Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Dozens?

Totally. Remember how Dark Angels needed a separate entry for Terminators even though there were three types already in the main codex? OH and remember how Blood Angels got two extra variations of the Apothecary? Must be so hard for them.

Oh and don't forget those poor Space Wolves that suffered when they didn't have their Not-Tactical Marine! My heart weeps for the injustice suffered!

Cmon guys.. have some god damn respect! The bugle is still playing... Respect the moment of silence please. Those poor poor marine datasheets..

 Argive wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Dozens?

Totally. Remember how Dark Angels needed a separate entry for Terminators even though there were three types already in the main codex? OH and remember how Blood Angels got two extra variations of the Apothecary? Must be so hard for them.

Oh and don't forget those poor Space Wolves that suffered when they didn't have their Not-Tactical Marine! My heart weeps for the injustice suffered!

Cmon guys.. have some god damn respect! The bugle is still playing... Respect the moment of silence please. Those poor poor marine datasheets..

Oh no, that poor Dark Angels fighter that had basically the same loadout as the Stormtalon...but it got a bonus to hit one target compared to ghe Talon hitting another target better :(

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Dozens?

Totally. Remember how Dark Angels needed a separate entry for Terminators even though there were three types already in the main codex? OH and remember how Blood Angels got two extra variations of the Apothecary? Must be so hard for them.

Oh and don't forget those poor Space Wolves that suffered when they didn't have their Not-Tactical Marine! My heart weeps for the injustice suffered!

Yeah Space Marines had a lot of extra probably unnecessary codexes for all the flavors of marines but I will say that the Wolves played considerably different than Vanilla Marines back before GW started merging them back together. It does suck for the people who actually play those factions because they gave a different gameplay experience. Much more than just some stupid chapter tactic, doctrine, or whatever other stapled on additional rules they give marines these days.

Spoletta wrote:

 Argive wrote:
On topic @ OP:

Yeah man preper to eat the gotcha samich from time to time and also stuff just get deleted if a some unit juiced to the gills with strats looks at it...
Welcome to modern 40k.

Some units were able to throw out like 60+ dice all reroll able.. ZzzzzZZZ....
In one of their marketing / blah blah article GW even said that "Great tactical acumen of this unit is naturally represented by all of the rerolls..."
Some people at GW seem to be semi self aware but mostly its a crapshow...

Spoletta wrote:
That's a bit unfair.

Those supplements were pushed out mainly because BA, DA and SW had LOST their models.

There were literally no rules available anymore, the 9th edition SM codex invalidates the previous SM codici.

There were no rules for Thunderwolf cavalry, Sanguinary guard, DW Knights... snowflake marines had lost about half of their datasheets and about 100% of what defined them.
It is quite obvious that you can't leave a faction hanging like that while waiting for the codex to come out.

It would be an unacceptable treatment even by xenos standards.

Lets all take a moment of silence for how poorly space marines have been treated and all the units they lost.
*bugle plays in the background as silence falls*

Your posts are the funniest cringe friend.
Never change.

Ahh, the sweet aroma of black knights who think that losing dozens of datasheets is fine.

Dakka wouldn't be the same without people like you.

As a SW player I wouldn't have lost anything. I'd have just played 9th for a few months with my 8e Wolf Codex like every other faction save Necrons & generic Marines.
What's a GK player do? Uses 8e codex + changes to melta weapons
What's a SoB player do? Uses 8e codex + changes to melta weapons.
What's a Guard player do? Uses 8e codex + changes to melta weapons.
What's Ork/Tau/Eldar/Chaos/etc etc etc do? Uses 8e codex.
I sense a pattern forming....


And as a SW player I certainly wouldn't be waiting very long for my codex.

But in the end as I also play Necrons I didn't have to worry about it at all.

Ghaz wrote:

nemesis464 wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Smoke launchers? Now a strategem for example.

That seems weird to me. I'd rather hthe complexity of the rules made up in the wargear and unit entry, rather than on stratagem cards.

Instead of having Smoke Launchers on every vehicle, you now have to spend points from a small pool of Command Points to use a stratagem that can be used only once a phase. That requires putting a bit more thought into the decision to use the stratagem than it did when Smoke Launcher were just wargear.

Which limits it to once per phase.

