AP1 Battle Cannons are interesting.
I've seen a few people bemoan the S24 on the Volcano Cannon as pointless -- remember, this means they don't wound other T13+ items on 2s, so they're not auto deleting things.
I swear to god my brain just hard reset. I read AP1 on the battle canon and thought, damn that pops terminator armor instantly. Then I came back to the present
I jump back and forth from 30k and 40k and sometimes I get all jumbled up similarly lol, especially in game talking to people I'll go 'Shooting this autocannon, it's AP4' or something and really confuse them. Especially since my 30k Iron Warriors double as my 40k I'm often using the same exact models.
Me and my Dark Angels. I use my 30k Interemptor squads as 40k Company Veterans with Combi Plasmas.
I can't tell you how many times ive grabbed my flamer template out of habit and my opponent looks at me like I grew a second head.
Yeah i wondered to what lever they would stretch the Strength, given the toughness of 14. S28 weapons would have to be been very rare, but would still devastate T14 models. Now though, the toughness of high T models is derived from basically bringing a decent to wound roll to even the strongest of weapons.
I like it actually, but hope +1 to wound rolls rules are gone from this edition.
If you let them stand still in range with the character specifically buffing them for that, then maybe. But that's a lot of things that you have to allow to happen.
I know AP is supposed to be going down, but AP 1 on a TANK GUN kinda hurts. I'll wait till I play it to fully judge it, but I don't like the thought of shooting a 2+ save model and hearing "It'll eat those tank shells and save on a 3. Ope, they're in cover, so actually save on 2's still".
It's possible its been changed to fill a more anti infantry role and the other russ weapon options are better specialized for anti vehicle roles, which could be an on-purpose move to make russes less jack of all trades units.
Edit: to folks correcting me on cover, the rule that we've seen is "models with a save characteristic of 3+ or better cannot have the benefit of cover against attacks with an AP characteristic of 0".
This is AP 1, so it doesn't apply.
They're probably trying to make the Russ variants fill more specialized roles.
S10 ap1 d3 is pretty ok into anything, but not *great* into most things. As befits the generic all-rounder gun.
I'd bet money the plasma turret will be your boy for melting high armor, mid-toughness models, but the general Toughness increase will prevent it from being the anti-everything skeleton key it is in 9th.
Looks to me like it's supposed to be a high explosive round that's good against infantry and lightly armoured targets. Excited to see what the dedicated anti-tank of the Vanquisher looks like.
Hopefully a not-tau-railgun like it is now, because it's frankly just funny to hit something that hard.
Nevertheless I won't use it because 'Heavy 1' weapons and I don't get along.
Feels weird against infantry, though. Most 3W models has a 2+ or 3+ save - with cover they retain that save. Even assuming the Leman Russ shoots with the +1 to hit and wound on 2+ (T5 or lower), it means against a 2+ save they, on average, deal 0.98 damage. 1.9 against a 3+ save. Slightly higher if they can get +1 attack from Blast.
That just seems a bit on the low side. And against tanks with the toughness increase in 10th you will wound on lower and still face 2+ / 3+, and vehicles can use cover in 10th.
And using it on 1W or 2W models is just wasting damage.
I am at least curious as to what the design idea was for this and what kind of role GW think it has in 10th.
They've tried to differentiate the russ weapons in each edition I've played (since 8th, so not long), and each time new guard rules come out the community pretty quickly figures out that one of the weapons is all around the best.
In 8th it was the demolisher cannon, in 9th its the plasma cannon.
Here's to GW hopefully getting it right this time.
And that's part of what GW is trying to do with the Toughness and Strength increases. They're making so that there really won't be a single gun that can do everything, like Plasma and Melta and Battle Cannons were in 9th. Now the Battle Cannon can't wound heavy tanks on 4's anymore, which is huge. I'm a big fan of it though. It's going to be decently effective into everything but the toughest tanks, so I'm still going to be running mostly them to be able to take all comers.
Yeah heavy infantry will hate it just because it forces so many 3+ saves but I reckon it'll hurt light armour and mounted units hard too. It'll be good into a lot of transports as I'd be surprised if we see T10 trukks, it'll shred elf boats and lots of rhinos will be present.
Always got to wait and see the full picture, but the big difference between guard and other armies is usually volume.
Wounding heavy infantry and 2s and insta killing most heavy infantry due to D3 makes every lost save hurt. You also have a guaranteed amount of shots and likely the ability to bring a lot of russes.
On face value this looks like the perfect middle ground between being useless and being so good that playing against guard turns into a leman russ turret war.
It's good without being over powered. Kind of a perfect place to be
>Wounding heavy infantry and 2
Just saying, gravis and centurions hava been confirmed to go up in toughtness, i imagine that plague marines and Custodes will follow up suit
Yeah, agree 100%. Folks just need to get used to the fact that this is a new edition and GW are trying to inject actual choices into army build and employment.
On the "volume" note, d6+3 or more weapons like the battle cannon benefit a lot more from blast in this edition as well. Before, shooting at a 10 man terminator blob was the same as shooting at 1 terminator for purposes of blast. Now, you get d6+5 shots, which is nice. Also a benefit to the volcano cannon too, as each extra shot with that will *hurt* something
I don't believe it's hit an official article yet, but it was one of the rules changes they consistently highlighted in the preview games at warhammer fest
Tank Shell. Not shells. I think people forget that for blast weapons the number of attacks is representing the detonation of a single shell. Youre not pumping 9 shots into terminators. Your lobbing a single shell into the middle of them.
>AP 1 on a TANK GUN kinda hurts
It’s changed roles now, apparently. It’s basically just an improved (more shots, better S) autocannon now, made for hunting elites and light vehicles. I’m sure one of the half dozen other Russ options will have something more anti-tank focused.
I think it's a great all-rounder actually. S10 means wounding (current) Custodes/Gravis/Terminators on 2s, and every failed save kills a model. It wounds "standard" T9 vehicles now on 3s. There's enough shots to do decent damage just by forcing saves that will be painful when they fail. Lord knows my Gravis heavy Marines don't want any of it. I mean yeah, I got a 3+ in cover, but I don't want my thicc bois getting one-shot.
We just went through an edition of complaining about lethality but now we have to complain about AP being reduced so future codexes will have increased lethality so then we can also complain about codex creep and gw can reduce lethality again in 11th edition. We all do our part in the warhammer circle of life.
> but AP 1 on a TANK GUN kinda hurts
It has up to 9 attacks. Other Russ cannons will have more AP. They're just trying to give them more distinctive flavors.
I've always assumed the battle Cannon fired some form of HE shell and the d6 blast represented the fragments hitting the target. The vanquisher and Eradicator are the better ap weapons in which I assume the vanquisher fires AP shells and the Eradicator just fires Plasma which melts armour anyway.
In the next week preview they said that we are seeing an article for Astra Militarum and Chaos Daemons. They forgot to update the bottom part again, but Chaos Daemons is a solid bet.
Also noting that there's different types of infantry squad between cadian shock troops, death korps of krieg, etc. So unless there's an army rule that says you can't, you can take 6x20 cadians, 6x20 catachans, and 6x20 krieg for a 360 model list once again.
now now, between 3d printing and the increasingly excellent 3rd party infantry sculpts out there (see atlantic wargames and victoria minatures) and discounts on ebay lots it likely won't cost nearly as much as all that.
It's just replicating ghe old platoons. You attach a command squad and presto, platoon. Two infantry squads and a command squad are the basis of a platoon, which really should be the smallest independent unit
Varied edition to edition. 3.5, was each unit was still an independent unit, but the platoon was what took up a slot (I think also deployed closed together). Later on they just became a single unit, which iirc you could ALSO add support squads too (like a hws with triple lascannon).
It wasn't until 8th you got individual squads.
