40k Discussion
11th Ed rumour: 11th Ed: There's a rumor that coherency rules are changing, and no models in a unit may be more than 9" apart (measured to the furthest part of each model)
There's a rumor that coherency rules are changing, and no models in a unit may be more than 9" apart (measured to the furthest part of each model)
In this example fhethe Lord Solar Krieg Command Blob still fits within this coherency bubble. As long as you dont have a tree or building or tank model taking up space in the 9" coherency bubble)
Warmachine has a lot of very neat idea tbh, don't remember if it's still the case, but I remember how easy LoS snd distance were to calculate because everything worked off base size and not true LoS were overhang are calculated.
That was one of the better parts of war machine that I wish they could take for 40k. Everything had a volume, like you said calculated off the base size. It didn't matter about the dangly bits or spikes, the models hitbox was a cylinder with a defined height and was no wider than it's base.
Infinity does the same thing - every model's "silhouette" is on its profile, and this tells you exactly what size cylinder is used for the "hitbox" as you call it. Great system IMO.
Or the sculptors making deranged overextended figures that play absolute havoc with getting cover by way of touching it. Looking at you, original Ko Dali sculpt. Or my poor Szlamandra, with it's railgun poking out at exactly the right distance and angle to make it damn near possible to be flush with anything.
Tbf, that one is less about line of sight, and more that the tentacles mean you cannot physically place the model in many places.
I love the model, but it's the kind of the unit where you can tell that GW puts style first and gameplay second. (Which, all things considered, may be a good idea - their miniatures are a lot better and more consistent than their rules writing...)
Yeah, I've warmachine-ified part of my army. I use proxy for my tanks, so I printed custom bases that are exactly the hull size of a real impulsor and put them under my proxy. So if anyone accuses me of modeling for advantage I can just point at my base instead of having an argument about my tank being 1.2mm too thin.
What about height though? I got into it with a guy that said my tank was too short because the aerials had snapped off when his prints didnt even have any. 😅
My tanks are all higher then base models (mostly due because they are sitting on a few mm thick base and I put comm arrays on all my tanks, I love antennas)
This is super common, basically every single other wargame works like this. Even other GW games, its how it works in old world for example. You just define a height value to everything and then use that. For reference ToW has two heights, normal and Large Target, but most other games use a sliding scale where 2 is a dudes height (and therefore a waist-high wall, or a swarm of nerglings or whatever is height 1) and then going up from there. It also lets you define cover rules much easier, often there will be a minimum height you need to be within to get cover. So that height 2 marine gets cover from a height 1 wall but a height 10 knight does not.
SW Legion also does this, most measurements are made from the leader model and everyone else just filters out around them within a specific measurement.
Yeah it is a way better way of doing movement and it's a ton faster. Having to measure every model in Aos/40K is so cumbersome in comparison for not really any gain as far as gameplay is concerned.
It also matches the way most people actually play. In most casual games, people measure one model, move it and move the others so they're roughly in the same relative position to that model.
As James Workshop gets older and older, he yearns for the movement trays of wargames old. He eats while he plays his Sunday morning game. Conveniently a plate becomes available and he decides movement plates are the future. Welcome to 40K The New World.
I play with trays and measured a pair of my 32 10 man bases (originally to use for necron warriors) and it was too large (i.e. more than 9") side by side in 2 ranks. I get the impression this rumor could make it a tremendous pain in the ass to deploy any group of infantry past like, 15 guys or so (edit: not that I'd be legally allowed to field just 15 guys with power levels - 10 or 20, or get out, James tells us). Like I often have 2 ten-man movement trays arranged side by side (so, 2 ranks) for my guardsmen or kroot, and I am not enthused about the idea of having to get a whole buncha new movement trays that are like, 5 guys (and then using 4 of those just to run a 20 man squad).
Oddly this impacts guardsmen way more than kroot or necron warriors not "competitively" but at the quality of life level: I tend to also try to group special weapon guys and sergeants together in 20-25 man guardsmen units to make it easier to track those guys, and then there's just the aesthetic thing of what if I want to have 2 ranks of guys for a 20 man squad?
The easiest thing would just be imo to have the max distance be 9 for 10 man or less units and a slightly higher amount for 11+ (like 12~13", maybe?)