Now I can't move all my rhinos and pop smoke on each one. Stupid. It removes an actual real life tactic in favor of stupid cp expenditure. Which is the exact reason they've doubled down on swapping rules on datasheet to dumb strats. The entire shift in design structure in favour of a resource pool over pregame spending and then adapting that cost into action on table makes it more MTG than 40k.
They want you to spend CP, on stuff to give you more and more rerolls or more betterer shooting/melee.

But the game boils down to Soooooo many rerolls. Reroll for the reroll God! Reroll for the reroll throne.

The reading comprension of this board has gone lower than my expectations, but what can you expect from Dakka after all.

For the last time:

The 9th SM dex had left 65 datasheet without rules.
No I don't mean, with outdated rules, I mean full out squatted.

There were no rules at all for them, they were completely invalidated as models on the table. 65 datasheets with respective models which had no legal way to be put on the table.

I like how marine haters in here seems to think that since they are SM that would have been fine, but it would have been not.

I don't own any SM models, I'm a Nid/Ts/Sister player and that would have unacceptable under any standard.

If GW tomorrow came out and said "The haemonculus sub faction, all CWE wraith units, the Ynnari HQs and the harlequins can no longer be legally played until next notice in a few months" would you really agree with that?

No, you wouldn't, and some of the black knights in this thread would be the first ones to jump on GWs throath for that... followed by me.

Does GW love her favorite SM childs? Yeah, obviously. SM favouritism is all over the place.
Were the FAQs born of that? Not at all. I can concede that they were a bit too generous since they gave a page of stratagems and relics/traits which were not strictly needed. But 90% of those FAQs were absolutely needed.

But...you're wrong.
I play Blood Angels, at no point were any of my units illegal.
Why? Because GW released small PDF supplement indexes (freely available) for those factions which contained the updated rules.
I lost most unique strategems and relics (they needed to ensure I still bought the actual supplement) but no actual units.

I totally agree with Mezmorki's earlier comment that building and playing is a totally different to how it used to be.
It's all about building synergies into units and allocating CPs.
I'm sure we're all familiar with that meme of the crazy guy pointing at a cork board with pictures and string everywhere? That's what it feels like now.
That's not the 40k I fell in love with. Unfortunately I've found no traction for Oldhammer so I've effectively been forced out of the game to find alternatives I enjoy.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
But...you're wrong.
I play Blood Angels, at no point were any of my units illegal.
Why? Because GW released small PDF supplement indexes (freely available) for those factions which contained the updated rules.
I lost most unique strategems and relics (they needed to ensure I still bought the actual supplement) but no actual units.

I totally agree with Mezmorki's earlier comment that building and playing is a totally different to how it used to be.
It's all about building synergies into units and allocating CPs.
I'm sure we're all familiar with that meme of the crazy guy pointing at a cork board with pictures and string everywhere? That's what it feels like now.
That's not the 40k I fell in love with. Unfortunately I've found no traction for Oldhammer so I've effectively been forced out of the game to find alternatives I enjoy.

Reread the answers.

They have been saying that those same small PDFs that you referencing shouldn't have existed, because it was "SM favoritism". Yes, the discussion is THAT dumb.

I'm defending those PDFs not the codici.

Maybe that's the strawman you've constructed.
I'd recommend you reread the comments - they said that the supplements shouldn't have been released, as in the books.
Space Marines would have been fine on those mini indexes for a while, just like Guard and Sisters and others are having to survive on FAQs updating their wargear.
There was no need for GW to rush through Space Marine supplements.

But this is entirely off topic, this topic is about 9th edition's overall gameplay as a result of rerolls and strategems.
Not every topic needs to be dragged into "GW favours Space Marines" within the first page!

9th edition does not embody the general gameplay that I enjoy, nor did 8th.

 Eldarain wrote:
They displayed the ability to issue Indexes to help factions get by early edition issues.
Unfortunately they only used it on their favourite sons to offset a several month wait instead of the books waiting far longer.

 CEO Kasen wrote:
...It kind of sticks in my throat; those armies got full indexes, some of which had completely new rules that presumably took time and effort, ...

Voss wrote:
Which... uh, yeah. Happened.
There totally were Day 1 FAQs for the snowflake chapters to get their special treatment for the couple weeks they had to 'suffer.'
They lost nothing for any amount of time.

@kirotheavenger
The discussion was about the Index.

When playing the new DG codex, they have exactly one re-roll aura that effectively does anything plague marines and blightlords, and if you have a second one it's usually from Mortarion himself who wastes little time buffing slow shooting units. Stratagems no longer play a central role in my strategy, but are used to react to certain situations during the game.

