What does everyone think of 10th so far?

[Blindhamster]

Interested to see how that pans out, I’ll be unhappy to lose some form of army wide representation of the red thirst. It at the same time, if they manage to work out a meaningful way to allow my tactical marines to play like blood angels via a detachment I’ll survive lol

[Khornestar]

There will undoubtedly be things I don’t like, but that happens with every edition. (They returned the juggerlord, so my #1 gripe has been resolved, short of returning KDK, but I digress…)

 

I really like what they’ve shown us so far. I like the streamlining, I *LOVE* the terminators, so we’re going in a good direction.

 

For my Black Templars, I don’t really care too much about losing all the special snowflake rules and options. For me the flavor is in how I model and paint them, as well as how I play them on the table. Astartes are astartes as far as I’m concerned, and I don’t need unique rules (though I enjoyed them) to still have fun playing them.

[Captain Idaho]

Funnily enough I actually like what they've done with psychics... if they aren't doing full Psychic phase like warhammer fantasy it's the logical way to streamline it!

 

Loving the idea of Terminators right now (yes, a 1st Company army is on the horizon for me...).

 

I'm happy with combining weapons profiles but some weapons I think it is too sweeping a decision. 2 examples... liking Bolt Rifles basically becoming all round decent without a focus on a single being the best, however I don't like what they've appeared to do to Combi weapons as a melta is not a flamer is not a plasma...

 

Another example that is melee based is power weapons. I don't mind them being a single weapon system. It makes sense as the difference in combat between being "bested" by a Space Marine with a sword or an axe is immaterial to the result.

 

So something things work, others worry me.

[Marshal Reinhard]

20 minutes ago, Khornestar said:

For my Black Templars, I don’t really care too much about losing all the special snowflake rules and options. For me the flavor is in how I model and paint them, as well as how I play them on the table. Astartes are astartes as far as I’m concerned, and I don’t need unique rules (though I enjoyed them) to still have fun playing them.

Ooof. Harsh.

 

From our perspective we just spent some four editions without our special snowflake options so having finally gotten them back less than 2 years ago it'd be kind of a bummer to see them go again.

 

Especially liked the completely new addition of the mini relics, present on our upgrade sprue. It'd be a shame if those just instantly went over to being whatever instead. Though I suppose I could in that case just slap them out willy nilly where I choose so there's that.

Edited April 19, 2023 by Marshal Reinhard

[spessmarine]

USRs, Characters leading squads, firing ports, Psychic attacks now have a statline. Interesting to see they've reverted some big things from the 8th/9th era. Not really going much further in the AoS path that some people thought was happening.

[Khornestar]

11 hours ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

Ooof. Harsh.

 

From our perspective we just spent some four editions without our special snowflake options so having finally gotten them back less than 2 years ago it'd be kind of a bummer to see them go again.

 

Especially liked the completely new addition of the mini relics, present on our upgrade sprue. It'd be a shame if those just instantly went over to being whatever instead. Though I suppose I could in that case just slap them out willy nilly where I choose so there's that.

9th rules were awesome, in the context of 9th, don’t get me wrong. But if the overall game ends up being better as a result of such  things going away, I’m okay with it. Remains to be seen, though marines aren’t looking too shabby so far.

[XeonDragon]

I'm hopeful. 

[Helias_Tancred]

I haven't been disappointed by a leak yet!

 

 

[Bouargh]

10th rule for transports teased so far looks very attractive. Probably the best thing so far for me...

 

My first born SW will have new runs in their rhinos and razorbacks but I might be tempted adding repulsors...

 

Edited 24-20-23 7:00 GMT - but Terrain rules teaser published today is a little bit of a deception...

Edited April 20, 2023 by Bouargh
i = e + update on WarCom

[Lemondish]

I am loving a lot of what I'm seeing with 10th, especially with regards to the baseline core rules. The return of USR are fantastic, but I've only ever imagined their impact as I started playing in earnest in 8th edition, having only ever collected prior to that.

