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.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Also, not gonna lie, why are you pounding the hell out of BA right before release? Where is the thought in nerfing DC marines, but leaving the DA Storm Raven Ultra Meta chasing list untouched?

The lists that were running 2 Stormravens and all the Ironstorm enhancements went up 60-ish points, depending on what else was in the list. Not exactly untouched, but not a massive nerf hammer either. Besides, us Dark Angels need something that works, because the vast majority of our codex is kind of trash.

I know why the NDKs went up(tournament players were using 4-6 of them), but why was the GK librarian hit with a points hike again? No idea.

In general a normal GW update. For most armies stuff gets unchanged, for better or worse, some armies are going to have to be rebuild (IG). For armies that really needed some serious fixes (deathwatch, DA, chaos and imperial knights) no real changes. the DW stuff is especialy mind blowing as in general if an army stays under the artificial 45% win rate GW does try to at least pretend they are doing something.
1ksons and orks remain untouched, same as tau so they are happy. BT will no longer be the marine+, but will remain the faction which is the better way to play marines. The bad marines (RG/IF/CF/WS) get nothing, besides minor or medium nerfs. WE are interesting, because maybe zerkers and maulerfiends are going to be used. Custodes points are funny in relation to the rules. It is nice that GW after a year+ (including playtesting) finaly noticed that Ad Mecha can't just go from a 2000$ army to a 2500$ army and that rules changes are needed. Sadly for those they will have to wait till summer. Will it fix them? Well if someone at GW is working day and night at rewriting the codex and giving them an Ad Mecha WD codex, then yes. Otherwise Ad Mecha will join the factions in the "waiting for 11th" bucket. Chaos SM changes are interesting, but considering their codex is coming out soon, the more important thing is, if the faction gets an ork/necron codex or a custodes/ad mecha one.

Sister MSU list stay MSU, but potentialy the list may get a bit different. I can imagine that some list will not be able to run the Funeral Conduct. DG are untouched and happy, because they are both okey right now, and with all the orks and nerfed custodes, and weak marines they can have fun playing their armies. Bummer about the terminators though. In general bummer about all terminators in all codex. Technicaly they got cheaper, but the iconic SM/CSM unit is so bad right now. And it is double sad, because of the multiple new models.

All in all a same old, same old. Stuff needed fixing generaly didn't get fixed good stuff stays good/okeyish, and bad stuff stays bad or got worse. Condolances and Congratulations to respective faction players.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

EightFoldPath 813641 11663325 wrote:
The recent Custodes Codex was a test, is your community a 40k playing community or is it a non playing 40k drama community.

Custodes tactics thread - 20 comments since Codex.

Two drama threads - 1,300+ comments.

It was pretty obvious already, but it also really cemented which youtube channels were for players and which weren't. Good for filtering them out.

Playing or not playing there wasn't much to talk about, when every big head was starting the codex reviews with "well we hope the points will be low for custodes". We already know what happens to custodes when they lose Devastating Wound protection. They drop to the very bottom of faction win rates. And in the codex they lost the protection, strike first, almost everything got nerfed and the points are still bad. Even if one would to ignore rules and rule interactions a 170pts contemptor is just bad, a 165pts one that moves 6" and doesn't shot is even worse. Tactic talk and list talk does happen, when there is stuff to talk about. In the orc section the new codex did generate traffic and people talking about new tricks/lists/units etc. With custodes the game play boils down to deploy your army and pray that your opponent lets you play, because if he doesn't you are not going to be doing much, besides removing models. Save maybe if your list is 3 calladius and a Rex. But that such builds point and $ cost, one may as well take the same rex, take 3-4 NDKs and just play GK, even the nerfed iron storm is better.

Tactical Squads dropped by 20 points. Lol, nice!

 RaptorusRex wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Guard are being told to stop playing with artillery and Kasrkin (echos of the CSM nerfs here) and instead spam Russ and Scions. I don't play the faction so hard to say how that will change things. I have had a fantasy of owning a mass Scion army for ages - but the costs and limitations make it not that attractive.

Is it truly GUARD being told that or is it GSC?

Why do you have such an animus towards GSC? The majority of armies I've seen use the GSC units, not Brood Brothers.

don't you know, GSC can steal models from guard with no restrictions whatsoever. we're basically guard + an extra index. rules aren't a real thing, of course, so those doesn't matter— it's just about the models!

