thoughts on 10th?

[Brother Nathan]

greetings from the hivemind! primarily tyranid player though i do have a set of gsc on sprues which i will eventually build and possibly play if not for 40k atleast for necromundia. anyway what im really curious about is gsc and 10th expections? nids are obviously getting a relaunch but when it rolls around to our cousins, what are you needing/ expecting? what gaps in the gsc range is there and what would you like built on etc. 

[Rogue]

Hello.

I'm really uncertain about 10th and GSC. The rules look fine so far, and it'll be interesting to see how they pan out - my concern is the interaction with GSC as a faction.

 

The current drive towards simplicity clashes with the Cult's general level of complexity. We're not super-complicated, but do have various interacting rules that feel like part of our identity, and I think we may lose some of that (as well as custom traits, which I'm really enjoying at the moment).

 

In terms of wish-listing; I feel like the range is in a good place. The one thing I'd like to see is something really rugged and smashy, the equivalent of a dreadnought, that we could use as a distraction carnifex. I know we have access to carnifexes,  but just one on its own feels weird, whereas some kind of mining walker would be brilliant.

[brother_b]

I agree, I’m concerned they’ll dumb down the faction specific rules that really give it flavor.

 

After looking at the weapons article the other day, I think they’re going to dumb down our options even more, like all melee heavy mining options are going to be given one profile.

 

Im hoping they instead add “anti” roles to the melee weapons like anti infantry etc.

 

For next edition:

 

I think we need our aberrants to be better. I want them to be a serious option with strengths that I can build a list towards. I want to have to make a serious consideration between aberrants, acolytes, and stealers.

 

I would love a mining style walker that would be great.

 

I want some form of LOW specific to the cults. I don’t want a tyranid monster or a guard bane blade.

 

I think the mining platform terrain piece was supposed to kind of be that for us.

 

Instead I want something like Triumph of Saint Katherine, or the AOS slaneesh model with the fat guy. Maybe “cult throng with ancient patriarch” or something.

 

 

Edited April 17, 2023 by brother_b

[Dr. Clock]

On 4/14/2023 at 6:04 PM, Brother nathan said:

what would you like built on

If our range is to be poached for Ash Wastes, I say bring the Ash Waste Ridgehauler into our range. I love the idea of throwing 15+ Acolytes in one of those puppies, or indeed Neophytes if they give it open-topped.

 

For other stuff, I hate to say 'baby carrier exo-suits', but I'm gonna. It'd be some sweet irony to have a 'definitely-not-Ripley' piloting some shambolic loading walker. Gotta make them distinct enough from other units that you'd likely need like T6 and 4W with a 3+ save maybe? Basically a unit of 2 in the style of AdMech Robots, and I'd be fine with either 'actual robots' or exo-suits (or make that that part of the dual-build; robots slower/heavier with double seismic/flamer/laser and operator, pilots for saw/drill/cutter or scoop/claw options). Basically shorter than Kastelans but slightly taller than new terminators.

 

The idea that like 4 UWU mining suits could run up to saw the legs off a Dreadknight is just too hilarious not to let it happen.

 

Cheers,

 

The Good Doctor.

 

 

Edited April 17, 2023 by Dr. Clock

[Zoatibix]

It’s testament to how well written the codex is that I, a bear of very little brain, can enjoy playing it despite the need for units to apply tokens, pre-game abilities, psychic powers, or command buffs.

 

Not quite sure how well the feel of the army will come across in just the index form. 

[Emperor Ming]

Worried

 

Getting rules chopped down to two pages means a lot of cuts for rules/strats etc. 

[TrawlingCleaner]

I'm really looking forward to seeing how the edition plays, so far I'm impressed with what we've seen.

My expectation is that all/most armies are going to be pretty basic in their "Index" incarnations, with only one "subfaction" detatchment per army. I think most of the flavour is going to come down to unit rules rather than "subfaction" detatchments to begin with until codexes start releasing or they release extra content as they did with 8th ed Indexes.

I hope we keep Crossfire as (in my opinion) it was one of the most interesting and well written faction rules and really brings together units in a fluffy way whilst still bringing rules crunch.