 

The way these weapon abilities work is one of the highlights for me. In the previous two editions, we had a list of weapon types that every weapon adhered to, but even from that point we had a bunch of special abilities that might or might not apply to a weapon. We knew how Melta behaved, with its extra damage at half range - but it needed to be spelled out in each melta-type weapon to have that impact. We knew how flamers behaved, but it, too, needed to be spelled out in every weapon profile. Eventually we started seeing special faction-specific weapon types, like HUNTR and Dakka getting in and messing with the concept of a unified, shared core ruleset. It started to expand even further with codexes adding subfaction rules that could impact your shooting, along with stratagems, warlord traits, relics, etc.

 

And each was written in a paragraph specific to that ability, yet we still used the same description or label to describe them: rules like exploding sixes, or auto-wounding, or slightly unrelated to weapons, but feel no pain - all were label used to describe the same rule but there was never an effort made to apply that until now.

 

Now, all these effects are universal rules that everybody should know, because it could affect or benefit your units on their own. Now, faction rules, traits, units buffs, and stratagems can rely on these seem shared rules exclusively, and provided we don't deviate into crazyland again with faction specific nonsense too often, we'll be in a great shape.

 

Then there's the impacts on how they deal with rerolls that I'm liking. I can tell already that I'm going to be able to reroll fewer actual dice throughout a match, but when I do, it'll have a much greater (or potentially greater) impact on the match. Like, Oaths of Moment is super powerful, but it's limited to a single target. Twin-linked weapons aren't super common and have their shots reduced (or so far we imagine they do), and other effects like Fire Support from Transports are limited in pretty big ways. I'll be rolling fewer dice a second time, but when I do, it'll matter. I really like that, personally.

 

Then there's the transport news they just shared, where transports will actually be of value.

 

All in all I am loving every new bit they show, but more than anything else...it's the models. They have been soooo good.

[Captain Idaho]

I think I like the morale changes. It might actually force people to take larger units now with objectives camping units and Troops. 

[Tacitus]

Firing Deck limited to one weapon is a disappointment especially as they give more and more models more than one ranged weapon Think Desolators that have one BIG gun that shows up as two on the statline. 

 

Models still can't charge after disembarking - (I suspect we'll still be paying twice for transporting melee units (Once for the upcharge on the vehicle for transport capacity, and once for missing a turn after disembarking)

 

Cover not working on 3+ vs AP- 

 

 

[XeonDragon]

I'm less hopeful after the terrain rules reveal - it looks like yet another edition where Raven Guard and other stealthy marines or factions will be poorly reflected in the rules, and have underwhelming abilities. 

 

Why? Because shadow masters and the stealthy chapter tactic currently work by granting "the benefit of light cover". As I droned on about many times, sneaky marines or other factions / units who get a +1 to save in the open via (as currently worded) "the benefit of light cover" should have a rule that allows that ability to stack with the "benefit of cover" separately and distinctly provided by actual physical terrain.

 

It makes no sense that sneaky marines are no harder to kill when actual cover from physical objects (i.e. terrain) is available than other non-sneaky marines. Zero. Nil. Nada.

 

Simplest way to do that is for GW to remove references to "benefit of" cover from the Raven Guard /stealthy chapter tactic and similar abilities in other factions and just make it +1 to save when targeted from >12" away. Done. Dusted. Easy. A -1 to hit from 12" away (the second part of the RG shadow masters ability) would also be sweet, or even -1 to hit when in terrain.  

 

It'd make the beaky boys hard to dig out... which is both fluffy and useful without being OP, and would do likewise for other sneaky factions or units. I really like the idea of Raven Guard eliminators or sniper units being bloody difficult to dig out with ranged shooting. Sigh. Sadly, GW appears to hate sneaky marines in particular, and 10th isn't going to change that :(

Edited April 24, 2023 by XeonDragon

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

15 minutes ago, XeonDragon said:

I'm less hopeful after the terrain rules reveal - it looks like yet another edition where Raven Guard and other stealthy marines or factions will be poorly reflected in the rules, and have underwhelming abilities. 

