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.

Welcome ladies and gentleman, boys and girls, children of all ages.

This is the Codex: Orks and Codex: Tyranids Balance Errata, a part of the larger 40k Balance Errata. The goal of these Balance Errata is to create a more balanced and varied 40k and can be applied to their respective codex.

Also, to anyone looking at these Balance Errata the goal was to use the lightest hand as possible using points as the primary mechanism of change. Using weapon profile changes as well as Unit Composition more sparingly. Altering model stats even more sparingly, and lastly rewriting or adding new rules only when absolutely necessary.

Note that these changes are replacements unless notates as additions or removals.

Codex: Orks


Change Log:


Codex: Tyranids



Change Log:


Ok, here is the first drafts of both the Ork and Tyranid Codices. Let me have it? What did I get right? What did I get wrong? Did I address internal balance? Did I address external balance with my other Balance Erratas? Anything standing out as way too powerful? Still now powerful enough? Did I create some new super unit without thinking? Let me have it! All feedback is greatly appreciated, the more community feedback and quality discussion we have the better balanced these individual errata and the project as a whole is.

Thank you again for any help and feedback!

Price reductionto 200 won't help naughts. Don't see a reason to make buggies more expensive. +1 HP to walkers won't cut it. Their problem in regular lists is not only mediocre walker durability but that they eat up Heavy Support and don't mesh well with any ork playstile except for walker wall. Orks are all about target saturation which requires timing. Means the majority of your stuff must maintain the same speed. And walkers are ~ 1 turn slower to reach the enemy than footsloggas and a lot slower than speed freaks. And unlike sm walkers that can at least be droppoded or perform long range fire support, our walkers can't do it good enough. It's a more complex problem all in all.

It'd not be as bad if they could at least be somewhat spammable. I've suggested making kanz cheaper - 35 pt and dreads to be allowed to be taken in squadrons of 1-3. So far, playtests have shown that it's a passable solution.
I've also added Ramshakkle 6+ to all ground vehicles and tweaked Armor Plates to give +1 to ramshakkle and cost 5 pt for kanzand, buggies and trukks, 10 for dreads, 15 for battlewagons and 20 for naughts that i've also made superheavies but with some restrictions like regular 6" movement, ability to catastrophic explode only with the weakest result and -1 on stomps so that they can't insta-remove stuff - all in all, very-heavies but not super.

25 pt for a kannon or zzap is too much if you don't change their rules.

Your proposed mob rule is too good. It combines both ld and no chance of truly failing it.

I gotta say this looks good. I can also say that I can count my games of 7th on one hand, and my games in the last year on that same hand, so take that with a grain of salt.

One thing I do know that hasn't been addressed is Zagstruk the Stormboy hero. He's absolutely useless and could do with an improvement. To reiterate what was covered in Kooaei's fandex thread he's rather crap. The HoW is a forgettable effect, he gives no leadership effect unless he's the warlord, he straight up just does nothing at all, doesn't reflect his fluff at all, and isn't worth half his current points cost.

I don't think he could be fixed with a points adjustment, because he does nothing and is worse than a klaw Nob for the unit. But if he got a klaw and then some kind of leadership effect (even LD9 or some weak crap), and then was 10pts over a standard Klaw Nob, we'd be on the money.

I do also second Kooaei's comment that walkers really suffer from their position in the force org chart, that they really cannot compare to guns and wagons and such in Heavy Support and that this is a bigger problem than their points cost or durability. You could try cutting and pasting the dread mob rules for dreads and kans - cheaper, squads, troops / fast attack. That would be a start, though admittedly they probably cannot be fixed in the edition we currently find ourselves in, as they're an unholy combination of melee, slow, and vehicle that goes well beyond a mere points change to fix up.

Will get in a game or two with this errata, and compare to the normal dex. My opponent should be cool with using the normal and then Space Marines dex, though as he's a space wolves player it won't be a perfect test in that regard. Will be at least two weeks before I can do any playtesting at all - though that gives us some time to get a finished beta to test out

koooaei wrote:Price reductionto 200 won't help naughts. Don't see a reason to make buggies more expensive. +1 HP to walkers won't cut it. Their problem in regular lists is not only mediocre walker durability but that they eat up Heavy Support and don't mesh well with any ork playstile except for walker wall. Orks are all about target saturation which requires timing. Means the majority of your stuff must maintain the same speed. And walkers are ~ 1 turn slower to reach the enemy than footsloggas and a lot slower than speed freaks. And unlike sm walkers that can at least be droppoded or perform long range fire support, our walkers can't do it good enough. It's a more complex problem all in all.

It'd not be as bad if they could at least be somewhat spammable. I've suggested making kanz cheaper - 35 pt and dreads to be allowed to be taken in squadrons of 1-3. So far, playtests have shown that it's a passable solution.
I've also added Ramshakkle 6+ to all ground vehicles and tweaked Armor Plates to give +1 to ramshakkle and cost 5 pt for kanzand, buggies and trukks, 10 for dreads, 15 for battlewagons and 20 for naughts that i've also made superheavies but with some restrictions like regular 6" movement, ability to catastrophic explode only with the weakest result and -1 on stomps so that they can't insta-remove stuff - all in all, very-heavies but not super.

25 pt for a kannon or zzap is too much if you don't change their rules.

Your proposed mob rule is too good. It combines both ld and no chance of truly failing it.

I am hearing you on the Walkers. I did feel like I didn't go far enough with them at first, even with increased durability they aren't good. I considered giving all Ork vehicles Ramshackle(5+). But I'm really trying to not go overboard on rule changes. I was planning on allowing Deff Dreads to be a Squadron, but forgot to add it!

Naught as SHV or a weird mashup doesn't sit well. I'd rather avoid that solution.

War buggies, it was having a scoring 25pt unit with that much utility, I could easily require 2 to make a unit at old cost, acceptable? Though, even at 30pts they excel at harassment and have uses. Il probably just up them to 2+ for a unit.