From the reveals we've seen so far, the only thing that has me a little concerned are the Chracters joining units. My worry is that our characters will be limited to only being able to be put in units of their "type". For example: Magus can only be put in Neophyte squads, Primus and Iconwards can only be put in Acolytes and Metas, Patriarchs only in Purestrain, etc. Perhaps it's a hangover of the last few editions and being able to "hide" melee characters behind Neophytes or a Magus in the midst of melee units. We'll see soon enough I think!

 

8 hours ago, Emperor Ming said:

Worried

 

Getting rules chopped down to two pages means a lot of cuts for rules/strats etc. 

It's a sentiment that I've seen in a few places but the only rules they've mentioned being condensed down to two pages are the Subfaction rules for each army.

A good example of how I think this will look is the Cogs of Vashtorr detatchment or the Red Disciples Detatchment.

Army rules are likely to be similar in length to how they are currently, maybe with some tweaks for those that are a tad too complicated.

That's all guess work, mind

[brother_b]

They’ve already mentioned the biophagus joining a unit so I agree we’ll likely see limits to that which does not make me happy.

 

At this point it is what it is so I hope we’ll have some positive translation from this codex to 10th edition.

[sitnam]

2 hours ago, brother_b said:

They’ve already mentioned the biophagus joining a unit so I agree we’ll likely see limits to that which does not make me happy.

It'll be interesting to see the list of units a Leader can attach to, especially in non-marine codexes that don't have quite the plethora of choices. I could see bodyguard like the Locus being allowed to join units with other characters to fulfill their role, whereas the Sanctus and Saboteur could be Lone operatives.

[Emperor Ming]

lone operatives could trap yourself into getting your squishy characters killed off easily, just getting within 12 isn't hard

 

Its a shame the current look out sir didn't stay.

 

Its worrying for squishy armies with squishy characters like guard/cults 

[Rogue]

This is true. Even our big broods can melt away in a turn if the enemy focus into them. Characters could get exposed pretty quickly.

[brother_b]

Well new information regarding terrain and the benefits of terrain. Personally, terrain rules seem way dumbed down right now. Simple, not simplicity. We'll have to see how this works.

 

I'm wondering how we'll be able to use terrain to keep our units alive. The real only bonus is that +1 save, which on our models is really weak. I would have liked (and maybe we'll get) some way to have terrain make it harder to units in terrain, a -1 to BS rolls from the firing unit, etc.

 

Transports look interesting. We can now move and disembark and shoot, which is nice, but can't disembark and charge. Maybe we'll get a strat for that.

Edited April 20, 2023 by brother_b

[Rogue]

All ruins becoming obscuring is helpful, though. At the moment, that's my main route to keeping units alive - keep them out of sight. So more LoS-blocking terrain, more places to hide.

[Dark Legionnare]

On 4/20/2023 at 1:56 PM, brother_b said:

Well new information regarding terrain and the benefits of terrain. Personally, terrain rules seem way dumbed down right now. Simple, not simplicity. We'll have to see how this works.

 

I'm wondering how we'll be able to use terrain to keep our units alive. The real only bonus is that +1 save, which on our models is really weak. I would have liked (and maybe we'll get) some way to have terrain make it harder to units in terrain, a -1 to BS rolls from the firing unit, etc.

 

Transports look interesting. We can now move and disembark and shoot, which is nice, but can't disembark and charge. Maybe we'll get a strat for that.

It's possible we might see the return of "Stealth" as a USR.  Since GW is seemingly realizing going away from USR's was dumb from the get-go (Having the same rule across 8+ factions & subfactions all be different names, but the same effect being dumb) then stealth may come back for the "skulkier" units across factions.  IE, adding +1, to saves if in cover or something of that like,

Edited April 25, 2023 by Dark Legionnare

[sitnam]

I suppose now that it has been revealed, any thoughts changed? I think Brood Brothers in particular is kind of interesting, as it seems that GSC can take the Catachans/Cadian/Krieg specific squads

[Emperor Ming]

Judging by the patriarch, the psychic stuff has gotten a massive whack with the nerf hammer

 

Going from cast two, to that profile...... large points drop hopefully

 

Patriarch is an epic hero as well so only one, also that means he cant have enchantments

 

He was never a popular pick to begin with, not sure what they were trying to do here

[brother_b]

I’m not a fan of how the characters are leaning. I have a feeling the patriarch will only ever be a guest rolling along with his genestealers.
 