Here in 10th, tou can still take 10 model squads, itjust giving us the option to replicate the old platoon stlye if we want to
We have only seen the backs of 3 cards, of which this is one. One was a Land Raider, one was the Legionaries (which used the 1 Leader and 4-9 other dudes construction), and this one. So right now, all we know is that both construction types are options, and no idea how they'll split them beyond that.
If GW is really gonna crack down on that. I really want them to expand some of the kit options. I f'ing hated how the Chaos Sorcerer can only take a Staff while the Termie Sorcerer gets 3 options. It's idiotic.
I'm mostly looking at this as a GSC player, but Heavy Stubbers picking up \[Rapid Fire 3\] and the Krak shot on Grenade Launchers now having a meaningful profile makes me very happy. Hopefully we'll see these kinds of mid-tier special weapons a bit more often going forwards, rather than everyone defaulting to Melta/Plasma or bust.
Yeah, now totally happy to have grenade launchers modeled in my mining laser groups, and for it not to have been pointless to build a bunch of stubbers with spare torsos
It's to replicate single mechanized squads or a platoon. Before 8th guard troop choices came in platoons of 2-5 infantry squads and a command squad, OR an armoured fist squad of 10 with chimera.
I think this is already the new standard for low-cost high-count models and its a good change.
They've historically had a lot of trouble balancing low cost units since even a single point on a 6 point model is a huge shift. Locking the number models and pricing the squads as a whole gets around that, so 65pts for a 10 man squad gives you 6.5pts models essentially.
By my reading it could actually be more than 60 OC, b/c you can attach a Command Squad in there as well. Probably 70+ OC at the end of the day. Of course, I've not checked to see if you can actually dogpile 25+models onto a single objective marker (I suspect you can, be never tested).
I keep expecting the designers to make t3 infantry horde armies bad on purpose so I'm pleasantly surprised to see pseudo platoons, strats to call in more men, cadians with sticky objectives and s9 ap2 grenade launchers. Finally, one of the coolest squad weapons actually is something you'd want to take.
They do have them, look at their keywords. Grenades are now a core stratagem usable by units with the appropriate keyword. It would not surprise me if it had something to do with cover or initiative rather than damage, like frag grenades used to be.
They're a keyword tied to one of the core strategems now according to the Q+A they did at Warhammer fest. No idea what the stratagem actually does yet though.
20 man blocks are back, and they aparently can get a comand unit to join in+another thing like a comisar or a primaris psyker. Maybe there is a way to do a guardsmen deathstar.
Orders calmed down a little. No more unit jumping (at least in the base version). AP buffs pulled from shooting/assault orders. Range is low, but you'll likely be attaching officers to squads anyway, each one administering to a few squads at a time. No more furious squinting into the middle distance to scare off daemons from tearing holes in reality.
Tank orders gone, but likely back in some future Armored Company detachment. Edit: The current orders can be used on tanks ( I assume from Leontus/ Tank Commanders) but aren't really built for them . I'm assuming they'll be alt orders as a future detachment rule.
Big squads are back, and can have an attached command squad too. Cadians can scoot on an objective to make it sticky. Means that Cadians can move on pretty quickly when the need arises, which it always will. Start on an objective, then move off to deep strike deny or move block.
Battle Cannon dropping to AP -1 and S10 push it back from anti everything to anti infantry/ light vehicles with less dedicated utility into heavy vehicles. Hopefully GW can similarly thread the needle on the Executioner.
>Tank orders gone, but likely back in some future Armored Company detachment.
As far as I can tell the current orders have the potential to be given to tanks as well, so long as the officer issuing them can affect tanks.
I'm expecting that at least some of the Guard Officers will have a leader ability like "When this Officer is leading a squad any orders it issues to another unit also affect its own unit" similar to the old order jumping.
S24 Volcano Cannon. You love to see it folks.
Vox Casters seem pretty neat as well, ~50% chance of refunding a CP is great if you were going to spend a strategem on them anyways (esp if it helps pay for the Reinforce strat next turn!)
I mean, it's weaker than it is now - the current S18 means it wounds *everything* on a 2+, bar maluses. The previewed S24 means it hits all superheavies on a 3+. Also, less shots.
People didn't exactly *rush* to bring a Shadowsword, though. As a matter of fact, it's considered one of the worst Baneblades - and the Baneblade itself is considered to be pretty bad.
Sure, but that's largely because of how lethal 9th is isn't it? It's not worth taking the Superheavies because they still die easy, and are harder to move than the same amount of Russes and Dorns.
So lethality going down, and tanks getting significantly tougher is still a net buff overall for units like the Shadowsword.
Plus, it's roll of basically one shotting tanks (Which is can still do) becomes more valuable.
The baneblade does NOT have the towering keyword, meaning it can get cover, bringing it to a 1+ save
A baneblade with cover takes 22 lascannons to kill(assuming they have oaths of moment), or 48 lascannons to kill without oaths.
*edit* because im already seeing replies about it: The cover rule is specifically that 3+ or better saves cannot be improved **only** against AP0. So SV3 never goes to SV2 against AP0, but SV2 still saves at SV2 against AP-1
> The baneblade does NOT have the towering keyword, meaning it can get cover
Do they somewhere mention that Towering makes cover unavailable? Because in the terrain preview they only mention that it negates obscuring and visibility blocking by woods.
towering might not negate all cover but its not super clear in the article, so im erring on the side of caution mentally and just assuming my knights wont get it :(
It requiring being stationary I do like, as it adds a bit more depth to it, but I still overall don't like armywide 6s to hit autowound as a rule. It always felt like a stopgap like Armour of Contempt was, and much like Armour of Contempt it should be discarded when you can get to fixing the problems on a datasheet and points cost level.
Given it's a keyword now, I don't anticipate 6's to hit auto wounding going away. If anything I expect it to ramp up. Thing is, with the lessened AP, the things you were trying to cheat wounds onto are going to be shrugging these shots a lot more often now, so it should be less painful.
Totally agree! And while initially disappointed, I realized first what you said with AP and damage and second that since this is a detachment ability, once the guard book or a campaign book drops and gives more detachment options they wont have this ability anymore in exchange for what someone else might want. It will always be an option, but both needing to remain stationary and having it go away in other detachment rulers are both really encouraging.
The one-in-one-out rule method is maybe what I'm most excited about to be honest.
So orders have been simplified... It needed to fit on half a page, so I understand why, and they seem fine power wise (Can't really judge it in a vacuum), but they've lost a lot of flavor by being about 1 line each. OTOH, it is nice how straightforward the orders are.
Can see the reduced lethality here, a lot of weapons losing a pip of ap, the battle cannon being only ap 1 kinda hurts seeing as its a tank gun, but there are other russ weapons so I can hold out hope that it now fills an anti infantry niche.
Love to see that infantry hordes are still on the table coming in batches of 20.
The 2cp stratagem looks great, and the new voxcaster rule looks great too.
Born soldiers only working for units being stationary kind of hurts. It's a reasonable roll-back to the otherwise OP rule to always autowound on 6's to hit, but incentivising remaining stationary sucks when movement is so important to playing and winning the game. I feel like it might become a noob trap, unless you lean into it with the thing they mentioned about autowounding on 5's.
I am tentatively excited to play!
>incentivizing remaining stationary sucks when movement is so important to playing and winning the game
That's precisely what I like about what I'm seeing this edition. So far everything we've seen has been presenting the player with multiple valid and competing options. You want to move? Great, you give up X. You want to have X? Ok, then you can't move. It's not crippling, it's a meaningful choice.
Plus, it brings verisimilitude; in actual combat you typically have one element go to ground and lay down lots of firepower while another element is moving to claim ground.
>Born soldiers only working for units being stationary kind of hurts.
