No, seriously, that's probably the reason why. The Rhino chassis for both loyalists (outside of maaaaybe razorbacks) and traitors have been left behind this edition ruleswise, they're stuck in this weird design space where they can't compete with equivalent tanks from other factions (Leman Russes) and their stratagems require you to max out their number to even do something above average in damage. A chaos predator should have better weaponry and warp forged options at this point and players shouldn't have to rely on FW for that to be an option.
Because Bespoke Rules! Men are more stable platforms than Land Raiders. Plasma is scared of the dark. Flamers can automatically hit hypersonic void-craft flying a mile in the air. 40k 8th edition abandoned what little logic it had left.
No, seriously, that's probably the reason why. The Rhino chassis for both loyalists (outside of maaaaybe razorbacks) and traitors have been left behind this edition ruleswise, they're stuck in this weird design space where they can't compete with equivalent tanks from other factions (Leman Russes) and their stratagems require you to max out their number to even do something above average in damage. A chaos predator should have better weaponry and warp forged options at this point and players shouldn't have to rely on FW for that to be an option.
It's not just Predators. I'm at least vaguely irritated by the fact that infantry can ignore the move-fire penalty but tanks don't.
Havocs don't even have heavy armor sets or anything; they're just power armored dudes!
This is kind of, well, disappointing. Why can a guy carrying a heavy weapon shoot better than a tank?
[Also, if a man can carry a lascannon, why does a predator have a lascannon as a main gun?]
Because GW is unwilling to change stats too much or radically alter costs, they need resort to bolt-on schticks like this to try and boost substandard units and move new kits.
Perhaps not the most perfect route, but they might see more use, and I can live with that.
I'm more irritated about a new weapon being introduced to do what the Heavy Bolter is supposed to do. The new gun looks super cool though.
meh, at least you guys have tanks. All I have is a transport with a Kannon or a killkannon bolted to the top. I could max out the number of guns on it and it would still suck in comparison to a standard Predator with LC sponsons.
Well i get it, ne modell new rules and stuff. What i really dont get is how they didn't give terminators anything with their new kit.
Havocs having t5 an relentless, and terminators not is just stupidly silly.
stormcraft wrote: Well i get it, ne modell new rules and stuff. What i really dont get is how they didn't give terminators anything with their new kit.
Havocs having t5 an relentless, and terminators not is just stupidly silly.
We did get a small pricedrop and Chainaxes allowing us to field terminators under 30 ppm though.
Edit: problem is we don't know how the sprue is and therefore how much Chainaxes we get.
I agree its a little strange that they got these changes. There were a few US marines that heroically wielded heavy weapons on their own, so I guess it makes a bit more sense for a Chaos Marine to have it with a point and shoot weapon than a GSC cultist with the ability to move and fire a MORTAR (edit: they can't actually do this!).
Maybe the Terminator keyword will get a beta rule. They probably should.
It's nice, but it does seem inappropriate. It makes Havocs too similar to oblits. I would prefer if they got a bonus for staying still, like a bonus to range or something. Predators are what should ignore penalties for moving and shooting.
The real question is: Will Devs get the same rule AND T5?
Because you will be able to pay an entire Roman legion with the salt that will bring if they don't
Galef wrote: The real question is: Will Devs get the same rule AND T5?
Because you will be able to pay an entire Roman legion with the salt that will bring if they don't
-
Do the need it? they were better before.
Edit: btw i could live with that i am just wondering.
All I know is I am psyched for this. 5 Havocs with 4 of the new rotor cannon is 32 24" S5 AP -1 shots that you can make with +1 to hit (Dark Apostle's prayer), and re-roll 1s or all fails (lord/abby), and even +1 to wound (VOTLW).
And you can double that with Endless Cacophony to 64 shots.
There is a GSC cult creed (the bladed cog), its INFANTRY also doesnt suffer the penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons, which is even more ridiculous. One model is 7 pts.
I'm not entirely mad that havocs got this rule (though I do think it's a little silly and there are better bonus rules they could have given them). I'm annoyed that relentless is so rare this edition, because the not being able to move or you shoot worse hurts a lot of units that used to have it. Moving and shooting at full bs should be more common.
Remember when moving with a heavy weapon meant you couldn't shoot at all? Because the idea was that you had to take time to brace your weapon. It made sense then that relentless would be common to make up for that. Now it's a -1 BS penalty that's a slap on the wrist for armies that aren't orks. Just handing relentless out now just makes an already weak drawback even more pointless and they'd might as well remove it altogether at that point (although I already expect it will be removed when 9th rolls around, with how easier shooting gets with each edition).
It was rare for infantry particularly troops. Vehicles generally had the ability to fire some if not all of there weapons at full BS unless they really moved at full speed. Things like bikes and terminators actually functioned a lot better when they could move and shoot.
It's just frustrating that something like a predator or an attack bike is essentially back to being a pillbox and havocs can run and gun not problem.
AnomanderRake wrote: More more to the point, why does the heavy bolter exist when you can now put 2.66 heavy bolters on one model?
Suspect the new cannon will be 25 points, and given the shorter range, that's about right in comparison to a Heavy Bolter.