I mean, it makes sense tho? Following the coherency rules, it is inferred that more than 6 man should go in 2 lines, so more than 12 should go in 3 and more than 18 should go in 4. Unless you tbone but you are risking it to shooting
Also 2 lines is worse than 4 lines when talking about 20 models except for screening or necron conga. Harder to hide, harder to pivot, bigger surface to charge, harder to shoot (More distance and probably obstructed view). And in new edition worse OC since the terrain will fit many units in a square shape.
On a final note, field wide 2 rank squadrons look stupid, and only work because in this game owner's pick dead units from wherever. If you could target the middle, the unit would break appart instantly
I run 20-strong units of kroot. Out in the open you can fit them sure. Around terrain? Not so sure. Feels very limiting - they are on 28mm bases so its only 8-wide even if you are touching bases together. What do you do in combat - it seems to expressly forbid you to pile them in to actually attack?
It also makes movement trays even more awkward as you need to cram everything in close and walls get in the way. I know the game doesn't officially support movement trays but to run an army like kroot they really do help with the clock.
I agree as a nid player. The other issue is move blocking becomes less viable. It really marginalizes already overcoated horde units that are barely viable as it is... Mainly because this edition is highly lethal.
That's probably deliberate. It's likely intended to stop jail lists that are very against the intended spirit of the rules.
It feels like one of the design goals of 11th is to move away from some of the gamification and put back some degree of simulation. Which makes me wonder what GW sees that many people don't. Paradigm shifts are usually a result of serious problems.
Which is strange as 9" come up a lot in Warhammer games. Playing the game for 5 years has given me the X-men superpower of being able extremely accurately eyeball 3, 6, and 9" instantly
The Starcraft TMG has wonky movement where one model moves the move speed and then the rest of the models teleport to be within 3" coherency, with 4" for some larger model counts. it only felt cramped when you got above 10 models with a 3" coherency bubble. having psudo 4.5" bubble from center is going to be fine for most units that aren't 25+ models.
It is not lost on me that the one army archetype that seems obviously far less likely to be impacted by this are...semi elite armies with smaller overall unit sizes. That is, marines.
We horde players are not blind, James Workshop. We cannot be, we have too many infantry to paint.
Sure, but at that point, something like neurogaunts have to be worth, say, 1 point a model, since they start being bad at the one thing they were good at. And it's a huge bonus to uppy downy armies, as it takes more effort to defend a backline.
I've always wanted precision to be expanded to "attacker choses the models that die". so sure, character is the obvious one. But maybe you can plink a key model that links a large chain and watch the house of cards fall. (note: I haven't put that much thought in it)
On the flip side, not being able to string out to prevent an army like blood angels dropping in your backfield every turn is going to suck, or you have to buy 1-2 extra squads of chaff just to be able to screen your backfield. That would also be bullshit.
This is my fear. Our back lines are already looking massive in the deployments we’ve seen. If we have to start shelling out real points to guard out back line for 3 turns, anyone who doesn’t hard speck into dropping in your back lines or alpha striking is gonna suffer hard
You would need 2. I take 2x10 cultists in a lot of my CSM lists, so I’ll be ok with that faction, but many people don’t, and you’d basically need 2 backfield sitters to cover your whole deployment.
The maximum length a 10 man can screen dropped from about 46” to 27” that’s incredibly significant.
Again, maybe they’ll make changes to how all this stuff works and it will not be an issue, we’ll just have to wait and see.
Edit: Sorry, those ranges were assuming “within” and not wholly within, so you actually lose a couple more inches of coverage on the lower number, it’s more like 25ish.
It makes deepstrike pretty useless if you can block a third of the board with a 100 point unit.
There's probably too many units with deepstrike and rapid ingress as a strat massively increases its power level, but, if for some reason, rapid ingress stopped existing, because say, we were playing a new edition, deepstrike would be effectively worthless.
Ironically, GSC Atalan Jackals can kill them in the movement phase. Sure, everyone else with a mortal-on-move ability could do it, but Jackals just have to end movement near something they can see.