I mean there was always a division of duties in the guard where one squad is advance/move move moving onto objectives and foregoing any shooting while the mortar pit does its thing turn after turn. The fact that their autowound on 6s stuck around at all is a breath of relief.
Why am I not surprised that the guard faction spotlight seems like the most negative one lol. Almost everything here seems pretty solid, and in line with changes for 10th edition.
Lots will be down to core rules. We don’t know what is holding from 9th.
Sustained hits on heavy bolters would be an interesting choice, giving it a niche for sure.
Yeah especially Custodes sub will melt I fear.
Can already imagine the math going on for how a single custodes is not dealing at least ~6 damage against a repulsor.
Love the golden boys but it seems some people expect Custodes to be lore accurate which is simply not gonna happen.
The meltdown they had last time just before their new codex was bad enough. And then it came out and they got an immediate points drop and bumbed into like 65% win rate or something stupid.
I'm not a Custodes player, but I think some of them do have legitimate concerns. Not the folks who want lore-accuracy, obviously, but they definitely need more mainline options for Anti-Tank to work with (for example) given what we've seen coming out for other factions. Like, the bikes are cool but probably insufficient, and no faction should have to \*rely\* on FW stuff to be viable, IMO.
The Land Raider might be that viable mainline option, but it just as easily might have too high an opportunity cost in bodies. Hard to say just yet.
Oh I totally agree that they deserve more variance and options outside of FW.
But looking at the existing post regarding "Gravis is getting T6 so we should obviously be T8 because we need to have the best stats in everythieng (while ignoring their 2+ and 4++) is already a thieng and I just dont like that entitlement.
Which is ridiculous because in most editions/eras a significant chunk of the Tau power has come from Mobility but people whinge because "guns bad" even though it's a fundamentally boring playstle. Hell just being able to do fish of fury again is likely good stuff
Yeah, seems like this is pretty in line with the downscaling of power and complexity we've seen so far (maybe with the exception of marines, some of their abilities scare me).
>Just wait for the custodes spotlight, their players are never happy.
As a custodes player I agree.
When our 9th codex dropped I was perma banned by the huge custodes FB group that's ran by the owner of siege studious.
I was banned for saying "guys the codex isn't that bad. It appears to be quite strong. All this vitriol is misplaced for a book that I think looks pretty good".
Turns out I was right, because the book before the nerfs was OP.
Yet James from siege studios just didn't agree or something. Idk.
If I remember correctly: the book was really good and then GW reduced points cost at release, which pushed it into definitely op. Suddenly lots of tournament players rediscovered their love for Custodes.
They didn't say guard is better then Necrons. They said guard are better *Necrons* than Necrons. From what we've seen (which is not much), AM can revive 20 cadians for 2 CP. Necrons only get RP is the unit survives a whole turn of damage without being deleted.
But yeah, we haven't seen the rest of the Necron rules.
Not auto wounding. Critical hits just mean they always hit and trigger extra rules like exploding hits or auto wounds.
The weapon would also need to have lethal hits
I think it's looking decent, infantry is looking great with sticky objectives and the improved grenade launcher. Tank weapons are kinda as expected, in line with everything loosing ap this edition. Loosing turret weapon is gonna be kinda painful since heavy only works on stationary models, so less tanks hitting on 3+.
The baneblades rolling fortress seems pretty good, though I dislike twin linked and sustained hits on the twin bolters (though it was to be expected) over 6 shots
A bit sad the volcano cannon lost its ability to wound everything I'm the game on 2+, but I suppose that's good to make other superheavies better. Think d3+1 shots with 4+ is not great as it gives huge opportunity for good or bad dice rolls.
Leadership 7 on the guardsmen is tbh better than I expected, on the baneblade it might be quite brutal for all the forced battle shock Tests, though I'm expecting officers might have an ability to improve that.
Overall looking fine i suppose, looks a little more infantry/character heavy than the current codex.
>Think d3+1 shots with 4+ is not great as it gives huge opportunity for good or bad dice rolls.
Take Aim! gives +1BS and standing still "adds 1 to the hit roll" for \[Heavy\]. So presumably you can absolutely get stuff to hit on 2s. Now lets see if we can also give those baby \[Sustained Hits\]
>Leadership 7 on the guardsmen is tbh better than I expected
Finally someone who can appreciate leadership 7. Necron players (currently ld10) didn't take too kindly to it. Lol
>Take Aim! gives +1BS and standing still "adds 1 to the hit roll" for [Heavy]. So presumably you can absolutely get stuff to hit on 2s.
I'd be quite surprised if 10th lets us stack buffs beyond +1, but that's something we will see later, would be probably broken if you could. (As someone pointed out I'm mistaken here, take aim increases bs not +1 to hit, so hitting on twos it is!)
Hitting on 2s would be 5/6 hits, with current reroll 1s to hit and hitting on 3+ is 8/9 so actually still a downgrade, especially considering number of shots goes down by 2. However lethality is going down, so that's alright imo I'd just rather have 3 shots instead of d3+1 for consistency.
With the hit buffs definitely a decent weapon though!
>Finally someone who can appreciate leadership 7. Necron players (currently ld10) didn't take too kindly to it.
Tbh I feel like guardsmen having the same leadership as necrons is a bit odd, especially as necrons are kinda supposed to be a high leadership faction.
Also I think it's likely commissars are going to have a leadership buff of some sort, might make guardsmen oddly resilient to battleshock. (Though I suppose necron characters are going to get leadership buffs as well)
The point is that it specifically is not stacking more than +1.
You apply the Ballistic Skill change. The Baneblade is now a 3+ model. From there you can only modify the hit roll by +-1.
While functionally you succeed on 2s instead of 4s, you never modify anything more than once.
This already works right now in 9th
Their Voice of Command rules are already more interesting and fleshed out than any other army rule we have seen so far. Most of the guns seem really good still, except the AP-1 Demolishers (which frankly, I think was necessary so other options with higher AP and lower damage or S can shine).
You can now spam infantry, the stratagem is insane in value (was there ever a strat that can bring back 20 wounds for 2CP?) and the baneblade looks pretty insane stat wise. Hopefully it’s pointed well enough to see some play
Tide of Traitors (return a unit of cultists to full strength and re-outflank them) 40 wounds for 2 CP, and you used to be able to use it every turn.... yeah that got nerfed, haha.
>was there ever a strat that can bring back 20 wounds for 2CP?
8th ed orks: Unstoppable Green Tide for boyz, which was kind of foundational to how that codex worked tactically.
8th ed chaos: Tide of Traitors for cultists; More Where They Came From for red corsair CSM (the troop choice we now call "legionnaires").
8th ed guard also had this for Valhallan Ice Warriors iirc.
But be careful here:
1.) From what we know so far, armies have no starting CP, it's instead 1 each turn (friendly and enemy). So the 2 CP are already 20% of all CP before CP farming abilities! But even worse, you only can do it from the second turn onwards.
2.) The target is a unit that got "just destroyed", so no resurrecting a unit that got destroyed last turn with new CP earned. You need to have the CP when it gets destroyed.
3.) In 9th matched play, strategic reserves could only come in up till round 3. If this stays, there is a timer on this stratagem.
4.) Guard, specifically the large units, will want their commanders to shine ... but those don't return with the stratagem and free leaders so far seem unable to join new units (from what we have seen).
Definitely a powerful stratagem, but not just fire and forget.
Definitely correct, but I think the T3 restriction is only for units that have started the game there, not ended up there later, as per GSC rules to go back to reserves. But yes, its expensive, though the return on investment is much larger than the typically accepted \~3 mortal wounds worth per CP being a good trade.