250 @ 1000pts for Incursion
500 @ 2000pts for Strike Force
750 @ 3000pts for Onslaught

Stop pretending that it's some kind of real penalty, Etherium. It's up to 25% of your army's point value, depending upon the Battle Size, from a faction commonly complained about as being undercosted points-wise.

25% of the points for models that don't interact with the army rule in an army where that rule is essential to how it plays. get over it

 Kanluwen wrote:
250 @ 1000pts for Incursion
500 @ 2000pts for Strike Force
750 @ 3000pts for Onslaught

Stop pretending that it's some kind of real penalty, Etherium. It's up to 25% of your army's point value, depending upon the Battle Size, from a faction commonly complained about as being undercosted points-wise.

So, let's take this at face value. If IG are undercosted by, say, 10% across the board, that means you can fit in about 11% more than you should be able to.

For GSC, in a 2,000 point game, you'd have 1,500 points of GSC and 500 points of Guard, with the Guard being worth about 555 points.
2,055 value out of 2,000 points, or a 3% boost.

For Guard themselves, in a 2,000 point game, you'd have 2,000 points of Guard, worth about 2,220 points.
2,220 value out of 2,000 points, or an 11% boost.

Of course, if anything undercosted is something like a unique character, then GSC can't access them.
And if they're undercosted because of synergies with the faction or detachment rule, then GSC doesn't get them either.

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
25% of the points for models that don't interact with the army rule in an army where that rule is essential to how it plays. get over it

Leader and unit abilities say "hi".

I'm sure there's absolutely no reason whatsoever that you'd argue against restricting Cadians, Atillans, Death Korps, or Catachan keyworded items.

None at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, let's take this at face value. If IG are undercosted by, say, 10% across the board, that means you can fit in about 11% more than you should be able to.

It means that your supposed "restriction" of "it's only 500 points!!11!" isn't.

Of course, if anything undercosted is something like a unique character, then GSC can't access them.
And if they're undercosted because of synergies with the faction or detachment rule, then GSC doesn't get them either.

Yes, let's keep playing pretend with the fact that Leader Abilities and special rules exist.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
250 @ 1000pts for Incursion
500 @ 2000pts for Strike Force
750 @ 3000pts for Onslaught

Stop pretending that it's some kind of real penalty, Etherium. It's up to 25% of your army's point value, depending upon the Battle Size, from a faction commonly complained about as being undercosted points-wise.

So, let's take this at face value. If IG are undercosted by, say, 10% across the board, that means you can fit in about 11% more than you should be able to.

For GSC, in a 2,000 point game, you'd have 1,500 points of GSC and 500 points of Guard, with the Guard being worth about 555 points.
2,055 value out of 2,000 points, or a 3% boost.

For Guard themselves, in a 2,000 point game, you'd have 2,000 points of Guard, worth about 2,220 points.
2,220 value out of 2,000 points, or an 11% boost.

Of course, if anything undercosted is something like a unique character, then GSC can't access them.
And if they're undercosted because of synergies with the faction or detachment rule, then GSC doesn't get them either.

infantry are a great example of this. stuff like cadians/krieg/kasrkin are good in part due to what they get out of orders. for GSC, they're just neophytes but worse. unless someone wants to do some kind of flavorful army, brood brothers infantry aren't especially useful (and if they do want to do something flavorful, then it's not really covered in the purview of this conversation). realistically speaking, brood brothers is being used for vehicles, and in that case, we can take 2-3 of those at 2000pts (talking about anything else isn't really worthwhile because other point levels aren't nearly as popular). i doubt GW is taking GSC into consideration when costing guard vehicles because it's just not that significant (to say nothing of the number of guard players vs GSC players)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
25% of the points for models that don't interact with the army rule in an army where that rule is essential to how it plays. get over it

Leader and unit abilities say "hi".

I'm sure there's absolutely no reason whatsoever that you'd argue against restricting Cadians, Atillans, Death Korps, or Catachan keyworded items.

None at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, let's take this at face value. If IG are undercosted by, say, 10% across the board, that means you can fit in about 11% more than you should be able to.

It means that your supposed "restriction" of "it's only 500 points!!11!" isn't.

Of course, if anything undercosted is something like a unique character, then GSC can't access them.
And if they're undercosted because of synergies with the faction or detachment rule, then GSC doesn't get them either.