 

Why? Because shadow masters and the stealthy chapter tactic currently work by granting "the benefit of light cover". As I droned on about many times, sneaky marines or other factions / units who get a +1 to save in the open via (as currently worded) "the benefit of light cover" should have a rule that allows that ability to stack with the "benefit of cover" separately and distinctly provided by actual physical terrain.

 

It makes no sense that sneaky marines are no harder to kill when actual cover from physical objects (i.e. terrain) is available than other non-sneaky marines. Zero. Nil. Nada.

 

Simplest way to do that is for GW to remove references to "benefit of" cover from the Raven Guard /stealthy chapter tactic and similar abilities in other factions and just make it +1 to save when targeted from >12" away. Done. Dusted. Easy. A -1 to hit from 12" away (the second part of the RG shadow masters ability) would also be sweet, or even -1 to hit when in terrain.  

 

It'd make the beaky boys hard to dig out... which is both fluffy and useful without being OP, and would do likewise for other sneaky factions or units. I really like the idea of Raven Guard eliminators or sniper units being bloody difficult to dig out with ranged shooting. Sigh. Sadly, GW appears to hate sneaky marines in particular, and 10th isn't going to change that :(

 

I'm not so sure. There is design space here for sneaky marines to not be targetable by attacks if they're within X of terrain and more than a certain distance from the enemy. Meaning you could use barricades to be invisible from people trying to tag you across the map. Little early to say how RG will shake out for sure, and while I don't anyone to get their hopes too high, we've seen enough mechanical change thus far that I wouldn't be surprised if the new mechanic wasn't to do with granting a cover bonus at all.

[WrathOfTheLion]

I think you shouldn't be less hopeful because of the current Raven Guard rules, applying 8th edition rules to a completely different system in 10E terrain/cover mechanics is odd. We should wait to see what the rules are for a lot of things.

 

For example, by similar logic, I should be less hopeful because of the morale system. Grim Resolve gives Dark Angels the ability to ignore combat attrition. Or for my Space Wolves, heroic intervention, which goes away with characters being attached to units. Obviously both those rules are going away, so they would have to get dumpstered and replaced with something else, if they still implement chapter rules like that.

[XeonDragon]

30 minutes ago, Marshal Valkenhayn said:

 

I'm not so sure. There is design space here for sneaky marines to not be targetable by attacks if they're within X of terrain and more than a certain distance from the enemy. Meaning you could use barricades to be invisible from people trying to tag you across the map. Little early to say how RG will shake out for sure, and while I don't anyone to get their hopes too high, we've seen enough mechanical change thus far that I wouldn't be surprised if the new mechanic wasn't to do with granting a cover bonus at all.

 

OK.... thanks for politely pointing out my pessimism and lack of data so far.... you've given me some hope :) 

10 minutes ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

I think you shouldn't be less hopeful because of the current Raven Guard rules, applying 8th edition rules to a completely different system in 10E terrain/cover mechanics is odd. We should wait to see what the rules are for a lot of things.

 

For example, by similar logic, I should be less hopeful because of the morale system. Grim Resolve gives Dark Angels the ability to ignore combat attrition. Or for my Space Wolves, heroic intervention, which goes away with characters being attached to units. Obviously both those rules are going away, so they would have to get dumpstered and replaced with something else, if they still implement chapter rules like that.

 Good points. Thanks for giving me some hope :)

[Lemondish]

And here I am after a fine example of hopeful optimism to rain on this parade by pointing out that, as far as we know now, the Index is very likely not going to include any rules that would adhere to your idea of sneaky marines. We may have to wait for the codex for that.

[Karhedron]

I also play Space Wolves and I am wondering how this will pan out. With unique datasheets, weapons and abilities, there is really no need to restrict Wolves to awkward subset of regular Astartes units. This makes me hopeful we will see a proper Wolf Priest with full buffs and Heals but we will have to wait and see. I would not mind us getting an Apothecary. I just hope we get an improvement over the current situation where we don't actually have access to an Apothecary of any flavour at all.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

There’s some stuff i really like the look of so far, there’s some stuff im very apprehensive about.