I was thinking of adding a Flakk shell to the a Cannon, though 25pts for a BS3 S8 AP3 36" shot from a durable platform isn't terrible. The Zzap gun isn't great due to its random nature... And single shot. What if that additional damage result dealt a second HP. So 2HPs per Glance or Pen? Zzap is only 2pts more than it was before. Are these options really that terrible? 125pts for five BS3 Missiles from T7 doesn't seem horrible weak. Not as good as 90pt for sure... But is it worth it if it has a Flakk shell option?

Dakkamite wrote:I gotta say this looks good. I can also say that I can count my games of 7th on one hand, and my games in the last year on that same hand, so take that with a grain of salt.

One thing I do know that hasn't been addressed is Zagstruk the Stormboy hero. He's absolutely useless and could do with an improvement. To reiterate what was covered in Kooaei's fandex thread he's rather crap. The HoW is a forgettable effect, he gives no leadership effect unless he's the warlord, he straight up just does nothing at all, doesn't reflect his fluff at all, and isn't worth half his current points cost.

I don't think he could be fixed with a points adjustment, because he does nothing and is worse than a klaw Nob for the unit. But if he got a klaw and then some kind of leadership effect (even LD9 or some weak crap), and then was 10pts over a standard Klaw Nob, we'd be on the money.

I do also second Kooaei's comment that walkers really suffer from their position in the force org chart, that they really cannot compare to guns and wagons and such in Heavy Support and that this is a bigger problem than their points cost or durability. You could try cutting and pasting the dread mob rules for dreads and kans - cheaper, squads, troops / fast attack. That would be a start, though admittedly they probably cannot be fixed in the edition we currently find ourselves in, as they're an unholy combination of melee, slow, and vehicle that goes well beyond a mere points change to fix up.

Will get in a game or two with this errata, and compare to the normal dex. My opponent should be cool with using the normal and then Space Marines dex, though as he's a space wolves player it won't be a perfect test in that regard. Will be at least two weeks before I can do any playtesting at all - though that gives us some time to get a finished beta to test out

Zagstruk, didn't take too much of a look at the Special a Characters honestly, Ld9 and a Points drop seems reasonable though.

And when you're ready for a test game,not wont be difficult to make the Space Wolf version, won't take any time at all.

Thanks for all the feedback!

I like your Ork changes, especially the mob rule one.

 Matthew wrote:
I like your Ork changes, especially the mob rule one.

Thanks, I took inspiration from both the current Mob Rules and the 4E codex Mob Rule. I felt that a large Mob of Boyz should feel like almost an unstoppable force when it is a true Mob, ork confidence ie Leadership directly proportional to the number of boyz seems fitting. I feel it is a better fit than the old Fearless Orks. And once the Boyz get down to 10 or less models Morale becomes a big problem and they can be broke and scattered quite easily.


@koooaei

I realize I forgot to address your concerns about Mob Rule. It is more powerful than the Old Mod Rule, espeically for big mobs of boyz, but for small mobs under 10 models it is actually a liability as a unit with a character under 10 models still passes morale 1/3 of the time, and 1/2 of the time in Close Combat. Now, Orks get no way to pass a failed morale under 10 models and have much less protection in CC from being broken or swept. And now the Bosspole has a good use for Mobs that fall under 10 Models. The rule is only stronger when there are Lots of Boyz in a unit, but does come with a corresponding weakness.

It is a boost where Orks could use it and thematically should have it while offering a corresponding weakness, and it cleans up the mess of rolling that was the Old Mob Rule.

5-20-15 Added

Boss Zagstruck Da Boss: 45pts

5-20-15 Changed

Deff Dread
4HP
May include up to two additional Deff Dreads…80 pts/model
Any modal may replace any of its Big Shootas with one of the following... Power Klaw: Free

Killa Kans
3HP
May include a second unit of 1-6 Killa Kans, both units count as only one Heavy Support Slot.... 50pts/model

Gorkanaut: 200pts
6HP
Special Rules: Add Assault Vehicle

Morkanaut: 200pts
6HP
Special Rules; Add Assault Vehicle
May take a Kustom Force Field: 40pts

5-20-15 Changed

Unit Composition: 2 Mek Gunz, 4 Gretchin
Mek Gunz: 40pts, 20pts/model
Any Mek Gun can replace its Kannon with one of the following... Zzap Gun: Free; Bubblechukka: Free; Smasha-Gun: Free; Lobba: 5pts; Kustom Mega-Kannon: 10pts; Traktor Kannon: 10pts;

there is one glaring thing missing from your genestealers; and that is the lack of flesh hooks. A BS0 unit should not be without assault grenades of some sort.

The thing I would like to see would be a big mek in mega armour being able to take a Shokk Attack Gun. Also the burna boyz give the poor ladz access to a Nob. They are the unit besides grots that don't have access to a Nob.

 morfangdakka wrote:
The thing I would like to see would be a big mek in mega armour being able to take a Shokk Attack Gun. Also the burna boyz give the poor ladz access to a Nob. They are the unit besides grots that don't have access to a Nob.

Done and done. Very reasonable changes that should have been stock.

I'll get those added later.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

StarHunter25 wrote:
there is one glaring thing missing from your genestealers; and that is the lack of flesh hooks. A BS0 unit should not be without assault grenades of some sort.

Great point, and its probably the best biomorph. 1pt/model, and its not like they can actually fire them as a weapon, they just get Assault Grenades out of it.

I wont comment on the orks as I dont really know how they work but Nids I do know

I like lots of the options you proposed I like that they arent overpowered proposal and that you also considered nerfing a few things.

for the Shadow in the warp I dont know if it works well since if they cast on a psyker they already deny on a 5+ or even a 4+ if higher lvl, My proposal on this is that it makes casting spell if within SitW you get a -1 on harnessing warp charges(normally requiring a 5+ instead of a 4+)

for the Tyranofex the rupture cannon does not get solved by getting a cheaper price tag, lets put it this way, you need 3 Tyranofex upgraded with the rupture cannon all firing into a unit of space marine (or even sister of battle) to average making one casualty per turn. This is completely unacceptable comming from the codex's biggest gun.
my proposal on this is it should get ap3 (instead of ap4) and 3 shots (instead of 2) with a special chain reaction rule where if you hit with at least 2 shots those shot become ap1, potentially with a light point increase but frankly I think that 30pts and losing the acid spray is enough of a cost for this kind of gun.

