What does everyone think of 10th so far?

[Sea Creature]

The new rules for the Lion leave me drooling like a madman.

[Tacitus]

6 hours ago, Eilio Tiberius said:

I'm still happy for 10th and look forward to playing it. I have yet to disagree with any rules leaks including what they sent to Legends the other day.

 

Still optimistic. 

even though I'm losing a couple models/units for my BA and DA.

 

 

I'm almost always against moving things to Legends.  Variety is King.  I'd far prefer each sub faction having at least a couple different viable builds at all times, and moving stuff to legends just makes that less likely. 

[Helias_Tancred]

1 hour ago, Tacitus said:

I'm almost always against moving things to Legends.  Variety is King.  I'd far prefer each sub faction having at least a couple different viable builds at all times, and moving stuff to legends just makes that less likely. 

 

Their rationale was so they could better balance the game going forward. But I do see your point. 

 

[The Unseen]

6 hours ago, Eilio Tiberius said:

 

Their rationale was so they could better balance the game going forward. But I do see your point. 

 

That's complete corporate nonsense and you and everyone else knows it. What the hell do we pay GWs outrageous prices for books for if not to do the job of making and balancing their game? TBH the whole decisions seems like exactly the sort of MBA know-it-all ego driven cascade failure that is all to common in the modern world. It doesn't make sense from almost any angle, unless you think that the HH units are pulling sales away from Primaris, which are clearly the darling child that must be protected, or thinking that pulling the rug out of paying customers will make them buy another whole army in another system if they lose cross-compatibility. TBH, with how eager 40k players are to throw money at GW despite their bad decisions, they are probably even right.

 

 I can't actually think of any reason to scrap the daemon engines except some combination of not wanting CSM players to use models that opened up their completely restricted design space and just plain "we didn't want to actually do the work to balance them"; pure disdain for the (already payed) customer. They're even listed as HH legends units, but the daemon engines haven't ever even HAD rules in the HH system, either 1st or 2nd edition. They were purely 40k units from conception to now. Giving the Titan previews immediately afterward feels especially tone-deaf, even for GW.

 

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the balance of the index's being completely and utterly broken upon release; I think it'll be funny to see GW speed-run a broken edition. Looking at DG and Admech vs Aeldari, and it isn't even close, and even if they somehow perfectly managed the balance with pts, it's still a complete army-flavor fail to have a horde of plague marines that can barely walk across the table during the course of a game, and be barely tougher than a regular marine, while the elves get to keep their ridiculous mobility, rerolls and Fate, indestructible war-walker units, and goddamn indirect better-lascannons artillery.

 

Between how I don't care for a lot of the 10th ed changes to the actual mechanics, like no skill expression with combat movement, the complete gutting of Melta as a viable anti-tank tool (which has been its role for literally the entire games history and lore btw), making combi-weapons weird anti-heavy infantry guns, ; and the decision to take plastic kits up-sold to 40k players less than a year ago behind the barn and "legend" them, I don't see myself playing much of 10th. 

 

A lot of the UI and keyword changes are great, and if anything didn't go far enough, sticky objectives should've absolutely been another USR; and the rules are definitely easier to read/understand this go round; and cutting down stratagems to a small list of impactful things is very good. Different sub-factions being unique detachments available no matter your paint scheme rather than multiple layers of nested rules is just good game design, though in implementation leave much to be desired. BA and Wolves are DOA, the DA one is *fine*, and the BT one is far and away the best and might even be better than the Gladius detachment outright; the DW one will live and die on the killteam units actual rules so I'm hesitant to  judge that one much. As the starting example of 10th ed's detachment balance, I am severely disappointed.

 

[The Emperors Champion22]

3 hours ago, The Unseen said:

That's complete corporate nonsense and you and everyone else knows it. What the hell do we pay GWs outrageous prices for books for if not to do the job of making and balancing their game? TBH the whole decisions seems like exactly the sort of MBA know-it-all ego driven cascade failure that is all to common in the modern world. It doesn't make sense from almost any angle, unless you think that the HH units are pulling sales away from Primaris, which are clearly the darling child that must be protected, or thinking that pulling the rug out of paying customers will make them buy another whole army in another system if they lose cross-compatibility. TBH, with how eager 40k players are to throw money at GW despite their bad decisions, they are probably even right.

 

 I can't actually think of any reason to scrap the daemon engines except some combination of not wanting CSM players to use models that opened up their completely restricted design space and just plain "we didn't want to actually do the work to balance them"; pure disdain for the (already payed) customer. They're even listed as HH legends units, but the daemon engines haven't ever even HAD rules in the HH system, either 1st or 2nd edition. They were purely 40k units from conception to now. Giving the Titan previews immediately afterward feels especially tone-deaf, even for GW.