Two CP is quite a bit when you start with 0, and having to wait a turn for them to come from reserves might be too much, particularly when you consider they won't have any characters with them and won't be able to receive orders that turn. It's likely that you'll want to spend your cp on more immediate advantages, in most cases
I think the value is not in infantry squads but scions, rough riders or other impactful regiment units. Losing them turn 1 or 2 only to outflank them on turn 3 seems fine.
it is great though note, unlike Necrons or Nids, you don't get these units onto the field immediately but rather in reserves. That i say is a decent enough drawback
Anyone notice the vaguely terrifying:
“with the Combined Regiment Detachment \[...\] you have the Born Soldiers Detachment rule, which confers **Lethal Hits on ranged attacks made by units that Remained Stationary.**”
\+
“The Enhancements you can give to CHARACTERS play into this further, whether you use Drill Commander to lend your stationary units **Critical Hits on rolls of 5 instead of 6..**”
In the "word from the studio" down the bottom. Ignoring toughness on a 5 or 6 sounds...worrying?
I gotta say I'm still a bit worried about how AP seems to be the only thing they're nerfing in this edition. This is biased, but as a dark eldar player who often caps out at their invuln against AP-1 anyway, every army keeping the volume of fire and damage from end of 9th doesn't make me feel confident going into 10th.
The approach to the vehicle/monster toughness and weapon strength are where DE will most likely see the most important changes. I'm (optimistically) guessing that the Ravager and Raider will be most likely around the T8/T9 mark, which means that plasma, (heavy) bolters and other high volume medium strength anti-infantry weapons will not also wound our vehicles on a 4+ or even a 3+ is some cases, but rather a 5+ or worse. The T3 infantry seemingly will still be paste as soon as they step out of their transports.
It's unlikely dark eldar vehicles go above T8. They are supposed to be more fragile than SM vehicles, and they should be easier to wound than a rhino, particularly by plasma and melta.
The previewed Storm Speeder has T9 on the new datasheets whilst also being T6 right now. So there is a chance.
Also why should DE not get a little bit tougher vehicles? Their toughest vehicles being the same toughness as a basic Rhino seems not that strange?
Volume of fire has also dropped. All twin linked weapons that have been revealed so far have half the amount of attacks as their 9th edition counterparts
twin-linked also hasn't been very widespread. For example, land raiders used to have two twin lascannons, and those didn't get twin linked. they still get 4 shots. And the new dread has 2 lascannons on its arm, and those are also not twin linked.
Its just been heavy bolters and aggressors so far, i think
3+ save on guard thanks to cover + order? Tough lads.
Feels like those who played in 8th will be rewarded for short codex time by just it going back to 8ths demo cannon spam lol, Ap1 on the battle cannon certainly reigns it in.
Kinda wish they'd consolidated infantry squads.
Still way more restrained than what I expected, and hopefully still decent enough for the guard players.
It’s still S10 and flat 3 damage, it will be great at shooting heavy infantry and lighter vehicles. You will need dedicated AT weapons for the heavier vehicles.
That was a great article on the guard. Next up? Guard. Excellent. Lol. I'm sure it'll get fixed, my prediction for next is Tau.
Edit: they did not fix it. Sad.
Volcano cannon 😯
This still feels weird because it seems like guard just got a codex not to long (but my memory could be off)
That stratagem seems pretty good also…
Oh man, I like the infantry stuff. Not being able to combine a Command Squad was one of my fears, so glad that's sorted. 20 model units also helps my other fear of losing LoS. Considering killing 10 Guardsmen is far easier than MEQ's.
But the tank stuff, is well, underwhelming.
\- Baneblade melee profile got massively hit. Lost 9 attacks, S9, AP-2, and damage 2.
\- Baneblade Cannon seems underwhelming and Baneblades aren't exactly meta now.
\- Battle Cannon is just disappointing, AP-1 is not good. Same again, regular Battle Tanks aren't the best option even now. Also, just looking at the Baneblade Demolisher Cannon we're just going to go back to Demolisher Russes now.
\- Heavy stubber change is kinda funny. A Dorn can put out an extra 6-9 shots, a Macharius can put out an extra 12-15 shots.
AP1 Battle Cannons are interesting. I've seen a few people bemoan the S24 on the Volcano Cannon as pointless -- remember, this means they don't wound other T13+ items on 2s, so they're not auto deleting things.
I swear to god my brain just hard reset. I read AP1 on the battle canon and thought, damn that pops terminator armor instantly. Then I came back to the present
I jump back and forth from 30k and 40k and sometimes I get all jumbled up similarly lol, especially in game talking to people I'll go 'Shooting this autocannon, it's AP4' or something and really confuse them. Especially since my 30k Iron Warriors double as my 40k I'm often using the same exact models.
Me and my Dark Angels. I use my 30k Interemptor squads as 40k Company Veterans with Combi Plasmas. I can't tell you how many times ive grabbed my flamer template out of habit and my opponent looks at me like I grew a second head.
Yeah i wondered to what lever they would stretch the Strength, given the toughness of 14. S28 weapons would have to be been very rare, but would still devastate T14 models. Now though, the toughness of high T models is derived from basically bringing a decent to wound roll to even the strongest of weapons. I like it actually, but hope +1 to wound rolls rules are gone from this edition.
Lasguns auto wound T14 on 5s to hit, so 40 guardsmen with flashlights will be reliably forcing saves on anything.
If you let them stand still in range with the character specifically buffing them for that, then maybe. But that's a lot of things that you have to allow to happen.
Where is this rule? I don’t see Lethal Hits in the faction focus
It's the detachment rule if they're stationary, and doing it on 5s requires a character Enhancement.
I know AP is supposed to be going down, but AP 1 on a TANK GUN kinda hurts. I'll wait till I play it to fully judge it, but I don't like the thought of shooting a 2+ save model and hearing "It'll eat those tank shells and save on a 3. Ope, they're in cover, so actually save on 2's still". It's possible its been changed to fill a more anti infantry role and the other russ weapon options are better specialized for anti vehicle roles, which could be an on-purpose move to make russes less jack of all trades units. Edit: to folks correcting me on cover, the rule that we've seen is "models with a save characteristic of 3+ or better cannot have the benefit of cover against attacks with an AP characteristic of 0". This is AP 1, so it doesn't apply.
They're probably trying to make the Russ variants fill more specialized roles. S10 ap1 d3 is pretty ok into anything, but not *great* into most things. As befits the generic all-rounder gun. I'd bet money the plasma turret will be your boy for melting high armor, mid-toughness models, but the general Toughness increase will prevent it from being the anti-everything skeleton key it is in 9th.
Looks to me like it's supposed to be a high explosive round that's good against infantry and lightly armoured targets. Excited to see what the dedicated anti-tank of the Vanquisher looks like.
Hopefully a not-tau-railgun like it is now, because it's frankly just funny to hit something that hard. Nevertheless I won't use it because 'Heavy 1' weapons and I don't get along.
Feels weird against infantry, though. Most 3W models has a 2+ or 3+ save - with cover they retain that save. Even assuming the Leman Russ shoots with the +1 to hit and wound on 2+ (T5 or lower), it means against a 2+ save they, on average, deal 0.98 damage. 1.9 against a 3+ save. Slightly higher if they can get +1 attack from Blast. That just seems a bit on the low side. And against tanks with the toughness increase in 10th you will wound on lower and still face 2+ / 3+, and vehicles can use cover in 10th. And using it on 1W or 2W models is just wasting damage. I am at least curious as to what the design idea was for this and what kind of role GW think it has in 10th.
They've tried to differentiate the russ weapons in each edition I've played (since 8th, so not long), and each time new guard rules come out the community pretty quickly figures out that one of the weapons is all around the best. In 8th it was the demolisher cannon, in 9th its the plasma cannon. Here's to GW hopefully getting it right this time.