Venomthropes are a bit weak in my mind compared to Malanthope, I Iitterally never consider them, Venomthropes always seem to just die so easilly.
I personally felt that the Venomthope should get a point decrease instead of increase (down to 40pts), with malanthropes increasing to 95pts (+10pts) and going down to 4+ArSv (instead of 3+)

Trygons holes should only allow one unit to come out of it per turn. more would seem a bit too much, although allowing it to work on same turn he came out is a must.

I dont know if Exocrines or Carnifexes require a point decrease, they seem pretty well pointed to me.
I wouldnt mind carnifexes going back to Str10 and maybe Ws4 though for a light cost.

maybe a 1pts decrease for the Genestealers.

I got a lot more but this is food for though

 fartherthanfar wrote:
I wont comment on the orks as I dont really know how they work but Nids I do know

I like lots of the options you proposed I like that they arent overpowered proposal and that you also considered nerfing a few things.

for the Shadow in the warp I dont know if it works well since if they cast on a psyker they already deny on a 5+ or even a 4+ if higher lvl, My proposal on this is that it makes casting spell if within SitW you get a -1 on harnessing warp charges(normally requiring a 5+ instead of a 4+)

for the Tyranofex the rupture cannon does not get solved by getting a cheaper price tag, lets put it this way, you need 3 Tyranofex upgraded with the rupture cannon all firing into a unit of space marine (or even sister of battle) to average making one casualty per turn. This is completely unacceptable comming from the codex's biggest gun.
my proposal on this is it should get ap3 (instead of ap4) and 3 shots (instead of 2) with a special chain reaction rule where if you hit with at least 2 shots those shot become ap1, potentially with a light point increase but frankly I think that 30pts and losing the acid spray is enough of a cost for this kind of gun.

Venomthropes are a bit weak in my mind compared to Malanthope, I Iitterally never consider them, Venomthropes always seem to just die so easilly.
I personally felt that the Venomthope should get a point decrease instead of increase (down to 40pts), with malanthropes increasing to 95pts (+10pts) and going down to 4+ArSv (instead of 3+)

Trygons holes should only allow one unit to come out of it per turn. more would seem a bit too much, although allowing it to work on same turn he came out is a must.

I dont know if Exocrines or Carnifexes require a point decrease, they seem pretty well pointed to me.
I wouldnt mind carnifexes going back to Str10 and maybe Ws4 though for a light cost.

maybe a 1pts decrease for the Genestealers.

I got a lot more but this is food for though

Thank you for the feedback. I'm relying on people to comment on the armies they know well, haha. Thank you, the goal was better internal and external balance. Gotta nerf the too good thing and buff the not so good things.

Shadow in the Warp was meant to give the Tyranid player the ability to Deny Blessing and Conjuring on a 5+. Sure, they may be able to Deny a Malediction or Witchfire better than that, but having a reliable way to stop blessing is huge. I also meant for the -3 LD to remain in place. It is fitting to lower a Psyker's morale. I'll fix that.

I like your idea, but reducing Harnessing to a 5+ is almost too good while in range of Shadows, that change alone would be a massive buff for the army. I think a more moderate and functional buff is in order.

I wasn't really trying to Fix the Rupture Cannon, but do see your problem with it. It probably should have AP3 or be Heavy 3. Firing at a 3+ infantry enemy is the wrong target to show its efficiency, its Long ranged S10, something that is a premium in the game. I don't think it should have both, and I would like to avoid adding any extra special rules if possible. I'll probably give it AP3 but it already has gotten a 20% decrease in cost to field it with Rupture Cannon.

Sure, Venomthropes look bad compared to the Malanthrope, but that is because the Malantrope is too good for its points. Its hardier than a Prime with 4 wounds, and a host of special abilities equal to the Venomthropes. After the balance errata you'll see how much starting every game with either a 3+ or 2+(Ruines or Nightfight) really is. I mean Orks pay 40pts(formerly 50pts) just for a 6" 5++ bubble, a 6" Shrouding Bubble is better. Basically the Malanthrope is an undercosted Forgeworld unit that is currently outside the scope of this errata, of course the Venomthrope looked pricey compared to it.

Trygons, There is a natural limit to how many units someone will bring through, placement. I don't think it needs to be spelled out.

Exocrines and Carnifexes are getting a drop on base cost due to being T6 with a 3+, it was overvalued and unless the unit had some good special rules or abilities ie Flyrant, Tervigon, Mawloc, it is really lackluster. Carnifexes needed help, the Dakka Fex was the best Fex out ther, but with the increase to Devourers it only drops in cost by 10pts, while Melee builds drop by at least 20pts.

Genestealers should be fine and are solid with their cheaper upgrades, especially once they gain Fleshhooks so can charge through terrain at Initiative for likely 1pt/model or possible free...

Keep the feedback and suggestions coming!

Should separate the tyranid wings into gliding wings and swooping wings for two different costs. Gliding just make it a jump MC, swooping wings make it a FMC, (and can of course be used to glide as well.)

niv-mizzet wrote:
...gliding wings...

niv-mizzet wrote:Should separate the tyranid wings into gliding wings and swooping wings for two different costs. Gliding just make it a jump MC, swooping wings make it a FMC, (and can of course be used to glide as well.)

Not a bad suggestion, could be used across the board. +40pts for Gliding, +80 for Swooping.

koooaei wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:
...gliding wings...

Spoiler:

Definitely got a laugh out of me!