I think Necrons only get re-roll auras on destroyer lords, and while I'm no expert on their army, most strategies seem to be revolving around what units you bring, not about which stratagems combo you use.

Are we sure that the problem isn't (as usual) marines, rather than 9th edition codices?

Nice cherry picking.
I can tell by the comments you skipped over, and your feeble attempt to pass off comments as meaning exactly the opposite of what they did within their proper context that you're not actually interested in being honest about this.
Let's just leave this part of the conversation behind because as I said, if there's one thing this forum needs it sure as hell isn't another thread about marine favouritism.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

BA, SW and DW were playable before getting their supplements.... if the energy used for these supplements had been given to Chaos or Xenos or even just another non-marine Imperium army, it wouldve been a better move for the players.

And so are eldar right now, yet eldar players seem to be dead on this mind set of marine favorism and them being the perescuted ones. As if someone mind sweeped 8th ed, and all the editions before it for them.

It was easier for GW to make and put out all the books at the same, and they did want to do it, because it would be kind of a hard to explain the spliting of BA/DA/DW/etc books in to two, if the other half of the book didn't drop soon after the core sm codex. And it wouldn't have been better for "the players" marines are the most numerous group of players. If something is done by GW to make marine players happy, it automaticaly becomes the thing that makes the majority of w40k happy. And the reverse is true as well. In fact, considering what was going on in 8th with marines, it is suprising that it took GW nine editions to realise that.

Karol, can't you just stop trolling the eldar players? It's getting old.

I ain't trolling. I am not a smart person, but I find it insane to hear from eldar players that they were somehow done wrong by GW. I only know 8th and 9th. 8th ed eldar were crazy comparing to marines, and for much longer time. most marine didn't even get to play with the cool 2.0 rules, because when they arrived in stores and people got to recast tall the models they needed lock downs started. I got to play with my 2.0 GK PA rules 3 times. got them in february, and on the 10th the country locked won. Eldar were a top army all through out 8th ed, and when they became "bad". They were bad in way of , they are better then anything, but castellan tournament lists are generally just as good or later one, you need to play a specific list to get those over 50% win rates.

In the same time if someone played Deathwing or IF, in 8th there often no build that good get you anywhere near eldar lists.

And what really blows my mind is that 8th was considered by people that played prior editions to be less crazy, rules wise. When I hear about eldar mega units getting hit on +6 tanking shots on ++2, running around with weapons that had stats of if I hit I kill, getting warlord units undercosted by 200-250pts.
And then GW does not nerf the eldar units, but just balanced this for marines with their free 500pts,as long as they spend the money on those 5-6 vehicles boxs. I am mind blow to.

Again I ain't smart, I ain't good at the game. But the claim that eldar are somehow treated bad by GW and marines, lumped as one which doesn't make sense to begin with, are the favoured ones, means that either I am more crazy, then I think I am, or is the eldar players. And it is them that are doing the trolling.

Marines 2.0 broke the game in ways we haven't seen before.

Nothing in the history of the game since the 1980s remotely compared to the insane win percentages and top tournament representation of Marines 2.0.

Not Mat Ward Grey Knights, not 6th Edition Riptide Wings allied with Wraithknights, not 7th Edition Screamer Stars, not Ynnari or Castellan, nothing even came close.


(non-Ynnari) Eldar in 8th Edition was for the most part a sub-par Codex with no depth and little variety. Early on, it could be abused to ally in Doom/Jinx into other armies, and like most bad Codexes, you could usually still mine it for skew-builds. In the case of 8th Ed. Eldar, it was Flyers. In the case of 8th Ed. Necrons, it was Doom-6. In the case of 8th Ed. (pre-PA) Daemons, it was Plaguebearer spam. Etc.. Those lists saw some success by building for the extremes and hoping your opponent doesn't have the tools. But they are generally a sign (or last resort) of working with a poor Codex, not a sign of a healthy book with lots of tools and valid options.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
you could usually still mine it for skew-builds.

No, no. Even skew can't be suffered. He's like the avatar of this game's forums collective mind, but with a bias.
As such, Eldars being able to win at all is bad because his regular opponents bullied him with their Ynnari armies and the internet says they are always OP, so they must be.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Marines 2.0 broke the game in ways we haven't seen before.

Nothing in the history of the game since the 1980s remotely compared to the insane win percentages and top tournament representation of Marines 2.0.