 

in general we still need a lot more information before any real conclusions can be drawn, and hopefully we’ll get those gaps filled in this weekend or so.

[Lemondish]

41 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

in general we still need a lot more information before any real conclusions can be drawn, and hopefully we’ll get those gaps filled in this weekend or so.

That's very true, though I fear it'll be some time before we see their vision for this edition. I think by the first codexes we'll still have a ton of questions on specifics, especially regarding subfactions.

 

Like, we don't even know what factions there will be in the Index. Will all Marines be considered Adeptus Astartes like the 9th edition treatment with everyone coming from one book with supplements? Or will they be splitting them off to take their (perhaps rightful) place as independent factions once again with their own detachments?

 

Honestly, I think just seeing a table of contents from that Index could answer a fair few questions lol

Edited April 24, 2023 by Lemondish

[Iron Father Ferrum]

5th Edition was my jam.  That's when I got really hip-deep into the hobby and earned my spurs here at the B&C.  I've often proclaimed that it was not only my favorite edition, but the best edition.  The USRs provided a common language for special abilities that sped up game play, and many of those terms continue to use today despite not being rules anymore (i.e., "Feel No Pain").  It was easy to learn and played quickly.

 

I say all this because a lot of structures from 5th are being brought back into the game for 10th.  Armor Values & facings are mostly still out (the "elevated attack gets extra AP" from the terrain rules reflects a similar rule about top-down attacks in 5th) but aside from that?  I'm not going to call this "Edition 5.1" but from what we've seen they're combining a lot of the most streamlined stuff from 5th and 9th.  AVs cause problems?  Keep Toughness & wounds for vehicles.  Degrading vehicles are a pain, though?  Sweep them aside for simple attacks debuffs.  The psychic phase pulls non-psychic army-players out of the game?  Stuff the powers back into other phases like they used to be.

 

So yeah, it's very mix & match but I like what I've seen so far.  There's still a lot of the rules hidden behind the curtain, but overall I'm fairly optimistic.

 

 

[Malakithe]

Based on the many, many, games I havent played I would say its the change ever.

[Tacitus]

On 4/24/2023 at 5:31 AM, KrakenBorn said:

As a space wolf player I'm curious how they're going to handle us having Wolf Priests rather than Chaplains/Apothecaries,

What makes you think Wolves will still have Wolf Priests instead of Chaplains and Apothecaries?

 

Or that Ravenguard will still be sneaky marines?

 

Maybe they bring this sort of thing back with the various codices, but nothing so far suggests any of these flavor choices have survived the new edition.  The new Terminator Datasheet release/tease doesn't say anything about Deathwing, or Wolf Guard. 

[Lemondish]

I can definitely see how folks could feel a bit shook at the idea of abandoning an edition where a particular faction could have support in a Codex that is in turn expanded on via supplements, campaign books, and armies of renown. Going from this to an edition wipe that resets everything with a baseline Index would be difficult to accept right away. I understand that.

 

But it isn't like the idea of building a subfaction, lore friendly representation is gone with this new edition-long system.

 

And further, it isn't like the current way this is handled is particularly effective.

 

Take Raven Guard, for example. Apparently so sneaky they ambush you with Centurions (absurd), and try to avoid fights by staying at arms length. Hardly proper Astartes behaviour if you ask me...

 

But imagine a detachment that provides bonuses to the types of sneaky units a force like this would be drawn to, and the best part is that you don't have to paint your guys as RG or a successor to make use of it because every Marine force can be sneaky.

 

Until we see the Codex, all we have is speculation of course, but the potential this detachment system has in being able to create hyper focused army styles that encourage you to play a specific style should not be ignored at this stage. There's value in not being locked into a specific set of rules because you painted yourself one way.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Not a fan of gambits.