Warhamster 40,000 9th edition

[punkrabbitt]

OK, so my friends and I tried out the new Warhamster 40,000 9th edition rules yesterday. You can read all about it https://rollin-with-my-homies.blogspot.com/2020/08/warhamster-40000-9th-edition.html

[steders]

Thanks for the review, but you don’t actually say why you don’t like them!
Any chance of a brief reason why?

[punkrabbitt]

Thanks for the review, but you don’t actually say why you don’t like them!
Any chance of a brief reason why?

It's hard to pinpoint; I've seen the rules get steadily worse since 2nd edition was released, and then 8th was this giant breath of fresh air where the game started to make sense and be fun again. Jist one example is that while I didn't think the Overwatch in 8th edition went far enough in it's execution, reducing it to a once-a-phase action in 9th stripped it of any real usefulness.

As we play a few more games, I'm sure the picture will solidify for me.

[mcfonz]

It's hard to pinpoint; I've seen the rules get steadily worse since 2nd edition was released, and then 8th was this giant breath of fresh air where the game started to make sense and be fun again. Jist one example is that while I didn't think the Overwatch in 8th edition went far enough in it's execution, reducing it to a once-a-phase action in 9th stripped it of any real usefulness.

As we play a few more games, I'm sure the picture will solidify for me.

As a matter of interest, what armies do you typically run in 40k?

Edit:

and skipped CP and Stratagems

Yikes! I mean, that's one of the areas they changed the most!!

[punkrabbitt]

Typically I play Death Guard and Asuryani. We skipped the CP and the Stratagems because the free 9th edition rules download was unclear on them. We weren't quite sure what we could and couldn't do with them.

[Sir_Theo]

Strategems are probably quite a big thing, and I do prefer (in theory ive not tried it yet) the CP generation this time around compared to 8th but....I feel very similar to you about 40k. The last edition I really enjoyed was 2nd, and that was when I was 15 (although I've played it recently and I Still prefer it) I liked the direction 8th took but they soon swamped it with codex creep, as is their want. Whilst the Indomitus box is very nice im not sure we really needed a new edition just yet.

That said I meet a group of friends at Warhammer world once a year so we have to play 40k that weekend at least.

[Bravo Six]

Anyone else come  to this thread expecting to see sci-fi hamster miniatures. 

[punkrabbitt]

Anyone else come  to this thread expecting to see sci-fi hamster miniatures. 

If I could find ones I liked, believe me, they'd be on the short list as K'kree allies.

[punkrabbitt]

 @Sir_Theo, I totally think it is too soon for a new edition!

[Pictors Studio]

Probably is too soon. I usually skip out on the strategems and CP too as it just seems like needless complication.  The nice thing about 8th was that it was a simplification after the complicated mess 7th had become. 

For the record my favourite edition is 3rd.  I think it is the most streamlined and easiest to play. 

[mcfonz]

It's interesting to see different reflections on 9th. From what I have seen the overwhelming response is that it is a massive improvement. And my gaming club with a fair number of 40k players along with the smaller group of friends that play (some overlap but not all) all feel it has improved and not just for their armies.

Strangely, I wouldn't say I have a favourite edition as such, I played up until 4th and then tried 8th. I could see why we had gone from 2nd to 4th, the changes made sense. The Imperial Guard codex with traits you could use was really cool and at the time, my Catachans were deployed to good use!

Since I have collected a tooth and claw tyranid force, previously as my Catachan force was a veteran of tyranid engagements. But also because they make really nice generic aliens for generic sci fi stuff.

Anyhoo. My friends talked me into trying a few games of 8th. It sucked. It sucked because if you were a combat orientated army, close combat was incredibly unrewarding. You could have broods of 20 models but it just meant that they were easier to see and shoot at and that more units could concentrate fire on them. Smaller units meant they could get shot to tatters and hardly be worth the impact of those they managed to charge with. Overwatch played a huge part in this.

Also, mission objectives. Not enough emphasis on them. This meant that you could have a player genuinely trying to play the objectives and the other just intent in killing as much as possible. And the killy one could win every game without taking any objectives.

As a result of both of the above, you saw a lot of armies fielding very static gun lines, preferring to get good firing positions and ignoring objectives and not really being that worried about combat.

The emphasis on objectives and not killing means that players are encouraged to do more than just plonk their units down and shoot. It also means they have to carefully consider unit construction as load outs may be more defensive or more offensive, and as a result they will be given more distinct battlefield roles.

Combat is no longer powder-puff. The change to overwatch rules mean that you have to be more considerate rather than relying upon weight of fire power alone. You can't take a couple of casualties and then fall back whilst shooting some more. It's going to be less forgiving.

In many ways, this edition feels the closest to 2nd ed since 3rd/4th. Overwatch used to be something you only got once per turn if you gave up your movement and shooting for your activation.

And combat is returning to being a somewhat scary experience. This is makes a huge difference to armies that are combat orientated or have combat specialists in their army compositions.

The CP/strategems have been streamlined. They don't influence how you pick an army anymore. In fact they remind me a bit of the old 2nd ed tactics cards you used to get before the game.

Interesting to see other folks take on it though. I do suspect it may well be down to how you have become accustomed to using the army you have as the changes are quite big, but definitely needed.