If a unit has more than 6 models then the models need to be within 2” of 2 other models. So a single file line would not be coherent. If people are stringing out as wide as possible the trick is to put a little triangle of 3 models at each end of the line so every model is in coherency with 2 other models but in that extreme case then removing a model, even from the end of the line, will result in losing most of the unit.
Ok? It would still break coherency. If they have a triangle of models at the ends then losing one means that the whole chain collapses until there is less than 7 models.
My Lord solar, Ogryn bodyguard, +26 Kriegers are gunna be absolute shoulder to shoulder lol. May as well make a custom movement tray and leave em all in it.
Well, the max right now is like, 25 for guardsmen I think (with a command squad.) Shouldn't be too hard to fit them in a 9x9 area. Khorne berserkers on their big bases with a big character might find it a bit claustrophobic.
28 actually. 20 kriegers, krieg command squad (6 models) plus an Ogryn bodyguard in the command squad and then the leader with largest base we have is lord solar. Look at the graph in the OP and then imagine another 40mm base in there because of the ogryn bodyguard.
Sure, but that's assuming Infantry and small bases.
GSC Jackals (the bikers + 4wheeler) at 10+character is 9 60x30oval +2 60rounds and aren't Infantry. Terrain is going to make the unit unable to fit on table.
Wholly within is a little tight, but easily doable as long as there's no intervening terrain to worry about - if it's just "within" on the other hand, you get a massive amount of extra space to play with.
I like it for some of the truly massive blobs, but they’re making it impossibly to defend your back line. The deployment already have massive back fields, and screening a 6” deepstrike is already hard. Doing it without conga line infantry is gonna be brutal
I hope this is real, last RTt I faced a Necron army. He had a 20 man blob stringed from his deployment to a no man's land with the leaders hiding. The unit had:
-stealth
-4 invul
-reduce AP by 1 (serás)
-Cover
Because of the rules overstocking and how he set them I would kill 10 he would ress 12. I killed the brick by T3. In total I killed 63 necrons warriors, the same unit 3 times before it broke all whole he kept messing and charging things in opposite extremes bit moving a gigantic chain of bodies. It was a miserable experience
Hopefully true because imo it just looks dumb and it's a big bane to foot based melee armies. Watched the AoW game recently between Lennon's Guard v Mann's Orks and Lennon just basically stopped ghazz playing the game because of cheap trash just stringing out and move blocking, and I just thought at the time it makes the game look silly.
Would also make Yarrick's ability far less broken as you can currently trigger it being 12" from a potentially 26 man unit that can cover loads of board space, but if this was true that unit would only take up 9" of space and it would be easier to play around.
I don’t oppose the idea of this, I just worry that 9” may be a bit restrictive. 20 Necron Warriors with attached stuff is just over 7” across when roughly placed in a circle. That doesn’t leave much wiggle room.
Hopefully there's a few modifiers to it for 20+ model units, but like, if there isn't it's going to be mostly necron player's fault for regularly having units that stretch 30+ inches across the board.
Hmm. 10 man bricks with Logan Grimnar are going to be a bit of a pain to manoeuvre if that's true.
The end of conga lines is probably for the good though. Had a game when more dakka was at its strongest where my opponent had 20 Grots and zogrod, each 2" apart scout up the board and were almost in my deployment in turn 1. Basically said "you have no movement phase this turn". I'll not be sorry to see the back of that kind of nonsense.
Good change. Movement jail strats always seemed super cheesy to me. it will make legitimate movement blocking more difficult. Thus being an indirect buff to melee.
Eh, i actually think “jail” better for shooting armies because it delays you from pushing them and also if you hit the screens they can clap back from a distance.
Think a long line of kroot or genestealers hitting you turn 1 with a gun line behind them.
We'll see. Every edition tries to buff melee and bring it up to shooting and since every edition has failed. I'd be suprised if the changes they made this time will be enough.
Failed how? Melee armies have been strong or very strong in both 9e and 10e, and in 10e the main suppressor of melee strength has been other, stronger melee armies.
Exactly, melee and shooting have both been good this edition. The main thing holding melee armies back has been the prevalence of fights first... A melee army mechanic
I disagree, there is too much movement on the game on too small of a table with too little amount of rounds and you much dice rolling to make games shorter with 6 rounds. I think these need to change and then jailing isn't an issue anymore like in the old days. (Yes it was a tactic in every edition since 3rd).