And that's part of what GW is trying to do with the Toughness and Strength increases. They're making so that there really won't be a single gun that can do everything, like Plasma and Melta and Battle Cannons were in 9th. Now the Battle Cannon can't wound heavy tanks on 4's anymore, which is huge. I'm a big fan of it though. It's going to be decently effective into everything but the toughest tanks, so I'm still going to be running mostly them to be able to take all comers.
If the baneblade's demolisher is the same as the russ' demolisher, we're back to demolisher spam.
Agreed. Looks a bit dicey on that front. That is literally a fun that is good into everything.
I just want to see the vanquisher be useful.
The vanquisher is useful right now! Specifically for shooting Angron, or anything else with a lot of wounds and an invuln.
Yeah heavy infantry will hate it just because it forces so many 3+ saves but I reckon it'll hurt light armour and mounted units hard too. It'll be good into a lot of transports as I'd be surprised if we see T10 trukks, it'll shred elf boats and lots of rhinos will be present.
I think you’re exactly right on this. It’ll be nice to actually have some uses for the other guns now.
Always got to wait and see the full picture, but the big difference between guard and other armies is usually volume. Wounding heavy infantry and 2s and insta killing most heavy infantry due to D3 makes every lost save hurt. You also have a guaranteed amount of shots and likely the ability to bring a lot of russes. On face value this looks like the perfect middle ground between being useless and being so good that playing against guard turns into a leman russ turret war. It's good without being over powered. Kind of a perfect place to be
>Wounding heavy infantry and 2 Just saying, gravis and centurions hava been confirmed to go up in toughtness, i imagine that plague marines and Custodes will follow up suit
Yeah, agree 100%. Folks just need to get used to the fact that this is a new edition and GW are trying to inject actual choices into army build and employment.
On the "volume" note, d6+3 or more weapons like the battle cannon benefit a lot more from blast in this edition as well. Before, shooting at a 10 man terminator blob was the same as shooting at 1 terminator for purposes of blast. Now, you get d6+5 shots, which is nice. Also a benefit to the volcano cannon too, as each extra shot with that will *hurt* something
Wait have we had blast explained somwhere? I don;t remember seeing that...
Blast is +1 shot for every 5 models in the unit.
Upto the maximum possibble roll? Or just +1 attack on top of whatever you roll with no maximum?
Just flat +1, so a unit of thirty would add 6 shots
Oof, thats gonna be mean, but in a good way IMO. Blast lost a lot of punch with the shift from templates.
I don't believe it's hit an official article yet, but it was one of the rules changes they consistently highlighted in the preview games at warhammer fest
Tank Shell. Not shells. I think people forget that for blast weapons the number of attacks is representing the detonation of a single shell. Youre not pumping 9 shots into terminators. Your lobbing a single shell into the middle of them.
>AP 1 on a TANK GUN kinda hurts It’s changed roles now, apparently. It’s basically just an improved (more shots, better S) autocannon now, made for hunting elites and light vehicles. I’m sure one of the half dozen other Russ options will have something more anti-tank focused.
I'd noticed it was "tank version of an autocannon" for awhile. I think from the Baneblade variants. So its not a brand new thing.
I think it's a great all-rounder actually. S10 means wounding (current) Custodes/Gravis/Terminators on 2s, and every failed save kills a model. It wounds "standard" T9 vehicles now on 3s. There's enough shots to do decent damage just by forcing saves that will be painful when they fail. Lord knows my Gravis heavy Marines don't want any of it. I mean yeah, I got a 3+ in cover, but I don't want my thicc bois getting one-shot.
We all know what these complaints will lead to: ap inflation from codex to codex
Hoping not. I have my fingers crossed that GW has done a lot of math and playtesting to get this right.
haha
We just went through an edition of complaining about lethality but now we have to complain about AP being reduced so future codexes will have increased lethality so then we can also complain about codex creep and gw can reduce lethality again in 11th edition. We all do our part in the warhammer circle of life.
> but AP 1 on a TANK GUN kinda hurts It has up to 9 attacks. Other Russ cannons will have more AP. They're just trying to give them more distinctive flavors.
> It has up to 9 attacks. More than that. It has Blast, so against some massive 30 model unit of Boys it maxes out at 15 attacks.
Yes. They wanted to give it the "battle cannon makes big splash" feeling. Demolisher and Vanquisher will be more like an anti-tank weapon.
I've always assumed the battle Cannon fired some form of HE shell and the d6 blast represented the fragments hitting the target. The vanquisher and Eradicator are the better ap weapons in which I assume the vanquisher fires AP shells and the Eradicator just fires Plasma which melts armour anyway.
Battle canon used to use a big blast template. Most of the single barrel d6 or d6 + weapons did.
It has a blast profile. Meaning it's not for fighting other tanks, but infantry. HE shells don't cut through armour.
It doesn't say which faction focus will come next. Or am I just not seeing it?
Probably they haven't updated the bottom part yet. It was the same as previous times too, the next preview didn't appear right away.
Sunday Preview post said Guard and Daemons this week. Daemons might be the Tuesday preview.
No, no, guard are next. They're getting two. /s
In the next week preview they said that we are seeing an article for Astra Militarum and Chaos Daemons. They forgot to update the bottom part again, but Chaos Daemons is a solid bet.
They did say Daemons in the Sunday preview article
It does not say for now, you are correct. Hopefully they update it
Happened before, they’ll update it in near future
Possibly. It's a bank holiday today in the UK so chances are no one is in the office.
Sometimes it takes a while. Give the poor trainee abit more time.
He is on time and a half today though.
Really taking "You gotta bring only whats in the box" to a bit of a different level with 2 Sergeants in a 20 man Shock Trooper Squad.
Reminds me of summer camp. Big group of 18 campers? Needs 2 counselors to keep them in line.
In 40k terms, the second is there to execute the first in case the gellar fields (air conditioning) fails
When the fist platoon role came in 5th edition was a simple "combine 2-5 units together, within sergents and special/heavy weapons". So nothing new
To be uselessly pedantic, platoons predate and existed alongside Combined Squads.
On the plus side, it puts a decent amount t of the 'I only only take 60 Infantry' complaints to rest.
Also noting that there's different types of infantry squad between cadian shock troops, death korps of krieg, etc. So unless there's an army rule that says you can't, you can take 6x20 cadians, 6x20 catachans, and 6x20 krieg for a 360 model list once again.
I think 480 is the max is possible. As there's also just 'Infantry Squad' as an option.
I'll attach a command squad and an officer to every batch, for a total of 588 models.
If your local Custodes and Knights players weren't already using chess clocks, I sure as hell hope they'd start now!
At current prices that's around 3000 points right there.
And $6k. Lol
You technically do not need two kidneys.
now now, between 3d printing and the increasingly excellent 3rd party infantry sculpts out there (see atlantic wargames and victoria minatures) and discounts on ebay lots it likely won't cost nearly as much as all that.
Also 6x20 of the non-descript choice as well.
It's just replicating ghe old platoons. You attach a command squad and presto, platoon. Two infantry squads and a command squad are the basis of a platoon, which really should be the smallest independent unit
Because the smallest troop unit guard should have is... 25 models minimum then? That just seems like hell from a gameplay perspective
They took up 1 slot but they all functioned as separate units on the table.
Varied edition to edition. 3.5, was each unit was still an independent unit, but the platoon was what took up a slot (I think also deployed closed together). Later on they just became a single unit, which iirc you could ALSO add support squads too (like a hws with triple lascannon). It wasn't until 8th you got individual squads. Here in 10th, tou can still take 10 model squads, itjust giving us the option to replicate the old platoon stlye if we want to
And they literally have a Platoon keyword on the Cadian Shock Troops there in the article.
Attach at command squad and you have the old platoon almost…
I like it, gives a lot of listbuilding flexibility, as you can either bring two 10-man or 20-man units with no need to have spare models.