Yes, let's keep playing pretend with the fact that Leader Abilities and special rules exist.

guard characters are even worse! once again! the army rule matters here!

guard units would have to be overwhelmingly better on a datasheet level to be taken over neophytes and to justify taking characters with them, and if we're going to talk about such a reality, then we can also start talking about if the world was made of pudding

 Kanluwen wrote:

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
25% of the points for models that don't interact with the army rule in an army where that rule is essential to how it plays. get over it

Leader and unit abilities say "hi".

I'm sure there's absolutely no reason whatsoever that you'd argue against restricting Cadians, Atillans, Death Korps, or Catachan keyworded items.

None at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, let's take this at face value. If IG are undercosted by, say, 10% across the board, that means you can fit in about 11% more than you should be able to.

It means that your supposed "restriction" of "it's only 500 points!!11!" isn't.

Of course, if anything undercosted is something like a unique character, then GSC can't access them.
And if they're undercosted because of synergies with the faction or detachment rule, then GSC doesn't get them either.

Yes, let's keep playing pretend with the fact that Leader Abilities and special rules exist.

So, how about we raise the points on Guard units to match their actual value?
And just because they have some rules still, doesn't mean they have ALL their rules. They don't get Orders. They don't get Lethal Hits for standing still.

Heck, let's compare a Guard Leman Russ Battle Tank against a GSC Brood Brother Leman Russ Battle Tank. We'll arm each with the Battle Cannon, Lascannon, two Plasma Cannons, Stubber, and HK Missile. At 36" and without either being on an Objective Marker...

And yet any time I mention locking GSC out of those items, you're up in arms.

Wild.

because there's no reason to take these options away. no one has an issue with this but you

 Kanluwen wrote:
And yet any time I mention locking GSC out of those items, you're up in arms.

Wild.

Because Brood Brothers are a flavorful option.
Look at how much flavor's been sucked from 40k. Look at how many options have been taken away.

You want to remove even more options? That don't affect balance in a negative way?

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, how about we raise the points on Guard units to match their actual value?

And while we're at it, let's raise their stats and lock their unit sizes to make it so they're actual professional soldiery, instead of weirdly the same as a bunch of bughuggers.

Oh. And lock Brood Brothers from featuring anything that has a name in it. Kthxbaaaaaaaaaaaaai.

And just because they have some rules still, doesn't mean they have ALL their rules. They don't get Orders. They don't get Lethal Hits for standing still.

NOPE! You're not changing the goalposts. The argument is they get NO interactions with the army at all, and nothing carries over from them being Guard. That is absolutely, 100% demonstrably FALSE.

Heck, let's compare a Guard Leman Russ Battle Tank against a GSC Brood Brother Leman Russ Battle Tank. We'll arm each with the Battle Cannon, Lascannon, two Plasma Cannons, Stubber, and HK Missile. At 36" and without either being on an Objective Marker...

Spoiler:

Guard Tank-No Orders, Stood Still
Heavy Stubber does .13 damage.
Hunter-Killer does 1.06 damage.
Lascannon does 1.36 damage.
Battle Cannon does 2.11 damage.
Each Plasma Cannon does .32 standard, .86 overcharged.
Total Damage of: 5.30 or 6.06, depending on Overcharge or not.

Brood Brothers Tank
Heavy Stubber does .05 damage.
Hunter-Killer does .91 damage.
Lascannon does 1.17 damage.
Battle Cannon does 1.26 damage.
Each Plasma Cannon does .20 damage standard, .51 overcharged.
Total Damage of: 3.79 or 4.41, depending on Overcharge or not.

Cool, now compare what else is in the army with each.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, how about we raise the points on Guard units to match their actual value?

And while we're at it, let's raise their stats and lock their unit sizes to make it so they're actual professional soldiery, instead of weirdly the same as a bunch of bughuggers.

Oh. And lock Brood Brothers from featuring anything that has a name in it. Kthxbaaaaaaaaaaaaai.

And just because they have some rules still, doesn't mean they have ALL their rules. They don't get Orders. They don't get Lethal Hits for standing still.

NOPE! You're not changing the goalposts. The argument is they get NO interactions with the army at all, and nothing carries over from them being Guard. That is absolutely, 100% demonstrably FALSE.

Heck, let's compare a Guard Leman Russ Battle Tank against a GSC Brood Brother Leman Russ Battle Tank. We'll arm each with the Battle Cannon, Lascannon, two Plasma Cannons, Stubber, and HK Missile. At 36" and without either being on an Objective Marker...