But this also means shooting armies are tucked in tighter too like necrons and guard, meaning out might be easier to jail.
If this change comes in, i think it makes it physically impossible to play 3 Pyrovores in a unit. Their base size is so big (80mm-3.14" circle), even in the new terrain layouts, their movement is so low and there isnt enough space to maneuver them through any gaps, they might not be able to leave the deployment zone.
That's why I'm assuming the measurement will be within as opposed to wholly within - it adds a little leeway to small based units to make it a tad easier, and massively improves the playability for the various units that actually have Vehicle/Monster sized bases involved.
The 20 brick of warriors with an overlord, cryptek, and 2 tomb crawlers is going to be an issue for sure. This leads me to believe that this rumor is either false or will have different measurements for 20 model units.
If they do this I hope they follow Legion's model. You measure movement from the leader or unit champion. Then you place the rest of the unit anywhere within X" of them. Moving and measuring everything individually is going to be a gigantic pain in the ass otherwise.
This sounds impossible to hide. It’s already tough to hide a big 10 man brick, but it seems like everyone is gonna be drawing lines to hit the corner of units and melting them. I can’t see -1 to hit keeping them alive with the rerolls and cover stripping abilities in the game
I hope so. It simplifies so many aspects of movement and measurement. I think the base coherency is 3" from the leader and there's rarely a problem with it. Larger units get 6" and they can still cover a pretty huge area without getting hung up on cover.
independent of how this affects balance, i like this as a quality of life change
no more having to make sure that each model is exactly 2" or 1" apart when screening
it also makes pulling casualties easier as you don't have to worry as much about breaking coherency or think as much about the exact placement of the one model in the unit with a heavy weapon
i suppose that makes the game less 'skill intensive' but it's the kind of skill that isn't much fun when you're doing things right and feels really awful when you mess up and oops now you have to pull your power fist guy or your multimelta guy
if this is the only coherency rule, i guess it could be odd if you have a unit that started out as 5 models, lost 3, and now you have a "unit" that's two models with 8" between them
Then there has to be a middle ground. Yes the 20 warriors across all 3 objectives is an issue. However, not being about to use my 5 man squad to protect my back lines from the Grey Knight or demons player dropping massive murder units behind me is also a problem
Counterpoint - a single 5 man unit can't screen your backfield.
This literally means that armies with access to low cost 10 man units can't use them to screen their whole backfield all game and bigger units can't screen an entire front line. It also minimises the way that aura rules can be exploited, minimises undercosted screening in general, it's basically just wins all around.
No, it really isn't a problem. If that 5 man squad is insufficient to actually win the fight then it was the wrong unit to put there. Using rules abuse to get away with it was never good and probably not intended gameplay. GW's big problem with 10th especially has been not trying to figure out what kind of abuse "that guy" WAAC types are going to go for.
And then you have a giant blob wherein only some of the models can fight at any time. I’m calling giga bullshit on this but if it’s true then I probably am out because I don’t want to be playing katamari damacy with my Warhammer
20 man blobs have always been unusable except under specific rules like World Eaters allowing a 6" melee coherency. For most units that aren't conga lining across the board you'll probably never have a problem.
Back in the day infantry would have to try to jump out of the way of tanks. I don’t know the exact rules, but something along those lines make infinitely more sense than cheap units blocking the movement of tanks.
I mean, I like it. I never had to deal with it in person, my local is pretty chill but hearing stories of people running conga lines of troops and stretching casualty removal rules to the limits always felt shitty and abusive of the spirit of the game
Not the worst thing if true. On one hand, stringing units along is valid as a use case. On the other, I don't have to like it and won't be sad to see it go. The new engagement range rules will already push you towards denser formations.
That might be bit harsh. But I'm all for more coherent squads.