Sure, Venomthropes look bad compared to the Malanthrope, but that is because the Malantrope is too good for its points. Its hardier than a Prime with 4 wounds, and a host of special abilities equal to the Venomthropes. After the balance errata you'll see how much starting every game with either a 3+ or 2+(Ruines or Nightfight) really is. I mean Orks pay 40pts(formerly 50pts) just for a 6" 5++ bubble, a 6" Shrouding Bubble is better. Basically the Malanthrope is an undercosted Forgeworld unit that is currently outside the scope of this errata, of course the Venomthrope looked pricey compared to it.

even if not considering the Malanthrope in this errata (sad), the Venomthropes issue is that hes just standing arround waiting to be shot with his thumb up its bum (or... tentacles... insert graphic anime images here). The orks with the 5++ can at least stay in a unit which will be abblative wounds for LOS, yes shrounding is much stronger than a 5++ but not if it just dies before everything else and then nothing gets the shrouding. there is enough ignore cover weapons out there that have no issue taking out venomthropes which are just so frail if they have no cover. even if you take a unit of 3, a single volley by the nerfed Waveserpent is likely to wipe it out. and then the rest of your army is completely unprotected.
In all the games I've seen people use Venomthropes, they always die very fast (as long as the opponent has good targeting priorities) without causing the opponent any real issues. I dont see why it would need a point increase.

I agree that the malanthrope is too good, but I would want to balance it out between the 2 so I could actually have a choice to make between one and the other, and the Malanthrope is so popular for Nids you might want to consider it in the errata cause it does need a nerf and if you dont then people could consider playing it with your rule thus nullifying the effect of your balancing.

The Prime is a bad example as he has been massively nerfed from the previous codex (45pts increase with no upgrades at all) if anything in the codex needs a point decrease its the Prime. I cant imagine him why hes over 100pts, why would anyone even consider him over a flyrant? My recommendation for him is he goes down to 100pts (25pts decrease) and starts with Regeneration. it might seem like a big upgrade but this guy needs it if he wants to compete in the HQ slot for internal balance and I dont think that compared to other codex HQ Beatstick he would be OP. also he should be able to get Wings for 20pts (jump pack).

wasn't really trying to Fix the Rupture Cannon, but do see your problem with it. It probably should have AP3 or be Heavy 3. Firing at a 3+ infantry enemy is the wrong target to show its efficiency, its Long ranged S10, something that is a premium in the game. I don't think it should have both, and I would like to avoid adding any extra special rules if possible. I'll probably give it AP3 but it already has gotten a 20% decrease in cost to field it with Rupture Cannon.

I agree that the a 3+ infantry isnt the Rupture Cannon's prime target but what if your fighting space marine, nids or Eldar where that all he has on the board (you get a 200+pts which cant shoot or fight in close combat), even if you are fighting againsts what the rupture cannon is suppose to be good against (high AV vehicule) how efficient is it really? lets see, 2 shots at Bs3 means 1 hit, 1 hit on let say AV14 mean a 0.5 HP if no cover, Invul or Jinking, and due to new damage chart even if it is a pen, it cant possibly kill it, you need an average of 8 rupture cannon Tyranofexs to kill a single Landraider in the open (1600pts of dedicated anti-heavy tank to kill a single land raider?).
So what is the gun for? not heavy vehicules, not MC since they also have 3+ArSv or better, not heavy infantry, certainly not light infantry, maybe open topped skimmer? no cause they jink.
It litterally has no target you can be happy about shooting, like I said the issue with the gun isnt the points, its the effectiveness on the board which at the moment is null due to the expensive platform that is carrying it.
My proposal turns the gun into a something that can actually harm stuff, still far from being destroyer though so isnt op, yet fluffy with the chain reaction ability which, with some good luck, could actually kill a Landraider in one volley, as many other guns in the warhammer universe can do.
If you want to avoid inventing rules (your SitW..cough cough) maybe just make the shots destroyer and call it a day.

 Matthew wrote:
I like your Ork changes, especially the mob rule one.

Oddly I think he made the codex worse. Sure he lowered prices on a few things that were expensive but those units had other issues that caused them not to be popular. However he significantly increased the prices on everything that was halfway decent in the ork codex, bikers, warbuggies, Mek guns, deffkoptas, nerfed Mek tools so that multiple Meks are useless.

Only thing he changed of any significant value was mob rule for infantry.

He made dread mob lists pretty powerful though with cheap killa kans and nauts and stompas.
Basically I don't think price increases on bikes, mek guns, deffkoptas, and warbuggies are warranted.

Orks have to marginally competitive lists right now green tide and bike spam. Neither of which is top tier. If he was trying to appropriately cost bikes with the fact he made ork boy squads able to purchase them for fast ob secured troops then the price of bike upgrade should be no more then 15ppm which means a basic boy is 20ppm or 2ppm more then the old warbikers ppm.

fartherthanfar wrote:

Sure, Venomthropes look bad compared to the Malanthrope, but that is because the Malantrope is too good for its points. Its hardier than a Prime with 4 wounds, and a host of special abilities equal to the Venomthropes. After the balance errata you'll see how much starting every game with either a 3+ or 2+(Ruines or Nightfight) really is. I mean Orks pay 40pts(formerly 50pts) just for a 6" 5++ bubble, a 6" Shrouding Bubble is better. Basically the Malanthrope is an undercosted Forgeworld unit that is currently outside the scope of this errata, of course the Venomthrope looked pricey compared to it.

even if not considering the Malanthrope in this errata (sad), the Venomthropes issue is that hes just standing arround waiting to be shot with his thumb up its bum (or... tentacles... insert graphic anime images here). The orks with the 5++ can at least stay in a unit which will be abblative wounds for LOS, yes shrounding is much stronger than a 5++ but not if it just dies before everything else and then nothing gets the shrouding. there is enough ignore cover weapons out there that have no issue taking out venomthropes which are just so frail if they have no cover. even if you take a unit of 3, a single volley by the nerfed Waveserpent is likely to wipe it out. and then the rest of your army is completely unprotected.
In all the games I've seen people use Venomthropes, they always die very fast (as long as the opponent has good targeting priorities) without causing the opponent any real issues. I dont see why it would need a point increase.