 

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the balance of the index's being completely and utterly broken upon release; I think it'll be funny to see GW speed-run a broken edition. Looking at DG and Admech vs Aeldari, and it isn't even close, and even if they somehow perfectly managed the balance with pts, it's still a complete army-flavor fail to have a horde of plague marines that can barely walk across the table during the course of a game, and be barely tougher than a regular marine, while the elves get to keep their ridiculous mobility, rerolls and Fate, indestructible war-walker units, and goddamn indirect better-lascannons artillery.

 

Between how I don't care for a lot of the 10th ed changes to the actual mechanics, like no skill expression with combat movement, the complete gutting of Melta as a viable anti-tank tool (which has been its role for literally the entire games history and lore btw), making combi-weapons weird anti-heavy infantry guns, ; and the decision to take plastic kits up-sold to 40k players less than a year ago behind the barn and "legend" them, I don't see myself playing much of 10th. 

 

A lot of the UI and keyword changes are great, and if anything didn't go far enough, sticky objectives should've absolutely been another USR; and the rules are definitely easier to read/understand this go round; and cutting down stratagems to a small list of impactful things is very good. Different sub-factions being unique detachments available no matter your paint scheme rather than multiple layers of nested rules is just good game design, though in implementation leave much to be desired. BA and Wolves are DOA, the DA one is *fine*, and the BT one is far and away the best and might even be better than the Gladius detachment outright; the DW one will live and die on the killteam units actual rules so I'm hesitant to  judge that one much. As the starting example of 10th ed's detachment balance, I am severely disappointed.

 

To be fair we havent seen the full suite of rules for the marine chapters so BA and SW might not be as DOA as you think.

[The Unseen]

We HAVE seen the Detachment rules and that's what I'm talking about. And giving up the new doctrines for +1Str/Attack ONLY on the charge or any of the Sagas is just a really poor trade. Unless the stratagems for those detachments are WAY better than the generic marine ones, you'll be way better off running the Gladius with your melee marines, since you can run your chapter specific units in it freely. 

 

That and the preview for both of them being units nobody cares about (Primaris DC and the Anti-Psyker Reivers no one has ever used, really?) and the sole successor character that a tiny fraction of BA players use have really help sell the factions, lol. 

[Blindhamster]

I imagine regular DC will have similar rules to the intercessor version.

 

I imagine the chapter specific strats will be updates of ones we already have in 9th. 

I actually like the DC intercessor rules, if they got the option to take more melee weapons than 2 across the entire squad, honestly I’d say it was a pretty fun unit. 

 

Edited June 3, 2023 by Blindhamster

[The Unseen]

14 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

I imagine regular DC will have similar rules to the intercessor version.

 

I imagine the chapter specific strats will be updates of ones we already have in 9th. 

I actually like the DC intercessor rules, if they got the option to take more melee weapons than 2 across the entire squad, honestly I’d say it was a pretty fun unit. 

 

I imagine so, just the unit that matters to anyone who isn't deliberately restricting themselves to Primaris is the one that can take melee weapons and jump packs.

 

God I hope not, BA have like 2 actually good strats.

[Karhedron]

Those faction focus articles are just to tease us. GW don't need to try and sell us on Blood Angels because there are already loads of players. They showed us DC Intercessors,  not because they are popular but because they are significantly improved over their 9th edition incarnation.

 

If their style of presentation does not appeal to you, do not sweat it. We will have all the data sheets in our hands in a couple of weeks. Is the BA trait as good as 9th? No, but most Detachment bonuses look weaker. It is fluffy and at least it is always on (unlike the poor SWs who need to complete a bunch of side-quests to activate theirs). I can Red Thirst working well with an aggressive melee army. And if I find I am wrong or want to run a more combined arms list then the Gladius Strike Force is still available. 

[spessmarine]

What GW is try to push can be pretty obvious.

Not sure if it is confirmation bias, but sure feels like Land Raiders have been popping up more in promo/marketing shots!

As well, Sword Brethren and the like are nice kits and fit BTs well so it is reasonable for them to feature in an article. On the other hand, sorry, but I think it is reasonable to say the Hounds and an Intercessor upgrade sprue aren't what drew people to SW/BA, refresh Bjorn + friends and Sanguinary Guard if it bothers you GW.

[Blindhamster]

I actually rarely go crazy on jump packs, didn’t even before primaris :D but I know many do. so I was happy to see how DC intercessors work, I may actually make some now as their rules look quite fun

[Sea Creature]

BA is looking to be a fun faction.

[Helias_Tancred]

16 hours ago, The Unseen said:

That's complete corporate nonsense and you and everyone else knows it.

 

 

I'll have to disagree. 

 

I like to keep things simple, the concept that reducing the numbers of models used under a set of rules in order to make  it easier to "balance" those rules ... is very plausible.

 

I also think we the players/customers/hobbyists tend to think GW has a much larger game development staff than they actually do, and thus can do a far better job than they have. I heard the truth is it's pretty small (thats what she said lol). But I also believe they use rules to sell models. So .... I'm curious to see if that pattern is broken with 10th? 