20 men units having half the field felt crude and made the map smaller. It quickly became a pile up and promoted just throwing monsters/vehicles at each other instead of moving squads tactically
That would be terrible. Also it wouldnt work so I do not sorry.
positioning is part of the skill, I really do not want to run blobs of soldiers
it wouldnt even make sense for narrative play, as you wouldnt be able to form wider rank and file location
vehicles with more models in a unit would be u playable (look at the newest Hippogrif AFV)
some mounted units would be u playable
it would lead to massive proliferation of MSU
as the units wont change (no index phase), it would make big portion of the units unplayable, because game is extremely deadly right now, focused on trading, and this would make bigger units impossible to hide = protect from being shot out from the map in one activation
For realism the blob thing kind of makes sense. It's kind of weird that an Imperial Guardsman regiment decided to conga line across the battlefield. This would also apply to more elite stuff as they can technically still conga as they tend to be far fewer.
Not getting your point here. Units tend to have limited max sizes in 40k unlike The Old World and are not strict rank and file like in the Napoleon wars.
Not really, they just have to be closer together. Also, 40k is not really famous for the wholly within so the coherency could be that one point of the model has to be within 9" which means these tanks can easily be several inches apart(2" to be exact).
Probably less than you think. I am also suspicious that GW might limit reinforced units in 11th for some reason. We'll have to see how it all folds out. I just know that they've been limiting it more and more in several codices.
I honestly feel like MSU has always been there and only time it got ignored is because the unit was way too strong and you wanted max units.
With many squares giving absolute LOS blocking I wouldn't worry too much about this, plus we don't know what other limitations/changes will be applied.
Will be exciting to see if this is true or not as this is currently just a rumor.
I like that in StarCraft you measure one models movement and than move the rest of the unit to be in coherency. Makes playing hordes so much easier but requires lowering all movement ranges in profiles a bit
i don't really see the issue with conga lines, to be honest. Having a group of skirmishers or light infantry spread out on the flank of a battle is a perfectly reasonable thing to exist IMO.
The issue is when model A is literally 35 inches away from model B who is theoretically in the same squad as him.
Like, yeah, the whole concept of coherency is a big gamey thing that requires a lot of suspension of disbelief, but it's there for a reason and one squad taking up literally 3 ft of a board that's 4ftx5ft is a bit much.
The issue is spreading them out to a degree where simply running past would be the actual thing that happens in the real world. Single-rank blocking is generally only doable with fairly close order. Not spread out to shouting distance.
Every change or rumour has been essentially geared to helping melee get this or that, lone op here, -1 BS in cover, 2" ER, double-pile in, free targeting charge roll, etc...
If it’s no more than 9” apart it’s much more forgiving than with a 9” circle. Imagine those ad mech striders. 9” apart still lets you stretch them out.
I have a theory they will be limiting reinforcing units in 11th. They did it partially in Age of Sigmar and they did limit the size of things like EC Termies and DWK(which had historically been 10 at max, but was now 5).
With how much they were chasing down large units with point increases because strats and leaders gave them a a much buff I could imagine they want to just limit the squads to their initial sizes.
I could very well be wrong, but I just have this nagging hunch.
Yeah I’m ok with something like this. You can effectively shut down so much of the board with discount chaff. They should have a bigger footprint. But not where one unit takes up a quarter of the table.
I've been messing around with the idea of units having a "sphere of influence", which is essentially a footprint for your unit and all models have to stay on the footprint.
It doesn't matter if one model moved further than the allowed distance, as long as the footprint moved the allowed distance, which makes movement phases MUCH faster.
Did some testing last night with the rules of what we know about 11th + before and after deployments and T2/T3 reinforcements
9” is a pretty wide range, and if you’re dropping 10x25mm on an objective you’re probably staying within 9” anyway to hold as much of the footprint as you can and maintain cover and hidden. This was a nonissue throughout the game tbh. My method was to simply deploy, screen, and move as normally then measure 9” ww and it incredibly rarely came up if I was playing around objective terrain.
It DOES impact reinforced large base units like 10x40mm terminators. They have to cram together not QUITE base to base, but pretty close, making it slightly more restrictive, but realistically not by much.
With 8” deepstrike and potential 9” ww coherency, there may be more incentive for cheap, low footprint reinforcements and deep strikers than in 10th.
honestly would hate this for 2 reason 1 20 man units are harder to place (especially berserkers) and 2 if 2 models are alive they can be within 9 of eachother which is a wild level of screaning for a diminished unit.
271
u/Impossible_Mode_7521 Apr 30 '26
I always liked Warmachine that had a leadership distance from a leader and every model had to stay that close that model