I agree that the malanthrope is too good, but I would want to balance it out between the 2 so I could actually have a choice to make between one and the other, and the Malanthrope is so popular for Nids you might want to consider it in the errata cause it does need a nerf and if you dont then people could consider playing it with your rule thus nullifying the effect of your balancing.

The Prime is a bad example as he has been massively nerfed from the previous codex (45pts increase with no upgrades at all) if anything in the codex needs a point decrease its the Prime. I cant imagine him why hes over 100pts, why would anyone even consider him over a flyrant? My recommendation for him is he goes down to 100pts (25pts decrease) and starts with Regeneration. it might seem like a big upgrade but this guy needs it if he wants to compete in the HQ slot for internal balance and I dont think that compared to other codex HQ Beatstick he would be OP. also he should be able to get Wings for 20pts (jump pack).

wasn't really trying to Fix the Rupture Cannon, but do see your problem with it. It probably should have AP3 or be Heavy 3. Firing at a 3+ infantry enemy is the wrong target to show its efficiency, its Long ranged S10, something that is a premium in the game. I don't think it should have both, and I would like to avoid adding any extra special rules if possible. I'll probably give it AP3 but it already has gotten a 20% decrease in cost to field it with Rupture Cannon.

I agree that the a 3+ infantry isnt the Rupture Cannon's prime target but what if your fighting space marine, nids or Eldar where that all he has on the board (you get a 200+pts which cant shoot or fight in close combat), even if you are fighting againsts what the rupture cannon is suppose to be good against (high AV vehicule) how efficient is it really? lets see, 2 shots at Bs3 means 1 hit, 1 hit on let say AV14 mean a 0.5 HP if no cover, Invul or Jinking, and due to new damage chart even if it is a pen, it cant possibly kill it, you need an average of 8 rupture cannon Tyranofexs to kill a single Landraider in the open (1600pts of dedicated anti-heavy tank to kill a single land raider?).
So what is the gun for? not heavy vehicules, not MC since they also have 3+ArSv or better, not heavy infantry, certainly not light infantry, maybe open topped skimmer? no cause they jink.
It litterally has no target you can be happy about shooting, like I said the issue with the gun isnt the points, its the effectiveness on the board which at the moment is null due to the expensive platform that is carrying it.
My proposal turns the gun into a something that can actually harm stuff, still far from being destroyer though so isnt op, yet fluffy with the chain reaction ability which, with some good luck, could actually kill a Landraider in one volley, as many other guns in the warhammer universe can do.
If you want to avoid inventing rules (your SitW..cough cough) maybe just make the shots destroyer and call it a day.

I wouldn't mind errataing the Malanthrope, but right now I'm trying to nail down internal and external balance within codices. It is definitely a popular unit that deserves to be addressed in time. And as you'll see I did recost the Prime, he's now
85pts, so I'd be looking at 115pts for a Malanthrope. Very durable chassis and always a 3+ or 2+ Cover save and a Shrouding Bubble. Basically would pay 65pts for +2 wounds and +1T and a 3+ AS which is a huge increase in Durability. Compared to the Prime is has lower CC stats for +1 Wound and a Shrouding Bubble for 30pts, but no IC. That seems to preliminary be right on.

So, we're looking at 50 vs 45pts for a 6" Shouding Bubble. Yes the Venomthrope dies quickly, but of course it is going to be a high priority target, the durability it brings a 14" Diameter Circle is huge, if an opponent ignores it their ability to hurt anything in the defensive bubble is pretty much nill. Even if it only protects for a single turn, or forces a large amount of the opponent's army to focus on it for a turn it is bringing a significant level of value to the list. And not all opponents have easy access to Ignore's Cover. Sure a Wave Serpent, a fairly pricey unit, can blow it's one use ability to neuter kill the Venomthrope, but that is a significant investment on their part. It takes on average just over 7 shots(average number) from a Serpent Shield to take out the Venomthrope, that means its fairly even odds that it will kill it or it won't, and that Eldar Player had to also maneuver their Transport into 24" of a particular target with 50/50 odds of killing it. For a 50 pt model, that is already haveing a solid effect on the game, and we are talking about one of the best counters for the Venomthrope. What is the Average SM player doing against it? Dark Eldar Player? etc. Ridiculous Ignore's Cover is less prevalent than it used to be, sure some armies have a counter, and even if they do it requires an investment in resources to accomplish. At 40pts as you suggest it is a must have, at 50 you have decisions to make. 45pts, the Shrouded abiltity was pretty much a must have. Must haves do not reflect good internal or external balance.

I've already said that the Rupture Cannon needs to be fixed, I'm probably going to make it Heavy 3 AP3 and bump it back to a +3pt upgrade. That gives it a lot more use and utility, and makes a better against AV with Rate of Fire, and AP3 gives it some use against say a Wraithknight and would be the only ranged Tyranid Weapon that could put a wound a turn on one.

Yes, I did write a new rule for Shadow in the Warp, because the old rule written for 6th Edition and factored into the cost of all the models no longer applies. So, either leave a non functioning army wide rule and decrease the point of everything with it, or rewrite the rule to have the same relative effect and usefulness. That is different than just adding Special Rules to a model. Sure, I did for the Pyrovore, I gave it a second firemode that uses the rules already in the game as the easiest fix. I never said I wouldn't rewrite certain rules, but I don't like doing it within the scope of this Errata and would prefer not to in most cases. I think Heavy 3 AP3 for the Rupture Cannon will solve the problem and give it some utility.

gungo wrote:

 Matthew wrote:
I like your Ork changes, especially the mob rule one.

Oddly I think he made the codex worse. Sure he lowered prices on a few things that were expensive but those units had other issues that caused them not to be popular. However he significantly increased the prices on everything that was halfway decent in the ork codex, bikers, warbuggies, Mek guns, deffkoptas, nerfed Mek tools so that multiple Meks are useless.