 

 

Edited June 4, 2023 by Eilio Tiberius

[Tacitus]

2 hours ago, Eilio Tiberius said:

 

I'll have to disagree. 

 

I like to keep things simple, the concept that reducing the numbers of models used under a set of rules in order to make  it easier to "balance" those rules ... is very plausible.

The issue is not plausible, the issue is responsible.  Turning 40K into alternate Chess/Checker pieces is plausible.  But it's not what we're paying GW for. 

[Captain Idaho]

8 hours ago, Eilio Tiberius said:

I also think we the players/customers/hobbyists tend to think GW has a much larger game development staff than they actually do, and thus can do a far better job than they have. I heard the truth is it's pretty small (thats what she said lol). But I also believe they use rules to sell models. So .... I'm curious to see if that pattern is broken with 10th? 

 

Well they should employ more people.  With the profits they're making, it is very feasible and would like create a tighter game and please more people, which is good for business.

 

****

 

I went from super impressed we were getting updated rules for classic units, to super depressed I was losing 70% of my army for 10th... back to confused about why Terminator Captains have on their data card that they can join Relic Terminators who are in Legends?

 

Very odd connection. 

[Marshal Reinhard]

7 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

I went from super impressed we were getting updated rules for classic units, to super depressed I was losing 70% of my army for 10th... back to confused about why Terminator Captains have on their data card that they can join Relic Terminators who are in Legends?

 

Very odd connection. 

Because Relic Terminators are still valid for all modes of play except competetive?

[Captain Idaho]

Legends being referenced by non-Legends specifically is an odd distinction. One is getting updates, the other not.

[Guzzlrr]

I've Got a controversial opinion apparently. I'm buzzing. cant wait to see what  this new edition has instore for me.

 

DG bit bummed that the Initial rules seem a bit stale in comparison to the other Chaotic factions, but when the Index drops and we get the full picture and we give feedback, hopefully adjustments (if necessary) will be made. looking forward to seeing what New Stuff DG will get!

 

World Eaters - I'm looking forward to trying a new edition with a buffed angie, i will Absolutely die with laughter if i ever get to bring back Angron also looking forward to seeing all the other rules  

 

Chaos - so many unknowns, Detachment rules datasheets what's happening with prayers? hoping to the lord obliterators are properly priced.

 

Thousand sons Is magnus gonna be good? he sat out 9th for me so hopefully an edition in the sin bin had sharpened his rules, also so far the thousand sons rule look the most fun, probably the army ill start 10th with.

 

so I'm fairly optimistic, looking forward to playing in tournaments with new rules and playing with friends in a completely new and fresh edition.  

 

 

as for the legends stuff, its been clear (at least to me) that GW has been moving towards self contained systems "whats in the box" making rules for models *that actually exist in the armies range* yeah while it does suck things like decimators etc are going away and it does suck this happened with no heads up either (bad GW for selling these kits as cross edition in 9th if they knew this was the plan) its also been pretty clear Generally GW is moving away from resin and has been for years so this really cant be a shock to anyone. not to say these things wont reappear in plastic because most of the HH stuff came back. its a wait and see approach and i don't think its really that much of a big deal unless your at tournaments. because no one i know would grumble at you using that in a friendly.

 

just my 2 cents.

 

Edited June 4, 2023 by Guzzlrr

[Tacitus]

9 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

Legends being referenced by non-Legends specifically is an odd distinction. One is getting updates, the other not.

Try this fan theory on for size.  

 

Making Relic Terminators in the first place was the carrot to get you to double down into HH/30K.

 

Moving Relic Terminators to Legends is the stick. 

[Captain Idaho]

I can imagine that's what they're doing in the board room... in practice it means I don't have anyone to play against unless I go 40K.

Edited June 5, 2023 by Captain Idaho

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I like that gravis goes up to T6 while terminators are T5.

the lower AP in the game makes both unit types viable options with neither being the clear choice.

 

the gravis apothecary I like the look of as well.

[Blindhamster]

I’m personally finding the scattershot approach to primaris weird and annoying, what is the point in the primaris captain having the primaris keyword, almost nothing else does from what we have seen, why not just stick to the tacticus keyword, same as stuff like intercessors are shown to have.

[Tacitus]

16 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

I’m personally finding the scattershot approach to primaris weird and annoying, what is the point in the primaris captain having the primaris keyword, almost nothing else does from what we have seen, why not just stick to the tacticus keyword, same as stuff like intercessors are shown to have.

Probably nothing - its probably an artefact from the previous edition that wasn't properly edited/updated.  Remember when the Heavy Intercessors were released, and the gun upgrade options referred to weapon names that didn't match their profile? 

[Sea Creature]

 Not worth getting upset about. Primaris aren’t going anywhere.

[Blindhamster]

It’s more I find it dumb to keep the keyword in some places and not others, just comes across as messy, would have much preferred if it was just gone lol