Not Mat Ward Grey Knights, not 6th Edition Riptide Wings allied with Wraithknights, not 7th Edition Screamer Stars, not Ynnari or Castellan, nothing even came close.


(non-Ynnari) Eldar in 8th Edition was for the most part a sub-par Codex with no depth and little variety. Early on, it could be abused to ally in Doom/Jinx into other armies, and like most bad Codexes, you could usually still mine it for skew-builds. In the case of 8th Ed. Eldar, it was Flyers. In the case of 8th Ed. Necrons, it was Doom-6. In the case of 8th Ed. (pre-PA) Daemons, it was Plaguebearer spam. Etc.. Those lists saw some success by building for the extremes and hoping your opponent doesn't have the tools. But they are generally a sign (or last resort) of working with a poor Codex, not a sign of a healthy book with lots of tools and valid options.

I'm not sure I agree with this.

7th was more broke than 8th has ever been at any point.

You didn't have the same win percentages in 7th because there was more than one utterly broken list, so they shared the wins.

If in the SM 2.0 era the difference between a competitive list and a non competitive one was 2 to 1, in the end of 7th it was around 10 to 1. The "competitive" lists simply played a different game than the more standard ones, while during SM 2.0 the competitive lists still played the same game, just much more efficiently.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Maybe that's the strawman you've constructed.
I'd recommend you reread the comments - they said that the supplements shouldn't have been released, as in the books.
Space Marines would have been fine on those mini indexes for a while, just like Guard and Sisters and others are having to survive on FAQs updating their wargear.
There was no need for GW to rush through Space Marine supplements.

But this is entirely off topic, this topic is about 9th edition's overall gameplay as a result of rerolls and strategems.
Not every topic needs to be dragged into "GW favours Space Marines" within the first page!

9th edition does not embody the general gameplay that I enjoy, nor did 8th.

No strawman here.
Reread what you want but my answer has been clearly aimed at the FAQs, I never mentioned the supplements.
By the way, you agree with me, so let's just drop this.

Karol wrote:
I ain't trolling. I am not a smart person, but I find it insane to hear from eldar players that they were somehow done wrong by GW. I only know 8th and 9th. 8th ed eldar were crazy comparing to marines, and for much longer time. most marine didn't even get to play with the cool 2.0 rules, because when they arrived in stores and people got to recast tall the models they needed lock downs started. I got to play with my 2.0 GK PA rules 3 times. got them in february, and on the 10th the country locked won. Eldar were a top army all through out 8th ed, and when they became "bad". They were bad in way of , they are better then anything, but castellan tournament lists are generally just as good or later one, you need to play a specific list to get those over 50% win rates.

Every codex should be equally playable, irrespective of history.
You were the one person regularly complaining about how GK shouldn't suffer during 8th because they were insanely OP in editions past.

If you now ask that eldar should be treated in the same way that you explicitly didn't want your army to be treated in past, you are being a hypocrite.

This has nothing to do with being smart. If eldar should not get any help, neither should GK.

Again I ain't smart, I ain't good at the game. But the claim that eldar are somehow treated bad by GW and marines, lumped as one which doesn't make sense to begin with, are the favoured ones, means that either I am more crazy, then I think I am, or is the eldar players. And it is them that are doing the trolling.

Ok, since you aren't smart, I'll spell it out for you.
No one. Absolutely. No. One. Thinks of Grey Knights when they say or read "Marines". This isn't even up for discussion. Stop jumping on this crap.

Now that you have been educated, you can no longer pull the "I ain't smart" excuse.

Karol wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:


I don't like strategems either.
Some of them do way too much, albeit GW has toned it down slightly.
But also they've been used to reduce a lot of special rules to be strategems. Smoke launchers? Now a strategem for example.

Okey lets imagine this. It is corona times, having good sells is important GW starts the edition with 7 books, out of which 5 are some sort of xeno armies, and the rest is one SM codex and one DG codex. All the BA, SW, DW etc marines are left skeleton rules. Now the minority of all players are having fun with their xeno books, while the majority of all players that are marines not so much. You think it would be wise for GW to do something like that? And we talking about it here, just after the goon report shown that marines aren't even the top armies in the game right now, and that a ton of non marines armies are doing well or very well. And that is without 9th books.

Wasnt there a recent report, maybe even the one you yourself just referred to, stating that space marines make up 33% of the player base in total?

Majority....generally not a word used to describe 33% of a population....