Only thing he changed of any significant value was mob rule for infantry.

He made dread mob lists pretty powerful though with cheap killa kans and nauts and stompas.
Basically I don't think price increases on bikes, mek guns, deffkoptas, and warbuggies are warranted.

Orks have to marginally competitive lists right now green tide and bike spam. Neither of which is top tier. If he was trying to appropriately cost bikes with the fact he made ork boy squads able to purchase them for fast ob secured troops then the price of bike upgrade should be no more then 15ppm which means a basic boy is 20ppm or 2ppm more then the old warbikers ppm.

Thanks for the feedback, I'm interested in discussing this. Some of rarely used units were either too expensive or had issues, ideally they should be recosted to correct the majority of the imbalance. Which units do you feel are still absolutely subpar choices in relation to the rest of the Errated Codex?

We may be looking at things from a desired balance perspective. Some things did get a small points increase, namely bikes(But massive points drop on Nobs and Nob Bikers), Mek Guns are slightly more expensive with a two gun minimum for the unit, but there are also large points decreases on the seldom seen Guns. This was meant to greatly increase internal balance.

I did increase the cost on Deffkoptas and Warbuggies, but have had second thoughts about it. My next set of changes is dropping them back to their original costs, but increasing the minimum unit size to two. I do have a problem with ultra cheap units, most codices aren't putting any single model unit on the table for under 40pts. The unit/cost is just fine, its just the minimum cost for a unit is too low. This is also congruent with my change to Mek Guns.



Where did I significantly increase cost? Also, internal balance is key, every codex under these Errata will or should find their best units or combos to either worse, illegal, or more expensive. You named the best things in the Ork Codex, and those are few selection are were just too good compared to the others. By adding in some small nerfs to those best units, and considerable buffs to the rest of the codex we end up with a much more internally balanced codex which is a very good thing. The only potential problem is external balance, but given Ork's starting point most everything else I've done should be balanced to fall around the same relative point.

Sure, Ork Warbikers got 11% more expensive.... but White Scar Bikers lost +1 Jink, Eldar EJBs are now 4+ and Scatters are S5, Nurgle Bikers cost more, etc. Every "really good or outright broken" choice in that category has taken a hit, while the subpar choices ie Nob Bikers, Non Nurgle CSM Bikers, in category have gotten significant boosts and all have gotten better in comparison to the old standard.

I felt that if I left the Really good choices in the Ork Dex alone, Changed Mob Rules, and made all the bad stuff good enough to compete with the best choices from the PreErrata dex that Orks would end up being better than the Balance Point I am shooting for. Every book is getting their best stuff knocked down, their bad stuff boosted up, what changes is some books need more adjustment on either end of the spectrum. Eldar got hit hard on a lot of units and only a few like Shining Spears and Wraithlords got a real boost, whereas most of the stuff in the Ork Dex got a boost with only a few units geting minor debuffs. That is the kind of balance I'm looking for.


A test that I have been using is to look in the Army Lists section, every tournament list will usually either no longer be legal, will no longer work, be toned down, or exceed the points limit while the casual fun lists have either gotten better or usually cheaper. I've scrolled through the army list section and so far this has been almost universally true.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
5-21-15 Changed To

Deffkoptas: 60pts, 30pts/model
May include up to three additional Deffkoptas…30 pts/model

5-21-15 Changed To

Warbuggies: 50pts, 25pts/model
May include up to three additional Warbuggies…25 pts/model

5-21-15 Added

Rupture Cannon: Change To
Range: 48" Str: 10 AP:3 Heavy 3

5-21-15 Changed To

Tyrannofex: 165pts
May replace Acid Spray with one of the following... Fleshborer Hive: Free; Rupture Cannon: 30pts

5-21-15 Added

Tyrannocyte
Add "The Tyrannocyte cannot be used to Transport Gargantuan Monstrous Creatures."

When I look at the complaints re; the rupture cannon I can't say I feel much sympathy. Tyranids are like Orks, we have guns that can deal with medium vehicles, but to kill that land raider you need to go stomp on it

 Dakkamite wrote:
When I look at the complaints re; the rupture cannon I can't say I feel much sympathy. Tyranids are like Orks, we have guns that can deal with medium vehicles, but to kill that land raider you need to go stomp on it

The Rupture Cannon was a valid complaint, paying a premium to upgrade an already good AP4 weapon to a S10 long ranged AP4 gun on a BS 3 model is painful. Orks at least have volume of shots... well not against LRs, but against everything else! And Orks have more Long Range lowish AP, or at least random enough AP to do it, Nids really don't have any ranged AP3. At least now Nids have a ranged weapon that should put a wound on a Wraithknight per turn, well 5/6ths, but close enough! The Exocrine at 24" range was only doing 2/3 due to FNP.

So, we're looking at 50 vs 45pts for a 6" Shouding Bubble. Yes the Venomthrope dies quickly, but of course it is going to be a high priority target, the durability it brings a 14" Diameter Circle is huge, if an opponent ignores it their ability to hurt anything in the defensive bubble is pretty much nill. Even if it only protects for a single turn, or forces a large amount of the opponent's army to focus on it for a turn it is bringing a significant level of value to the list. And not all opponents have easy access to Ignore's Cover. Sure a Wave Serpent, a fairly pricey unit, can blow it's one use ability to neuter kill the Venomthrope, but that is a significant investment on their part. It takes on average just over 7 shots(average number) from a Serpent Shield to take out the Venomthrope, that means its fairly even odds that it will kill it or it won't, and that Eldar Player had to also maneuver their Transport into 24" of a particular target with 50/50 odds of killing it. For a 50 pt model, that is already haveing a solid effect on the game, and we are talking about one of the best counters for the Venomthrope. What is the Average SM player doing against it? Dark Eldar Player? etc. Ridiculous Ignore's Cover is less prevalent than it used to be, sure some armies have a counter, and even if they do it requires an investment in resources to accomplish. At 40pts as you suggest it is a must have, at 50 you have decisions to make. 45pts, the Shrouded abiltity was pretty much a must have. Must haves do not reflect good internal or external balance.

