With all the 40k previews, it seems like the way models interact with cover and coherency is changing,is this the death of movement trays?
9th Edition is on the way and for models interacting with terrain specifically, it looks like there’s been some clever rewording on GW’s part. Check out what we’ve noticed and let us know what you think about it all.
New 9th Edition 40k Rules the Death of Movement Trays?
Base-to-Base Interaction Looks to be the New Norm
Before we jump in, we should note that GW has never been outright against movement trays. They even made their own movement trays for all sorts of units when Apocalypse was re-released. However, movement trays might have been an unintentional casualty with these latest rules previews.
Jumping into the latest rules breakdown on Dense Cover, to get a -1 to hit on the unit, your opponent can’t be able to draw a line to every part of a single model’s base without that imaginary line going through the building. It’s pretty straight forward, right?
Well, if you noticed, this is a stark change from the current rules in 8th Edition where as long as you can draw LoS on ANY part of the model and it’s not standing in terrain, there are no bonuses/debuffs given.
Azrael is a perfect example of a model that got the short end of the stick. Sure he’s a character, but if snipers can see any part of that banner, they can technically shoot at him with no debuffs. Other infantry units with antennas/wings on their backpacks also suffer the same fate.
The fact that they’ve changed terrain rules to interactions with base sizes will greatly help units with awkward profiles stay alive a bit longer. In 9th Edition, even if you can see Azzy’s banner, he could be safe and sound getting +1 to save and -1 to hit (depending on if he’s standing in terrain or just obscured). All because his BASE is now the point of interaction on the model.
We Saw Age of Sigmar’s Base Sizes Change- Could that Happen in 40k?
Another quick note to make is that when AoS dropped, we saw base sizes change like crazy across every faction. GW dropped a downloadable PDF showing which units required certain base sizes. Now that we have a growing focus on base-to-base interactions in 40k, GW may also be dropping a PDF soon showing what older units need to have their bases changed.
There are still some characters out there that have no business being on a 25mm!
Could 9th Edition’s New Terrain Rules Be the Death of Movement Trays?
Now let’s look at the bigger picture here. With armies that use hordes like GSC, Orks, Tyranids, and even some Death Guard lists, movement trays help cut down on time. You can slide a tray forward in two seconds and in that time, you’ve just moved anywhere from 5-20 models. With that said, movement trays have built-in spacers between where the models sit. This lets your models have a bigger footprint on the table and with current 8th Edition rules, it hardly has any effect on the game.
However, now that units will be -1 to hit as long as something is trying to shoot through dense cover and your bases are obscured, movement trays may be getting the boot in competitive play. Note that you don’t have to be near the terrain feature to get the -1 to hit bonus. It just has to be within your opponent’s firing arc and they can’t be able to spot a base clearly sticking out.
Take a closer look at the movement tray. You can get a better idea of the unnecessary spacing between models if they sit on the tray. Plus, it’s not huge, but the tray also adds a couple of millimeters to the diameter of the model’s base. We know how competitive games go and there would 100% be some rules discrepancies between players having unimpeded LOS to a unit because of their movement tray.
Pulling out movement trays may not be a huge deal to players just using Marines or Custodes. However, Ork blob lists with Boyz loaded onto a 30-man tray, things could get very annoying very quickly. You might save time on your movement but the fact that you could potentially have your units -1 to hit without even needing to be near the terrain with the Dense Cover rule is something to consider. You definitely don’t want to lose out on that kind of protection. Especially in a horde list where your best save is sometimes a 5+.
New Coherency Rules Up In the Air
Screens, as we know it, are changing in 9th Edition. The new rules creates a restrictive “bubble” around your units. If you’re running small squads the unit can’t be fanned out as a whole as easy anymore In addition, you have to regain coherency the next time you make a move. Otherwise, the movement cannot be made.
Now we’re seeing that coherency opens up a whole new way of thinking for stringing out your units, and while lining them up may be bad now, you could stagger them in two lines so each model is within 2″ of three others. It also seems to not invalidate cloud-style movement trays for larger armies either.
So long story short, between these two rules point, the jury is still out on Movement Trays, but they are not dead… yet.
Essential Hobby Products & Tools List
With all of this in the open, do you think we will see fewer movement trays in the days ahead? Will movement trays need to be redesigned? Do you like how interactions between models are changing to base-to-base?
Let us know in the comments of our Facebook Hobby Group and make sure you enter the latest monthly giveaway for FREE today!
About the Author: Wesley Floyd
Wesley Floyd
Job Title: Staff Writer
Joined: 2018
Socials: @RealmbrushPainting
About Wesley Floyd: Wes has been in the Warhammer hobby since 2015 and joined the Spikey Bits writing team in 2018. He is known for his satirist takes on trending topics and imaginative yet amazingly affordable hobby solutions to painting Warhammer miniatures.
Imperial fanboy, tabletop fanatic, and the self-proclaimed King of Sprues. He knows for a fact that Mephiston red is the best-tasting paint and is the commission painting equivalent of a Wendy’s 4 for $4. If you like what he writes and want to contact him or have your tabletop minatures painted (to a mostly okayish standard), message him on Instagram.