Which report would that? Because I've not seen such a finding, and doubt that any report can provide a single number to such a nuanced question.

I'm not sure there is an official report - but if you look at the data in things like the ITC Battles App - and really any significant tournament - Marines usually make up 30-35% of the lists. You can see this in Goonhammer articles, and in the Warhammer Community Article (but I think that's esssentially a re-print of the Goonhammer stats, so not really surprising.)

Factoring in the inclusion of DA/SW/BA/DW this has been fairly stable since Marines 2.0.

I'm suspect though that player population can be concluded flat though, as it inevitably waxes and wanes with performance. Losing repeatedly gets old fast.

Karol wrote:
I ain't trolling. I am not a smart person, but I find it insane to hear from eldar players that they were somehow done wrong by GW. I only know 8th and 9th. 8th ed eldar were crazy comparing to marines, and for much longer time. most marine didn't even get to play with the cool 2.0 rules, because when they arrived in stores and people got to recast tall the models they needed lock downs started. I got to play with my 2.0 GK PA rules 3 times. got them in february, and on the 10th the country locked won. Eldar were a top army all through out 8th ed, and when they became "bad". They were bad in way of , they are better then anything, but castellan tournament lists are generally just as good or later one, you need to play a specific list to get those over 50% win rates.

In the same time if someone played Deathwing or IF, in 8th there often no build that good get you anywhere near eldar lists.

And what really blows my mind is that 8th was considered by people that played prior editions to be less crazy, rules wise. When I hear about eldar mega units getting hit on +6 tanking shots on ++2, running around with weapons that had stats of if I hit I kill, getting warlord units undercosted by 200-250pts.
And then GW does not nerf the eldar units, but just balanced this for marines with their free 500pts,as long as they spend the money on those 5-6 vehicles boxs. I am mind blow to.

Again I ain't smart, I ain't good at the game. But the claim that eldar are somehow treated bad by GW and marines, lumped as one which doesn't make sense to begin with, are the favoured ones, means that either I am more crazy, then I think I am, or is the eldar players. And it is them that are doing the trolling.

The average age of eldar models is 15 years. Meanwhile marines are getting an update to the updated range of miniatures... Its not about their performance, its about their old ass finecast miniatures.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:


I'm not sure I agree with this.

7th was more broke than 8th has ever been at any point.

You didn't have the same win percentages in 7th because there was more than one utterly broken list, so they shared the wins.

If in the SM 2.0 era the difference between a competitive list and a non competitive one was 2 to 1, in the end of 7th it was around 10 to 1. The "competitive" lists simply played a different game than the more standard ones, while during SM 2.0 the competitive lists still played the same game, just much more efficiently.

SM 2.0 (mainly ironhands) sat at a higher winrate than Ynnari/Castellans/Scatterbikes ever did tho. And considering that SM is one of the most popular armies (at least more popular than Ynnari, Knights or eldar), it made for a truly broken game and even marines that werent IH could play as this chapter since they have the same units.

 Jidmah wrote:
When playing the new DG codex, they have exactly one re-roll aura that effectively does anything plague marines and blightlords, and if you have a second one it's usually from Mortarion himself who wastes little time buffing slow shooting units. Stratagems no longer play a central role in my strategy, but are used to react to certain situations during the game.

I think Necrons only get re-roll auras on destroyer lords, and while I'm no expert on their army, most strategies seem to be revolving around what units you bring, not about which stratagems combo you use.

Are we sure that the problem isn't (as usual) marines, rather than 9th edition codices?

Even marines aren't that bad. It's the armies that don't have the CORE setup and full reroll changes.

You can specifically build a reroll marine army, but that's with Bobby and even then he can only be in one place at a time since he can't sit back and buff vehicles. People are WAY more likely to be running Chaplains and Librarians. People rarely pay the 25 for a CM, because it just isn't worth having full rerolls for just one unit when there are other more interesting synergies.

Especially because chapter master is 40

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
When playing the new DG codex, they have exactly one re-roll aura that effectively does anything plague marines and blightlords, and if you have a second one it's usually from Mortarion himself who wastes little time buffing slow shooting units. Stratagems no longer play a central role in my strategy, but are used to react to certain situations during the game.

I think Necrons only get re-roll auras on destroyer lords, and while I'm no expert on their army, most strategies seem to be revolving around what units you bring, not about which stratagems combo you use.

Are we sure that the problem isn't (as usual) marines, rather than 9th edition codices?