Im not sure your math is correct, wouldn't 5 serpent shield shot still average a kill? even if the wave serpent doesnt have Bs5 (aspect host/ Dire avenger formation),
5 shots average 3.333 hits on Bs4, 3.33 hits average 2.77wounds, then a 5+ ArSv mean a Venomthrope should die from this, and this isnt considering the extra TL gun and potential shuriken cannon the Wave serpent shoots. it certainly is a much better then 50% chance for a waveserpent to kill a venomthrope.

space marine players have thunderfire cannon that ignore cover, or flamers, tau have markerlights and SMS etc.
or you can just rate of fire it, most of the time it wont have a ruin to hide behind so they are looking at a 3+ cover which makes them as tough to kill as 2 space marines (which isnt that hard to kill). or a sinlge Str8+ shot to go through which is surprising how often I see that happen.
a 2+ is difficult to keep since the nids army isnt meant to stay behind cover and shoot, even if there are Ruins, the low range on most of their weapons means that you need to move forward, also to take advantage of their CC skills.
When moving forward you can still get a 3+ cover from itervening models but the opponent can also just shoot the guys in front who will only have a 5+ cover and then reache the shrouders afterwards.

You are saying the opponent need to dedicate a lot of firepower to take out the venomthrope but my experience taught me that if want some cover, you need lots of venomthropes to last more then one turn. A single venomthrope tends to not take any more than 1/5 of the opponents firepower (even with no ignore cover weapons) and then the rest shoots your army, basicly it barely harm the opponent unless he isnt a shooty army at all or the opponent is a terrible judge of priority.

I wouldnt really consider a venomthrope at 50pts, even 45pts is a big maybe, (at least not for a TAC list... even if the Malanthrope wasnt an option). maybe if I took a Bastion but even then...not really. its just so frail.

as a question, how many games have you seen a venomthrope play in where the players are experienced?

 fartherthanfar wrote:

So, we're looking at 50 vs 45pts for a 6" Shouding Bubble. Yes the Venomthrope dies quickly, but of course it is going to be a high priority target, the durability it brings a 14" Diameter Circle is huge, if an opponent ignores it their ability to hurt anything in the defensive bubble is pretty much nill. Even if it only protects for a single turn, or forces a large amount of the opponent's army to focus on it for a turn it is bringing a significant level of value to the list. And not all opponents have easy access to Ignore's Cover. Sure a Wave Serpent, a fairly pricey unit, can blow it's one use ability to neuter kill the Venomthrope, but that is a significant investment on their part. It takes on average just over 7 shots(average number) from a Serpent Shield to take out the Venomthrope, that means its fairly even odds that it will kill it or it won't, and that Eldar Player had to also maneuver their Transport into 24" of a particular target with 50/50 odds of killing it. For a 50 pt model, that is already haveing a solid effect on the game, and we are talking about one of the best counters for the Venomthrope. What is the Average SM player doing against it? Dark Eldar Player? etc. Ridiculous Ignore's Cover is less prevalent than it used to be, sure some armies have a counter, and even if they do it requires an investment in resources to accomplish. At 40pts as you suggest it is a must have, at 50 you have decisions to make. 45pts, the Shrouded abiltity was pretty much a must have. Must haves do not reflect good internal or external balance.

Im not sure your math is correct, wouldn't 5 serpent shield shot still average a kill? even if the wave serpent doesnt have Bs5 (aspect host/ Dire avenger formation),
5 shots average 3.333 hits on Bs4, 3.33 hits average 2.77wounds, then a 5+ ArSv mean a Venomthrope should die from this, and this isnt considering the extra TL gun the Wave serpent shoots. it certainly is a much better then 50% chance for a waveserpent to kill a venomthrope.

space marine players have thunderfire cannon that ignore cover, or flamers, tau have markerlights etc.
or you can just rate of fire it, most of the time it wont have a ruin to hide behind so they are looking at a 3+ cover which makes them as tough to kill as 2 space marines. or a sinlge Str8+ shot to go through which is surprising how often I see that happen.
a 2+ is difficult to keep since the nids army isnt meant to stay behind cover and shoot, even if there are Ruins, the low range on most of their weapons means that you need to move forward, also to take advantage of their CC skills.
When moving forward you can still get a 3+ cover from itervening models but the opponent can also just shoot the guys in front who will only have a 5+ cover and then reache the shrouders afterwards.

You are saying the opponent need to dedicate a lot of firepower to take out the venomthrope but my experience taught me that if want some cover, you need lots of venomthropes to last more then one turn. A single venomthrope tends to not take any more than 1/5 of the opponents firepower (even with no ignore cover weapons) and then the rest shoots your army, basicly it barely harm the opponent unless he isnt a shooty army at all or the opponent is a terrible judge of priority.

I wouldnt really consider a venomthrope at 50pts, even 45pts is a big maybe, (at least not for a TAC list... even if the Malanthrope wasnt an option). maybe if I took a Bastion but even then...not really. its just so frail.

as a question, how many games have you seen a venomthrope play in where the players are experienced?

My math was right... but the Venomthrope doesn't have a 4+ Save. So yes, a Wave Serpent, which is a perfect counter in every way does nuke it most of the time, but does also have to close into range.

Either way we cant' assume the enemy will always have the perfect covering ignoring weapon. Against a lot of builds the Venomthrope brings a large amount of durability to the army, especially first turn, with 50% chance of Nightfight is a 2+ or 3+ cover.

But, for some reason I had it in my head that the Venomthrope had a 4+ when I adjusted its point, I'll be reverting them back to 45pts as that is a very good pricepoint.


To answer your question, the last time I faced one was at NOVA last year, she won one of the lower brackets. I nuked the Venomthrope 1st turn, but I was Tau, and I had to devote resources to killing it that would have killed a Hive Crone before it got airborne. Having the venomthrope dictated my strategy, whcih in of itself is worth points.