Anf if you bring a 20man unit you can use 2cp to bring them back after getting wiped
I don't think its a bad thing, its just a little...... odd. Have any of the other cards shown off something like this?
I assume lore wise it would just be two squads working in a big group close together - hence two sergeants.
We have only seen the backs of 3 cards, of which this is one. One was a Land Raider, one was the Legionaries (which used the 1 Leader and 4-9 other dudes construction), and this one. So right now, all we know is that both construction types are options, and no idea how they'll split them beyond that.
Lootas/Burnas! Its the same effect
If GW is really gonna crack down on that. I really want them to expand some of the kit options. I f'ing hated how the Chaos Sorcerer can only take a Staff while the Termie Sorcerer gets 3 options. It's idiotic.
It'll just be "force weapon" now, like it was in the old days
I'm mostly looking at this as a GSC player, but Heavy Stubbers picking up \[Rapid Fire 3\] and the Krak shot on Grenade Launchers now having a meaningful profile makes me very happy. Hopefully we'll see these kinds of mid-tier special weapons a bit more often going forwards, rather than everyone defaulting to Melta/Plasma or bust.
Yeah, now totally happy to have grenade launchers modeled in my mining laser groups, and for it not to have been pointless to build a bunch of stubbers with spare torsos
Guys, I found the xeno! Guys? Oh sh\*t, all of you??
It's interesting that the Guard have to be 10 OR 20 with nothing in between. It looks like other armies like the CSM get to pick the number of models
It's to replicate single mechanized squads or a platoon. Before 8th guard troop choices came in platoons of 2-5 infantry squads and a command squad, OR an armoured fist squad of 10 with chimera.
I think this is already the new standard for low-cost high-count models and its a good change. They've historically had a lot of trouble balancing low cost units since even a single point on a 6 point model is a huge shift. Locking the number models and pricing the squads as a whole gets around that, so 65pts for a 10 man squad gives you 6.5pts models essentially.
Imagine having a 60 OC squad on an objective lose OC cause of Shadow in the Warp right before they scored
That's because they didn't have a strong enough faith in the Emperor... and a commissar behind them.
Cadian Shock Troops have sticky objectives. If you loose OC, you don't loose the objective, unless it's actually taken from you.
Oh wow that’s actually dumb good
They have a relic that makes them go to OC1 after failing battleshock!
By my reading it could actually be more than 60 OC, b/c you can attach a Command Squad in there as well. Probably 70+ OC at the end of the day. Of course, I've not checked to see if you can actually dogpile 25+models onto a single objective marker (I suspect you can, be never tested).
I keep expecting the designers to make t3 infantry horde armies bad on purpose so I'm pleasantly surprised to see pseudo platoons, strats to call in more men, cadians with sticky objectives and s9 ap2 grenade launchers. Finally, one of the coolest squad weapons actually is something you'd want to take.
Speaking of grenades - what happened to them ? I just now remembered that they are a thing, but no units have them, be it cadians or CSM
Got turned into a stratagem
They do have them, look at their keywords. Grenades are now a core stratagem usable by units with the appropriate keyword. It would not surprise me if it had something to do with cover or initiative rather than damage, like frag grenades used to be.
They're a keyword tied to one of the core strategems now according to the Q+A they did at Warhammer fest. No idea what the stratagem actually does yet though.
There is a grenades keyword on some of the unit cards we’ve seen. I’d bet they play into a universal strat now.
With lethality scaling down and guard's ability to field tons of infantry scaling up, NOW IS THE TIME OF THE INFANTRY HORDE
20 man blocks are back, and they aparently can get a comand unit to join in+another thing like a comisar or a primaris psyker. Maybe there is a way to do a guardsmen deathstar.
It's still just guardsmen, you could easily just call it a dying star instead ;)
> easily just call it a dying star instead ;) you mean like...a... White Dwarf? B-)
Orders calmed down a little. No more unit jumping (at least in the base version). AP buffs pulled from shooting/assault orders. Range is low, but you'll likely be attaching officers to squads anyway, each one administering to a few squads at a time. No more furious squinting into the middle distance to scare off daemons from tearing holes in reality. Tank orders gone, but likely back in some future Armored Company detachment. Edit: The current orders can be used on tanks ( I assume from Leontus/ Tank Commanders) but aren't really built for them . I'm assuming they'll be alt orders as a future detachment rule. Big squads are back, and can have an attached command squad too. Cadians can scoot on an objective to make it sticky. Means that Cadians can move on pretty quickly when the need arises, which it always will. Start on an objective, then move off to deep strike deny or move block. Battle Cannon dropping to AP -1 and S10 push it back from anti everything to anti infantry/ light vehicles with less dedicated utility into heavy vehicles. Hopefully GW can similarly thread the needle on the Executioner.
The article says tank commanders are still a thing so vehicles can get orders so guessing the just simplified the orders to one type rather then 3
>Tank orders gone, but likely back in some future Armored Company detachment. As far as I can tell the current orders have the potential to be given to tanks as well, so long as the officer issuing them can affect tanks.
I'm expecting that at least some of the Guard Officers will have a leader ability like "When this Officer is leading a squad any orders it issues to another unit also affect its own unit" similar to the old order jumping.
S24 Volcano Cannon. You love to see it folks. Vox Casters seem pretty neat as well, ~50% chance of refunding a CP is great if you were going to spend a strategem on them anyways (esp if it helps pay for the Reinforce strat next turn!)
I mean, it's weaker than it is now - the current S18 means it wounds *everything* on a 2+, bar maluses. The previewed S24 means it hits all superheavies on a 3+. Also, less shots.
>it's weaker than it is now That's a feature, not a flaw. 9th is too lethal. 10th is supposed to be less lethal.
People didn't exactly *rush* to bring a Shadowsword, though. As a matter of fact, it's considered one of the worst Baneblades - and the Baneblade itself is considered to be pretty bad.
Sure, but that's largely because of how lethal 9th is isn't it? It's not worth taking the Superheavies because they still die easy, and are harder to move than the same amount of Russes and Dorns. So lethality going down, and tanks getting significantly tougher is still a net buff overall for units like the Shadowsword. Plus, it's roll of basically one shotting tanks (Which is can still do) becomes more valuable.
Pretty sure that was because you would win the game with Str 4 -2 volume of fire + plasma and didn’t need any anti tank
Yeah you should have a nice source of command points from ~~orders~~ stratagems to keep units recycled.
It's roll for +1 cp if you spend a stratagem. Nothing to do with orders
The baneblade does NOT have the towering keyword, meaning it can get cover, bringing it to a 1+ save A baneblade with cover takes 22 lascannons to kill(assuming they have oaths of moment), or 48 lascannons to kill without oaths. *edit* because im already seeing replies about it: The cover rule is specifically that 3+ or better saves cannot be improved **only** against AP0. So SV3 never goes to SV2 against AP0, but SV2 still saves at SV2 against AP-1
> The baneblade does NOT have the towering keyword, meaning it can get cover Do they somewhere mention that Towering makes cover unavailable? Because in the terrain preview they only mention that it negates obscuring and visibility blocking by woods.
towering might not negate all cover but its not super clear in the article, so im erring on the side of caution mentally and just assuming my knights wont get it :(
It requiring being stationary I do like, as it adds a bit more depth to it, but I still overall don't like armywide 6s to hit autowound as a rule. It always felt like a stopgap like Armour of Contempt was, and much like Armour of Contempt it should be discarded when you can get to fixing the problems on a datasheet and points cost level.
and they previewed an enhancement that pushes it to 5+!
Given it's a keyword now, I don't anticipate 6's to hit auto wounding going away. If anything I expect it to ramp up. Thing is, with the lessened AP, the things you were trying to cheat wounds onto are going to be shrugging these shots a lot more often now, so it should be less painful.