Even marines aren't that bad. It's the armies that don't have the CORE setup and full reroll changes.

You can specifically build a reroll marine army, but that's with Bobby and even then he can only be in one place at a time since he can't sit back and buff vehicles. People are WAY more likely to be running Chaplains and Librarians. People rarely pay the 25 for a CM, because it just isn't worth having full rerolls for just one unit when there are other more interesting synergies.

Due to certain limitations on who can play me in person, I really only face DA and they seem to have re-rolls everywhere due to the tripple wing setup. But glad to hear that other marines have moved in the same direction as DG where specialized support characters have more impact that a blob cuddling to their bosses for re-rolls.

Spoletta wrote:
Especially because chapter master is 40

Well, even worse!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:

Due to certain limitations on who can play me in person, I really only face DA and they seem to have re-rolls everywhere due to the tripple wing setup. But glad to hear that other marines have moved in the same direction as DG where specialized support characters have more impact that a blob cuddling to their bosses for re-rolls.

Yea DA might be one of the few armies willing to spring for 3 detachments and carrying more HQs as a result. It would be hard to pack in much in the way of full rerolls and unless they also spend more on LTs the overall rerolls should be less than previous. I imagine as things develop that DA will lean more into Apothecaries over reroll auras.

Tyel wrote:
I'm not sure there is an official report - but if you look at the data in things like the ITC Battles App - and really any significant tournament - Marines usually make up 30-35% of the lists. You can see this in Goonhammer articles, and in the Warhammer Community Article (but I think that's esssentially a re-print of the Goonhammer stats, so not really surprising.)

Factoring in the inclusion of DA/SW/BA/DW this has been fairly stable since Marines 2.0.

I'm suspect though that player population can be concluded flat though, as it inevitably waxes and wanes with performance. Losing repeatedly gets old fast.

That's tournament data though, not representative of thr game as a whole.

Just as my informal observations over the years, a lot of people have multiple armies. When people do have multiple armies, one or more of them is almost always Marines.
With new players it's an even higher percentage. Most people start out with a core set, immediately that's 50% marines if they're sharing with another player. But they see marines get more attention, in everything from models to lore to rules, and so people are more likely to adopt marines.

lulz Spoleta. Just ... lulz ...Most other factions would have had to get by with either literally nothing until their codex came out, or would have had to make-due with a "get you by" FAQ download, or simply using their old codex until their new "official" supplement went out. You know this. I'm not sure why it offends you so much. For example, I'm STILL WAITING on my Crimson Slaughter update ...

What? A Blood Angel player may have to go a few months without using Sang Guard, or possibly using them but in a less-than-convenient way? How sad. Tell it to the Tau/GSC/Tsons players who's entire armies are nearly essentially useless with their 8th ed books ... Also, while I'm not one to throw stones given how many typos I frequently have, I've also never beat someone up so badly for "reading comprehension". You may want to go back and do some heavy editing to that rant if you want to also keep the reading comprehension part.

As far as the thread topic - If you're just coming back from an older edition, I can see where it's pretty weird! It takes some getting used to, but I think 9th is going to be a good edition. They just need to get some issues fixed w/the missions imo, but over-all things are in good shape.

As far as re-rolls and all that - I do have to agree that the 9th ed dexes have toned that down a lot from what we had in 8th. Especially the marine dex. Marines can actually miss shots now. This was, without exaggeration, almost unheard of in the previous dex. This has also (thankfully) been mostly kept in the supplements and other codexes. While it's a little annoying that IH get to keep the 6+ FNP roll and DG lost the 5+ (just a personal pet peeve), I think they really have done a great job of cutting it back down. This was one of my biggest crits of the 9th rules. They wanted a "faster" game, but created a rule set that would only make games LONGER while not addressing the real issues of strats and rerolls. I will say that they still haven't quite hit that "faster" mark, but yeah, the rerolls are WAY better imo.

The strats are better now too than they were imo. You have situationally good strats in each book so far, and a few minor combos, but nothing like what was happening before, and each book appears to have better strats over-all combined with similar quality and quantity. For example, the 8th ed DG book was pretty much a bad joke when it came to strats. Basically, it was just - "how many times will I be able to use Cloud of Flies". I think they've addressed this well.

Genestealer Cults are paying for the sins of how God awful broken that 7th edition codex was. First time I ever starting spamming Combi-Flamers on a Sarge when I could.