Trading a 110-140 pt vehicle for a 50pt model doesn't sound like a failure on the part of a 50pt model to me...

Bharring wrote:
Trading a 110-140 pt vehicle for a 50pt model doesn't sound like a failure on the part of a 50pt model to me...

I agree, it still has its uses, but given I was thinking it had a 4+ save, no reason to change it, 45pts is appropriate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
5-21-15 Removed

Venomthrope Brood: 50pt, 50pt/model

Shadow in the warp should be "enemy models within synapse range suffer a -2 to leadership and only harness warp charges in a psychic test on a roll of 5-6."

Tying shadow to synapse helps boost things like the norn crown.

The leadership penalty to everything is representative of the nightmares and stuff the entire planet feels when hive ships are in orbit.

The 5-6 harnessing makes casting abilities less reliable which means more charges to cast which increases chances of perils.

This fits the fluff.

Lance845 wrote:
Shadow in the warp should be "enemy models within synapse range suffer a -2 to leadership and only harness warp charges in a psychic test on a roll of 5-6."

Tying shadow to synapse helps boost things like the norn crown.

The leadership penalty to everything is representative of the nightmares and stuff the entire planet feels when hive ships are in orbit.

The 5-6 harnessing makes casting abilities less reliable which means more charges to cast which increases chances of perils.

This fits the fluff.

Hmm, I wa spooking at returning the LD Penalty, but keeping it a Deny on a 5+ if the power was cast within Synapse.

Casting on LD -3 was a 36% decrease in casting. Everything denied on a 6, so 17%.

Harnessing on a 5+ instead of a 4+ is a actually a 50% increase in required dice, or reduction of 33%. With no change in Deny and the stock LD penalty harnessing on a 5+ is roughly the same amount of psychic protection as before.

Now that I've run the math, this does seem like the best solution on par with with the original in effect. Thank you and the other poster who suggested it. When I considered it I thought it was too powerful, hence the 5+ deny. But, now after running the math I find it the best solution.


Automatically Appended Next Post:





5-21-15. Changed To

Shadow in the Warp: Replace "When an enemy Psyker, Psychic Pilot, or Brotherhood of Psykers attempts to harness warp charges while in Synapse range the are only successfully harnessed on a 5+ instead of a 4+. In addition they suffer -3 Leadership while within Synapse Range.."

Automatically Appended Next Post:
5-21-15 Change To

Genestealer Brood: 65pts, 13pts/model
Any model may take Fleshhoods... 1pt/model
Any model may take Scything Talons... 2pts/model
All Genestealers in the unit may take any of the following biomorphs... Adrenal Glands: 1pt/model; Toxin Sacs: 2pt/model

I think the -3 leadership to only psycher is silly. 1) the shadow in the fluff effects everyone. Psychers more so, but everyone is effected. 2) reducing the penalty to apply it to all models helps impact things like fear, pinning, loosing assaults. It provides a lot of synergy that the nid dex is currently sorely lacking. 3) -2 is not a massive penalty. And again only within synapse.

Lance845 wrote:
I think the -3 leadership to only psycher is silly. 1) the shadow in the fluff effects everyone. Psychers more so, but everyone is effected. 2) reducing the penalty to apply it to all models helps impact things like fear, pinning, loosing assaults. It provides a lot of synergy that the nid dex is currently sorely lacking. 3) -2 is not a massive penalty. And again only within synapse.

That is way too massively powerful if it is a blanket Leadership penalty and way more powerful than the original effect. It's unbalancing.

LD10 would be checking at 72 instead of 92% Success
LD9 would be checking 59 instead of 84% Success
LD8 would be checking at 44 instead of 84% Success
LD7 would be checking at 28 instead of 58% Sucess

-2 Leadership is grossly powerful, way too much so for an effect that covers as much table as SitW. Fluff or no. Even -1 to all units is too powerful, where as -3 LD for Psykers and the reduced harnessing almost mathematically fits the old rule perfectly and does what it is supposed to do.

I would consider a blanket -1 Leadership, but never a -2. That option isn't even on the table.

Alternatively. The penalty with current rules is basically worthless.

Consider this, how much in the mid repertoire actually makes people take leadership tests?

The living artillery node causes pining. We have few but basically everyone is fearless or atsknf or so high leadership it wouldn't matter anyway.

Nids pay for fear and basically can't use it. This would help change that.

Or, make sitw negate fearless/atsknf. That way we might be able to.

Lance845 wrote:
Alternatively. The penalty with current rules is basically worthless.

Consider this, how much in the mid repertoire actually makes people take leadership tests?

The living artillery node causes pining. We have few but basically everyone is fearless or atsknf or so high leadership it wouldn't matter anyway.

Nids pay for fear and basically can't use it. This would help change that.

Or, make sitw negate fearless/atsknf. That way we might be able to.

It does effect some Perils results, especially the most critical. it does affect unit leadership for units with the Brotherhood of Psyker etc.

It doesn't have a huge impact on the game, but the original wasn't designed to do any more than that originally. I'm not trying to reinvent the rule, just balance what we have. The less orignal and sweeping content I write the better. What you are suggesting is immensely powerful and drastically alters balance. Your example negates combat. Losing a combat by 1 against guants becomes testing at -3 and being 50/50 or worse of being swept by them. You also failed to mention moral tests, because with a couple of SitW Flyrants its easy to force Morale tests with almost every firing.

Not all armies have Fearless or ATSKNF, far from it actually. How does tau fair? or most of CSM? or Necron? or Orks? or Astra Militarum? or Dark Eldar? or Eldar? etc.

Again, your proposed changes are extremely powerful, and would be unbalancing. As the change is now, it performs as intended and does hamper psychic powers annd serves as a deterrent. This is all good, and works much better than the broken rule from the 6th to 7th transition. No need to create more problems and balance issues than already exist. This isn't my re-imagining of 40, but a re-balancing of what we already have. The lighter hand the better.