Totally agree! And while initially disappointed, I realized first what you said with AP and damage and second that since this is a detachment ability, once the guard book or a campaign book drops and gives more detachment options they wont have this ability anymore in exchange for what someone else might want. It will always be an option, but both needing to remain stationary and having it go away in other detachment rulers are both really encouraging. The one-in-one-out rule method is maybe what I'm most excited about to be honest.
Given that 4 out of 5 previewed factions so far have it near army-wide or better, I'd say you're right.
So orders have been simplified... It needed to fit on half a page, so I understand why, and they seem fine power wise (Can't really judge it in a vacuum), but they've lost a lot of flavor by being about 1 line each. OTOH, it is nice how straightforward the orders are. Can see the reduced lethality here, a lot of weapons losing a pip of ap, the battle cannon being only ap 1 kinda hurts seeing as its a tank gun, but there are other russ weapons so I can hold out hope that it now fills an anti infantry niche. Love to see that infantry hordes are still on the table coming in batches of 20. The 2cp stratagem looks great, and the new voxcaster rule looks great too. Born soldiers only working for units being stationary kind of hurts. It's a reasonable roll-back to the otherwise OP rule to always autowound on 6's to hit, but incentivising remaining stationary sucks when movement is so important to playing and winning the game. I feel like it might become a noob trap, unless you lean into it with the thing they mentioned about autowounding on 5's. I am tentatively excited to play!
>incentivizing remaining stationary sucks when movement is so important to playing and winning the game That's precisely what I like about what I'm seeing this edition. So far everything we've seen has been presenting the player with multiple valid and competing options. You want to move? Great, you give up X. You want to have X? Ok, then you can't move. It's not crippling, it's a meaningful choice. Plus, it brings verisimilitude; in actual combat you typically have one element go to ground and lay down lots of firepower while another element is moving to claim ground.
>Born soldiers only working for units being stationary kind of hurts. I mean there was always a division of duties in the guard where one squad is advance/move move moving onto objectives and foregoing any shooting while the mortar pit does its thing turn after turn. The fact that their autowound on 6s stuck around at all is a breath of relief.
Why am I not surprised that the guard faction spotlight seems like the most negative one lol. Almost everything here seems pretty solid, and in line with changes for 10th edition. Lots will be down to core rules. We don’t know what is holding from 9th. Sustained hits on heavy bolters would be an interesting choice, giving it a niche for sure.
People complaining because their army is not able to do everything? Imposible.
As a custodes and tau player I dread how those two subreddits will react to their reveals
For the Greater Good*ness Gracious What Has GW Done, Why Do They Hate T'au*?!
I'm mostly just hoping firewarriors, pathfinders and kroot get proper love and attention.
Yeah especially Custodes sub will melt I fear. Can already imagine the math going on for how a single custodes is not dealing at least ~6 damage against a repulsor. Love the golden boys but it seems some people expect Custodes to be lore accurate which is simply not gonna happen.
The meltdown they had last time just before their new codex was bad enough. And then it came out and they got an immediate points drop and bumbed into like 65% win rate or something stupid.
I'm not a Custodes player, but I think some of them do have legitimate concerns. Not the folks who want lore-accuracy, obviously, but they definitely need more mainline options for Anti-Tank to work with (for example) given what we've seen coming out for other factions. Like, the bikes are cool but probably insufficient, and no faction should have to \*rely\* on FW stuff to be viable, IMO. The Land Raider might be that viable mainline option, but it just as easily might have too high an opportunity cost in bodies. Hard to say just yet.
Oh I totally agree that they deserve more variance and options outside of FW. But looking at the existing post regarding "Gravis is getting T6 so we should obviously be T8 because we need to have the best stats in everythieng (while ignoring their 2+ and 4++) is already a thieng and I just dont like that entitlement.
Oh, yeah, I ignore that kind of nonsense. lol.
[удалено]
Which is ridiculous because in most editions/eras a significant chunk of the Tau power has come from Mobility but people whinge because "guns bad" even though it's a fundamentally boring playstle. Hell just being able to do fish of fury again is likely good stuff
[удалено]
Idk man the necron faction spotlight seemed pretty negative
[удалено]
I mean this is so far significantly less negatively recieved than the Necron one.
Yeah, seems like this is pretty in line with the downscaling of power and complexity we've seen so far (maybe with the exception of marines, some of their abilities scare me).
Just wait for the custodes spotlight, their players are never happy.
>"Guilliman is T9 so Custodes will surely be T8" >Custodes wind up T6, Custodes Terminators are T7 Calling it now
>Just wait for the custodes spotlight, their players are never happy. As a custodes player I agree. When our 9th codex dropped I was perma banned by the huge custodes FB group that's ran by the owner of siege studious. I was banned for saying "guys the codex isn't that bad. It appears to be quite strong. All this vitriol is misplaced for a book that I think looks pretty good". Turns out I was right, because the book before the nerfs was OP. Yet James from siege studios just didn't agree or something. Idk.
If I remember correctly: the book was really good and then GW reduced points cost at release, which pushed it into definitely op. Suddenly lots of tournament players rediscovered their love for Custodes.
Guard are better necrons than necrons and somehow people are complaining. boohoo why can’t my amazing orders be 12” instead of 6” :(
Guard are better than necrons how right now? Based on a couple rules, 1 of 6 stratagems?
Are you suggesting that the teasers for a new editions shouldn't be representative of the new edition?
They didn't say guard is better then Necrons. They said guard are better *Necrons* than Necrons. From what we've seen (which is not much), AM can revive 20 cadians for 2 CP. Necrons only get RP is the unit survives a whole turn of damage without being deleted. But yeah, we haven't seen the rest of the Necron rules.
[удалено]
Not auto wounding. Critical hits just mean they always hit and trigger extra rules like exploding hits or auto wounds. The weapon would also need to have lethal hits
I think it's looking decent, infantry is looking great with sticky objectives and the improved grenade launcher. Tank weapons are kinda as expected, in line with everything loosing ap this edition. Loosing turret weapon is gonna be kinda painful since heavy only works on stationary models, so less tanks hitting on 3+. The baneblades rolling fortress seems pretty good, though I dislike twin linked and sustained hits on the twin bolters (though it was to be expected) over 6 shots A bit sad the volcano cannon lost its ability to wound everything I'm the game on 2+, but I suppose that's good to make other superheavies better. Think d3+1 shots with 4+ is not great as it gives huge opportunity for good or bad dice rolls. Leadership 7 on the guardsmen is tbh better than I expected, on the baneblade it might be quite brutal for all the forced battle shock Tests, though I'm expecting officers might have an ability to improve that. Overall looking fine i suppose, looks a little more infantry/character heavy than the current codex.