The same for our other characters, as noted in the preview, “The Leader ability also opens up many exciting possibilities for this faction, with some supporting Characters able to lend their own abilities to units already led by a Primus, Magus, or Acolyte Iconward. From the Fights First ability conferred by the Locus to the Lethal Hits weapon ability a Biophagus brings with them, there are many devious ways to punish the foes of the Cult”.

 

At least it appears we may be able to double buff some units.

 

I remain optimistic. I’ve already painted 30+ neophytes and held off choosing weapons for my leaders. Now it seems that doesn’t really matter, nor does the unit of shotguns I was working on.

 

We should know much more or all within the month it seems!

[MDops]

Just wondering if I am reading it right for the new ambush.

 

Battleline always return in essence.

 

Min roll of 1 + 3 for being battle line = 4 the only issue is if the leader returns with them

[Ulfast]

That seems to be right. Intersting thing and I wonder how good it will be. 

[Rogue]

I'm sad about the new Patriarch. I use the current version as a really buffed-up weapon - Preternatural Speed, Unwilling Orb, Smite, Blast, Toxin Agents, Synaptic Resonance - which makes him a valuable (and consistent) source of mortal wounds, and dangerous against most things in combat.

 

The new version just feels less. Hopefully he'll turn a brood of genestealers into handy linebreakers, but it's not as good.

 

It feels like the preview is pushing the Cults towards a neophyte-heavy shooting army, which has never been my style - not enough neophytes, for one thing; and if I wanted a horde of cheap infantry guns, I'd be the Guard and get decent tanks thrown in.

 

So not convinced yet. Hopefully getting it all on the table and giving a go will help.

[Zoatibix]

Yeah, the Patriarch should be to a regular Genestealer what an old school Smash Captain was to an assault marine! Enemies should be very worried about getting into melee with a Patriach.

 

Stuff ‘maybe he’ll be cheap’?! He should be a killer and cost appropriate points. Not Grandpa Simpson Shouting at the enemy.

 

In regards to our fragility- hopefully we gets strats that buff armour, give Stealth , replace lost Ambush Tokens, etc, etc

[Rogue]

Theory-hammer, obviously, but what would it look like if we really lean into the army rule and fill a list with as many neophytes as possible? - twelve squads of twenty, I think. Build a gun-line, and every time a unit dies, recycle them into the backline and go again.

 

Alternatively, go with twelve squads of five acolytes. Easy to kill, true, but able to repeatedly pop up all over the board. And given that they're generally pretty cheap, it might be worthwhile giving up ambush tokens to pull enemy units back into their own lines or otherwise out of position.

[Emperor Ming]

Possibly, but since they can come back, I'm expecting nonsensical points increase

[Rogue]

Probably, but it's such a variable, especially for non-battleline units. Something like genestealers could potentially return four times in a single game (although if they're being killed that often, they're not doing much except absorbing firepower); on the other hand, they'll fail the first roll in half their games and won't come back at all.

 

How do you set points for "This genestealer could be anything between 1 and 5 genestealers"?

[Zoatibix]

I fear that GW’s answer will be to make our units middling at best.

 

I watched the first half of the WHTV Bat rep last night. At one point the flamer Marines kill seventeen termagants with a single volley*. I’m not a great player but that kind of wrecking of Neophyte or ‘gaunt squads isn’t new to me.

 

But this was ‘okay’ because the Tyranid player could replace destroyed Broods, albeit at much lower numbers. Which feels a lot like we’re restocking the shooting gallery for the Hero Protagonists again.

 

The Nids won by the skin of their teeth on points but despite those respawned broods they still got tabled.

If ‘less lethal’ means that Marines aren’t dying as quickly…while everyone else still dies by the handful, a light infantry army such as ours is going to be heavily dependent on respawning units. Therefore I hope that GW consider the overall relative strengths of each army and don’t smack GSC units with some kind of points tax .

 

That said, units like Genestealers and Abominants need to be able to punch stuff like Terminators to death because ‘more bodies’ or ‘occupying space’ can only take us so far.

 

 

*I missed if that BBQing of the poor Gaunts was done via Overwatch. Technically it could be, which highlights a potential danger for light infantry trying to get into position for a firefight.