My POV here is from someone who only plays in competitive GTs. Not any everyday player or casual player. So, that's something to bear in mind, as casual games are far easier to change and prepare for than competitive GTs which are pretty fixed all year around.
Based on this, GWS are somehow still pursuing the idea that they want everyone to play smaller games as the norm for competitive. They tried to make us stick with 1750 pts from their tournaments, but most TOs ignored them and stuck to 2k points. Now, many of the top SMs lists from before have gone up by 300 pts on average.
My take on this is that the competitive community (those who play to compete in grand tournaments) will no way in seven hells stick with 2k points being the norm anymore, which is what GWS seem to have been working towards. The whole points change has not been to balance the game, so much as it has been to strangely reduce the number of models for normal sized competitive games at grand tournaments. At least on the SM side, which is what all the points leaks are about.
My take is that TOs for GTs will eventually push the norm to about 2500 points and GWS will be like. Seriously? Listen here you little :cusss!
Also, 9th edition seems to be all about how long can you last and hold objectives. There is an extremely low attention towards anything kill for objectives. I completely disagree with this. 40k is about slaughtering your enemies more than holding objectives, because that is the objective! I mean, who's going to contest your objective if they're already dead? Right? That is the 40k logic right?
EDIT: I more than welcomed the addition of more objective based games in 8th edition, because some parts before felt too killy (I'm not khornate. So figures.) But if what I've seen is true, they went from one extreme to the other, which isn't how you should do it.
As for the rest of the community who plays the game. In all honesty, it doesn't phase me. Is it better for them? By what metrics are you measuring that by? Faster games? At what points level? The types of missions? Maybe. Scalability being better? Possibly, I don't know. It's next to impossible for anyone to define what points level or time the everyday player plays at. The only reliable data anyone had is what time and points the most competitive at GTs regularly play. GWS will almost never get reliable data on the average everyday player as the possibilities are too many. So they should and have based the points on the competitive community, because they provide reliable data and are the ones who actually tell the community what's broken and what needs to be fixed. Casual players don't do this and shouldn't be relied upon for such feedback 99% of the time. But I feel pretty strongly that GTs outside GW for the most competitive like NOVA etc will not stay at 2k points. It will increase.
Why will the GTs increase in points? If they wanted smaller games, then they would have done so in 8th edition. The current 2k for GTs feels like a 1500 or game right now for 9th. 1750 at most.
At first, I don't see how the rules will make games slower or faster. Only at what points the games are being played will change that and how familiar you are with the rules. So long games will be back due to the huge changes in unit coherency and interaction with cover, but that won't affect game time too much in the long run IMO.
Does this mean shorter games? No, because it depends on points levels. What it does mean however, is that you'll be able to get stuck into close combat faster and that doesn't mean faster games. Because that's another buckets worth full of dice and rules to activate that you normally wouldn't get to do back in 8th edition. Also, shooty armies tend to be faster to play than close combat armies since CC armies largely ignore 1 phase (shooting) and shooty armies largely ignore 2 phases or 3 (movement, assault and psychic). By ignore, I mean it's not as time consuming or difficult to make decisions on compared to their main phases of their turn.
Edited by antique_nova, 03 July 2020 - 01:58 PM.