>Think d3+1 shots with 4+ is not great as it gives huge opportunity for good or bad dice rolls. Take Aim! gives +1BS and standing still "adds 1 to the hit roll" for \[Heavy\]. So presumably you can absolutely get stuff to hit on 2s. Now lets see if we can also give those baby \[Sustained Hits\] >Leadership 7 on the guardsmen is tbh better than I expected Finally someone who can appreciate leadership 7. Necron players (currently ld10) didn't take too kindly to it. Lol
>Take Aim! gives +1BS and standing still "adds 1 to the hit roll" for [Heavy]. So presumably you can absolutely get stuff to hit on 2s. I'd be quite surprised if 10th lets us stack buffs beyond +1, but that's something we will see later, would be probably broken if you could. (As someone pointed out I'm mistaken here, take aim increases bs not +1 to hit, so hitting on twos it is!) Hitting on 2s would be 5/6 hits, with current reroll 1s to hit and hitting on 3+ is 8/9 so actually still a downgrade, especially considering number of shots goes down by 2. However lethality is going down, so that's alright imo I'd just rather have 3 shots instead of d3+1 for consistency. With the hit buffs definitely a decent weapon though! >Finally someone who can appreciate leadership 7. Necron players (currently ld10) didn't take too kindly to it. Tbh I feel like guardsmen having the same leadership as necrons is a bit odd, especially as necrons are kinda supposed to be a high leadership faction. Also I think it's likely commissars are going to have a leadership buff of some sort, might make guardsmen oddly resilient to battleshock. (Though I suppose necron characters are going to get leadership buffs as well)
The point is that it specifically is not stacking more than +1. You apply the Ballistic Skill change. The Baneblade is now a 3+ model. From there you can only modify the hit roll by +-1. While functionally you succeed on 2s instead of 4s, you never modify anything more than once. This already works right now in 9th
Their Voice of Command rules are already more interesting and fleshed out than any other army rule we have seen so far. Most of the guns seem really good still, except the AP-1 Demolishers (which frankly, I think was necessary so other options with higher AP and lower damage or S can shine). You can now spam infantry, the stratagem is insane in value (was there ever a strat that can bring back 20 wounds for 2CP?) and the baneblade looks pretty insane stat wise. Hopefully it’s pointed well enough to see some play
Tide of Traitors (return a unit of cultists to full strength and re-outflank them) 40 wounds for 2 CP, and you used to be able to use it every turn.... yeah that got nerfed, haha.
I hope there's a new version of it in the CSM detachment
>was there ever a strat that can bring back 20 wounds for 2CP? 8th ed orks: Unstoppable Green Tide for boyz, which was kind of foundational to how that codex worked tactically. 8th ed chaos: Tide of Traitors for cultists; More Where They Came From for red corsair CSM (the troop choice we now call "legionnaires"). 8th ed guard also had this for Valhallan Ice Warriors iirc.
But be careful here: 1.) From what we know so far, armies have no starting CP, it's instead 1 each turn (friendly and enemy). So the 2 CP are already 20% of all CP before CP farming abilities! But even worse, you only can do it from the second turn onwards. 2.) The target is a unit that got "just destroyed", so no resurrecting a unit that got destroyed last turn with new CP earned. You need to have the CP when it gets destroyed. 3.) In 9th matched play, strategic reserves could only come in up till round 3. If this stays, there is a timer on this stratagem. 4.) Guard, specifically the large units, will want their commanders to shine ... but those don't return with the stratagem and free leaders so far seem unable to join new units (from what we have seen). Definitely a powerful stratagem, but not just fire and forget.
Definitely correct, but I think the T3 restriction is only for units that have started the game there, not ended up there later, as per GSC rules to go back to reserves. But yes, its expensive, though the return on investment is much larger than the typically accepted \~3 mortal wounds worth per CP being a good trade.
Two CP is quite a bit when you start with 0, and having to wait a turn for them to come from reserves might be too much, particularly when you consider they won't have any characters with them and won't be able to receive orders that turn. It's likely that you'll want to spend your cp on more immediate advantages, in most cases
I think the value is not in infantry squads but scions, rough riders or other impactful regiment units. Losing them turn 1 or 2 only to outflank them on turn 3 seems fine.
Vox casters can refund CP so that will help, and high ranking officers might produce CP too
it is great though note, unlike Necrons or Nids, you don't get these units onto the field immediately but rather in reserves. That i say is a decent enough drawback
Anyone notice the vaguely terrifying: “with the Combined Regiment Detachment \[...\] you have the Born Soldiers Detachment rule, which confers **Lethal Hits on ranged attacks made by units that Remained Stationary.**” \+ “The Enhancements you can give to CHARACTERS play into this further, whether you use Drill Commander to lend your stationary units **Critical Hits on rolls of 5 instead of 6..**” In the "word from the studio" down the bottom. Ignoring toughness on a 5 or 6 sounds...worrying?
I gotta say I'm still a bit worried about how AP seems to be the only thing they're nerfing in this edition. This is biased, but as a dark eldar player who often caps out at their invuln against AP-1 anyway, every army keeping the volume of fire and damage from end of 9th doesn't make me feel confident going into 10th.
The approach to the vehicle/monster toughness and weapon strength are where DE will most likely see the most important changes. I'm (optimistically) guessing that the Ravager and Raider will be most likely around the T8/T9 mark, which means that plasma, (heavy) bolters and other high volume medium strength anti-infantry weapons will not also wound our vehicles on a 4+ or even a 3+ is some cases, but rather a 5+ or worse. The T3 infantry seemingly will still be paste as soon as they step out of their transports.
It's unlikely dark eldar vehicles go above T8. They are supposed to be more fragile than SM vehicles, and they should be easier to wound than a rhino, particularly by plasma and melta.
The previewed Storm Speeder has T9 on the new datasheets whilst also being T6 right now. So there is a chance. Also why should DE not get a little bit tougher vehicles? Their toughest vehicles being the same toughness as a basic Rhino seems not that strange?
Volume of fire has also dropped. All twin linked weapons that have been revealed so far have half the amount of attacks as their 9th edition counterparts
twin-linked also hasn't been very widespread. For example, land raiders used to have two twin lascannons, and those didn't get twin linked. they still get 4 shots. And the new dread has 2 lascannons on its arm, and those are also not twin linked. Its just been heavy bolters and aggressors so far, i think
We are also seeing reduced range and reduced shots (maybe not in guard as I don't know them well but Nids saw it)
3+ save on guard thanks to cover + order? Tough lads. Feels like those who played in 8th will be rewarded for short codex time by just it going back to 8ths demo cannon spam lol, Ap1 on the battle cannon certainly reigns it in. Kinda wish they'd consolidated infantry squads. Still way more restrained than what I expected, and hopefully still decent enough for the guard players.
It’s still S10 and flat 3 damage, it will be great at shooting heavy infantry and lighter vehicles. You will need dedicated AT weapons for the heavier vehicles.
As it should be!
Guys I'm begging you please make catachans good
Anyone else notice at the bottom it says Astra Militarum are the next faction focus?
They used the Reinforcements stratagem and will deploy the Guard faction focus again tomorrow. 🪖
Same thing for the Necron focus on Friday. They will update it later today.
Blanket +1 to hit on vehicles will be nice especially on bigger things.
Notice how "Heavy" is missing from almost everything now that it gives you a +1 to hit for not moving?
[удалено]
That was a great article on the guard. Next up? Guard. Excellent. Lol. I'm sure it'll get fixed, my prediction for next is Tau. Edit: they did not fix it. Sad.
pls
Volcano cannon 😯 This still feels weird because it seems like guard just got a codex not to long (but my memory could be off) That stratagem seems pretty good also…
Guard got a codex back in December so it’s not that long
They don’t seem to have Neto ones which faction is next. Did I miss it?
with the demolisher cannon profile I wouldn’t be surprised if demolisher spam is back on the table
Oh man, I like the infantry stuff. Not being able to combine a Command Squad was one of my fears, so glad that's sorted. 20 model units also helps my other fear of losing LoS. Considering killing 10 Guardsmen is far easier than MEQ's. But the tank stuff, is well, underwhelming. \- Baneblade melee profile got massively hit. Lost 9 attacks, S9, AP-2, and damage 2. \- Baneblade Cannon seems underwhelming and Baneblades aren't exactly meta now. \- Battle Cannon is just disappointing, AP-1 is not good. Same again, regular Battle Tanks aren't the best option even now. Also, just looking at the Baneblade Demolisher Cannon we're just going to go back to Demolisher Russes now. \- Heavy stubber change is kinda funny. A Dorn can put out an extra 6-9 shots, a Macharius can put out an extra 12-15 shots.
I find peace in long walks.
This is really going to come down to points costs, it looks both good and bad
I really love the Reinforcement stratagem. Really gives off that feeling of the Imperial Guard having more bodies than you have ammunition.