, and it doesn't work today, the leaked codex doesn't fix any of that.   Take away Inflexible Command, which scores even when we're tabled, and the Guard WR% would be 35% at best.  Then drop the free 12 points from Boots on the Ground and Guard would be at a 25% WR.

 

Edit:

note the damage profiles on the chart I provided are uncapped, meaning the BC gets credit for the full 3W vs a 2W intercessor.  This helps account for 3W models like Bladeguard & Eradicators, or 2W -1D models like DG.

Maybe instead of comparing BA trait to SATW, you should probably compare to a trait that fills the same niche.

 

+1 to charge rolls isn’t nearly as good of a movement buff.

 

don’t mistake what I’m saying as I think the codex will be super strong based on what we’re seeing now, I just think people are taking a very narrow view of what we’re seeing.

 

not to mention 3-12 weeks after dropping there’s going to be an errata that either buffs or nerfs  things.

Edited November 6, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Khornestar]

Do guard vehicles still get armor of contempt in the new codex?

[Emperor Ming]

1 hour ago, Khornestar said:

Do guard vehicles still get armor of contempt in the new codex?

Its dataslate related so yes if you play matched

 

No for everyone else

[jarms48]

34 minutes ago, Emperor Ming said:

Its dataslate related so yes if you play matched

 

No for everyone else

 

This. Though from memory I think GW said there'd be another dataslate in January. So we could potentially lose it. Really up to GW.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

43 minutes ago, Emperor Ming said:

Its dataslate related so yes if you play matched

 

No for everyone else

Wait what? It depends on which game type you play now?

[Lord_Ikka]

Hmm. Super-heavy tank ace with the Knight of Piety and AoC turns out to be much, much beefier than an Imperial Knight. 2+ armor, T9, 5+ invuln, 5+ mortal wound save, and Armor of Contempt lowering opponent AP- nasty. 

19 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Wait what? It depends on which game type you play now?

Balance dataslate changes technically only apply to Matched Play game mode, not Narrative/Open. Narrative game mode changes came from the Crusade books- now the Ark books, FAQs for clarifications/changes of rules, or Chapter Approved Munitorum Field Manual for PL changes.

Edited November 7, 2022 by Lord_Ikka

[sairence]

7 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Wait what? It depends on which game type you play now?

 

The balance dataslate is specifically for matched play and by default only affects those games. Think it says so in its intro and has been that way since it was introduced. :)

 

As for AoC, we have it as long as it's in the dataslate, unless they've specifically added it to the Codex.

[jarms48]

1 hour ago, sairence said:

The balance dataslate is specifically for matched play and by default only affects those games. Think it says so in its intro and has been that way since it was introduced. :)

 

This. The biggest issue for crusade is that BS, GW App, and games-workshop roll all the rules into the datasheet.

[Medjugorje]

On 11/6/2022 at 4:12 PM, Captain Caine 24th said:

And while we all know my dear malcador infernus isn't going to be getting any buffs in that, we can be sure that if there are problems with the rogal dorn, castellan, sentinel, kasrkin, they'll get some attention. 

dont be too sure. GW shown their roulette on point drops. My BT army had some magnificent point drops for Crusader squads (which they needed at this time) but the Sword Brethren (also new) didnt get anything although they were terrible from the start - and now they are even more terrrible and nothing happened.

[TCC]

GW have dropped so more rules.

 

shock troops get exploding 6’ with lashing - makes me think we will loose auto wound on 6 as its odd to have the two overlap.

[Emperor Ming]

2 hours ago, TCC said:

GW have dropped so more rules.

 

shock troops get exploding 6’ with lashing - makes me think we will loose auto wound on 6 as its odd to have the two overlap.

Will it? isnt that covered by rare rules section

 

So the 6 would go onto wound automatically because of hammer of the emp

 

the extra hit caused by shock troopers would have to wound normally

[TCC]

19 minutes ago, Emperor Ming said:

Will it? isnt that covered by rare rules section

 

So the 6 would go onto wound automatically because of hammer of the emp

 

the extra hit caused by shock troopers would have to wound normally

That would be amazing and a decent buff, I’m not holding my breath.

[duz_]

 

 

RR look scary... 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I was just thinking. Chimera having a 12 man transport capability is a weird number. So anyone think it will get an adjusted transport capacity?

[greatcrusade08]

i wonder why you would take a sabre over the melta tip lance profile tbh

[mertbl]

4 minutes ago, greatcrusade08 said:

i wonder why you would take a sabre over the melta tip lance profile tbh

Its an additional weapon option. You don't give up the lance. I dont know why you would ever use the sword though.  

[jarms48]

11 hours ago, duz_ said:

 

 

RR look scary... 

 

17.5 wounds to a knight with the melee order. Kills 8 CSM terminators. Best unit in the codex.

[Iron Lord]

2 hours ago, mertbl said:

Its an additional weapon option. You don't give up the lance. I dont know why you would ever use the sword though.  

A character with the sabre and the lance, automatically gets an bonus attack with the sabre, in addition to the standard number of attacks with the lance.