Spoiler:

Guard Tank-No Orders, Stood Still
Heavy Stubber does .13 damage.
Hunter-Killer does 1.06 damage.
Lascannon does 1.36 damage.
Battle Cannon does 2.11 damage.
Each Plasma Cannon does .32 standard, .86 overcharged.
Total Damage of: 5.30 or 6.06, depending on Overcharge or not.

Brood Brothers Tank
Heavy Stubber does .05 damage.
Hunter-Killer does .91 damage.
Lascannon does 1.17 damage.
Battle Cannon does 1.26 damage.
Each Plasma Cannon does .20 damage standard, .51 overcharged.
Total Damage of: 3.79 or 4.41, depending on Overcharge or not.

Cool, now compare what else is in the army with each.

I'm... I'm sorry? No one has said, to my knowledge, that Brood Brothers get literally nothing. They still keep their datasheets.

But they don't get Orders. They don't get Cult Ambush.
They don't get Lethal Hits for standing still, They don't get Sustained Hits 1 and Ignores Cover for coming in from Reinforcements.

Those are some considerable downsides. Some things might still be worth taking, but that's almost certainly a sign of one to two things.
That datasheet is OP as heck, and/or GSC have a significant hole in their capabilities that need filling.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
And yet any time I mention locking GSC out of those items, you're up in arms.

Wild.

Because Brood Brothers are a flavorful option.

No, they're not. Not with how they're set up now.

Flavorful options were the ones that first came out as part of the GSC book in 7E. The garbage now isn't flavorful.

Look at how much flavor's been sucked from 40k. Look at how many options have been taken away.

LOL. You really wanna talk about how much flavor's been sucked from 40k? How many options have been taken away?

GSC ARE LITERALLY DOING THAT TO GUARD. Your Neophyte Squads are for some stupid reason the same statlines as Cadians, yet with way more weapon options.

You want to remove even more options? That don't affect balance in a negative way?

Yep. I want to remove the options that don't fit. That up until this gakfest of a Brood Brothers rule were purposely locked out, and nobody voiced an iota of complaint about it.

Want to play Guard? Play frigging Guard.

Maybe we need a dedicated discussion for genestealer cults and guard integration since it’s not really balance discussion is it?

 JNAProductions wrote:
I'm... I'm sorry? No one has said, to my knowledge, that Brood Brothers get literally nothing. They still keep their datasheets.

And yet, you can find that argument in the threads we've discussed this in. I very much doubt the poster who made it has changed their minds, given they're still arguing for it--but now with the added caveat of "eVeRyOnE OnLy BrOoD-bRoThErS iN vEhIcLeS!1!".

But they don't get Orders. They don't get Cult Ambush.
They don't get Lethal Hits for standing still, They don't get Sustained Hits 1 and Ignores Cover for coming in from Reinforcements.

They do get Leader abilities, they do get their own datasheet rules, etc.

Those are some considerable downsides. Some things might still be worth taking, but that's almost certainly a sign of one to two things.
That datasheet is OP as heck, and/or GSC have a significant hole in their capabilities that need filling.

Or that YOU should not be allowed to take it as part of a Brood Brothers bolt-in bullgak detachment.

New thread for Brood Brothers discussion.

 JNAProductions wrote:
New thread for Brood Brothers discussion.

I made one with actual discussion too...

 Kanluwen wrote:
250 @ 1000pts for Incursion
500 @ 2000pts for Strike Force
750 @ 3000pts for Onslaught

Stop pretending that it's some kind of real penalty, Etherium. It's up to 25% of your army's point value, depending upon the Battle Size, from a faction commonly complained about as being undercosted points-wise.

The penalties are cumulative. The are 3 of them:

1/ Unit exclusions.
2/ Point Limit.
3/ Inability to benefit from faction and detachment rules.

For me, 3 is the most serious, and I think that IF they make BB a dedicated unit, one that we will see disappear.

Anyway, the combination of these three limits, I think, does put enough control on GSC use of guard. That being said, I get where Kan is coming from- I'll never include guard units in an army unless I've actually fought against and infected them, and in my mind that goes a distance toward overcoming some of Kan's issues- it cannot be inappropriate to include a unit in a GSC army that they have literally infected or stolen during a game. Granted, this only really works in a closed campaign system, and I know most people either don't prefer to play that way, or don't have a group that's open minded enough to let them try it, but it seems to work in the few small games where I've tried it.

My thoughts on the update. Sisters need a new detachment if you want to improve internal balance.

This update was frustrating for me. I play Necrons, BA and DW and there are issues with all 3 armies, IMO. When you look at the treatment some armies got versus others it feels pretty unbalanced in terms of thought and effort.

The points increases to Necrons all feel fairly decent, though I think they probably should have split the increase between the Technomancer and Wraiths instead of piling it all into the Technomancer. But the terrible unis in the Codex didn't get looked at. Praetorians have been bad since 8th edition, as has the Obelisk. Various other units continue to be overpriced to the point of being completely non-viable. If you just raise costs and don't adjust the worst units all you really do is make people drop a unit or two from their current army to get under the limit again. It doesn't meaningfully change how the army works of the internal balance of either the faction as a whole or the detachments.

BA got something similar, but likely because of their interaction with non-BA detachments, where they've been quite strong. DC with jump packs going up seems fine, I guess, but putting up the DC on foot is weird. SG got another points cut and still aren't viable. Overall BA seem to be fine after this and of the the 3 armies mentioned above they've come out OK.

Deathwatch are a joke right now. Apparently GW have forgotten they exist. Sure they may be getting folded into the Imperial Agents Codex, or discontinued altogether, but when even the Imperial Agents units got adjustments it's a kick in the teeth for DW players to get nothing. Our units are comically overcosted, key parts of the firstborn unit were reduced for other SM armies and statistically DW are one of the worst armies in the game. So why not even just a small cut in points? We've even seen that GW are now willing to cost a 5-man and a 10-man unit at different ppms depending on which one gets the most utility, so it's not as if DW are in a place where they're just working against the way points work in 10th edition, which was an argument at the start of the edition.

Lammia wrote:
My thoughts on the update. Sisters need a new detachment if you want to improve internal balance.

I think this is a flaw in GW's detachment design.

Arguably there's nothing wrong with fixing stuff now and then fixing it later when the codex comes out. But Sisters will presumably at some point get the "I can't believe its not Bloody Rose" detachment, which is likely a lot more powerful/useful than their current one.

You see the opposite with say Eldar. A frankly busted army rule, and a 10/10 detachment rule, is forcing them to keep hiking the points of units to compensate. The answer is probably tweaks to both (and I suspect the detachment rule will be nerfed when the Codex shows up) - but for some reason GW refuses to push that button now.

But its what leads you into difficulty with say Ad Mech. They can keep cutting the points to try and fit a square peg into a round hole. But the logical course is a rules change. Its not overly fluffy, but just give every unit Doctrina Imperatives (sort out the robot detachment), and buff those effects. (There was for instance some suggestion of having the +/- AP effect in the mid-board rather than just the respective deployment zone. Might be a bit good I guess but who knows.) The potential issue is you roll out a major buff and then everything has to go up 20% to not be broken.

So with the shift to: nothing but the model costs points anymore! style of play (10th), I think things like Storm Raven, or Dakka Boats in general, needs to be legends, or at least removed from competitive play. Flying knights don't really belong in THIS version of 40k. If they want to fix that in 11th, or bring back costed upgrades, fine. But you shouldn't be able to kit out a trio of storm ravens with more dakka than a Scion Detachment, and expect to not pay any sort of penalty.

Auspex tactics talked about this in a recent video.

GW will likely NEVER make the Gorkanaut/Morkanaut model playable in competitive non-armageddon games. Things larger than a knight don't belong. Hence why titans and the like start at an entire army lists points cost and go UP. The Stompa I believe is still 1k-1500? Point is, no one in their right mind is fielding those in a 2k Game. I'd love to see things like the Custodes Flying titan taken out, any sort of knight level "flying" unit. I think Daemons here need a special mention, because I honestly can't say I've ever seen the BIG demons played competitively. And those are usually Primarch/Knight level units. Even Bel is just a really strong Primarch level model.


YMMV, my 2 cents.

The penalty is flyers sucking a big one.

 RaptorusRex wrote:
The penalty is flyers sucking a big one.

That's generally a user problem, not a unit problem.

ccs wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:
The penalty is flyers sucking a big one.

That's generally a user problem, not a unit problem.

Is it? The Ironstorm use case is an edge one; it requires expensive enhancements and a very specific playstyle to work. As it is, the majority of flyers are bantha poodoo.

I think the problem that a flyer unit that is not a knight, can put out knight levels of Dakka, with oath of moment, and all the stupidity that is SM buffs, for roughly 250pts.

Yeah, nerf that specific unit. EzPz.