Not sure how I feel about the Havocs, rumor has it you can't get ablative wounds on the squad anymore, so it's more like a Long Fangs Pack, 5 guys with 4 Heavy Weapons.
I think it's helpful that a heavy weapons team be optimized for heavy weapon use. The extra toughness and fewer model trade-off is more interesting to me because I like the concept of marines hiding expensive weapons behind less expensive defensively focused bodies.
This does make terminators look silly too. Especially since only 1 in 5 get a heavy weapon, so having relentless would be such a small thing but really help public opinion.
Wayniac wrote: All I know is I am psyched for this. 5 Havocs with 4 of the new rotor cannon is 32 24" S5 AP -1 shots that you can make with +1 to hit (Dark Apostle's prayer), and re-roll 1s or all fails (lord/abby), and even +1 to wound (VOTLW).
And you can double that with Endless Cacophony to 64 shots.
Get fethed, hordes.
"Hordes"?
That combo will do 25,92 wounds after saves to MEQ's, 15,55 wounds to Leman Russ-EQ's.
Galef wrote: The real question is: Will Devs get the same rule AND T5?
Because you will be able to pay an entire Roman legion with the salt that will bring if they don't
-
I hope not. But! I'd rather the signum to effect the squad that way they don't have T5 but they get a bonus for standing still. Which I normally advocate against but still.
So when the inevitable SM 2.0 codex drops and see if devs get changed then we'll know if it's a money grab or not.
Wayniac wrote: All I know is I am psyched for this. 5 Havocs with 4 of the new rotor cannon is 32 24" S5 AP -1 shots that you can make with +1 to hit (Dark Apostle's prayer), and re-roll 1s or all fails (lord/abby), and even +1 to wound (VOTLW).
And you can double that with Endless Cacophony to 64 shots.
Get fethed, hordes.
"Hordes"?
That combo will do 25,92 wounds after saves to MEQ's, 15,55 wounds to Leman Russ-EQ's.
Wayniac wrote: All I know is I am psyched for this. 5 Havocs with 4 of the new rotor cannon is 32 24" S5 AP -1 shots that you can make with +1 to hit (Dark Apostle's prayer), and re-roll 1s or all fails (lord/abby), and even +1 to wound (VOTLW).
And you can double that with Endless Cacophony to 64 shots.
Get fethed, hordes.
"Hordes"?
That combo will do 25,92 wounds after saves to MEQ's, 15,55 wounds to Leman Russ-EQ's.
It's cause of the little talons on their boots. You crummy loyalists have been making fun of our spikes for so long it's about time they come back to poke you in the ass.
Yup, because plasma never getting hot in past edition if you hated someone enough was sooo much more logical.
Oh wait
BaconCatBug wrote: Flamers can automatically hit hypersonic void-craft flying a mile in the air.
I like when this nonsense was parroted last time someone pointed out that pistols or grenades (even these with 3 or 6 inch range, which was always shorter than flamer) never had any problems hitting the mythical "mile high" flyer somehow with hand throw if you happened to be standing underneath it flight path despite not having nearly enough range, and was met with sudden silence. I wonder, will we hear sudden hypersonic silence deployed again?
Especially seeing in past editions flak guns firing solid projectiles had no problem hitting flyers, but as soon as you loaded airburst shrapnel ammo (used since forever in AA role) it magically disappeared once getting close to plane, which also had miraculous field making custode and ork just as accurate in BS by airbending bullets away even if you stood right next to it on landing pad. Because reasons. Veeerrry logical.
BaconCatBug wrote: 40k 8th edition abandoned what little logic it had left.
That's rich given past editions were far dumb-- Oh, wait, it's coming from someone using 16th bullet point in 1824 edition of Nigerian dictionary while also ignoring half of what it says to ""prove"" rules (that are loud and clear to anyone using common sense...) ""don't"" work despite literally no one with eyes agreeing with such rule twisting and playing it as intended instead.
I especially like how your last attempt to prove turret gun was not, in fact, turret gun (combined with claims expensive relics having far smaller damage output was somehow ""WAD"" was cut short by FAQ stating "of course it is, you idiots!". Logic!
This is kind of, well, disappointing. Why can a guy carrying a heavy weapon shoot better than a tank?
[Also, if a man can carry a lascannon, why does a predator have a lascannon as a main gun?]
This is a weak explanation, so I don't need it pointed out, but in the fluff Havoc weapons usually graft themselves to the Chaos marine and gain a sort of malicious sentience (ammo hoppers develop hungry mouths feasting on more bullets an such) from being in the Warp for such a long time. I suppose if a bazooka literally incorporated itself into my arm and I had it for 100s/1000s of years like that I would become pretty adept at using it even while moving.
chimeara wrote: I for one love this new rule. Really gives me a reason to buy a ton more havocs for my IW.
And GW claps their hand sayign "just as planned"
I think GW has a vision for chaos of being a really agressive army that pushes up and gets in your face. Now if only CSMs could take boltguns AND chainswords...
chimeara wrote: I for one love this new rule. Really gives me a reason to buy a ton more havocs for my IW.
And GW claps their hand sayign "just as planned"
I think GW has a vision for chaos of being a really agressive army that pushes up and gets in your face. Now if only CSMs could take boltguns AND chainswords...
Or more simply. New models. Got to give something new to sell em. Particularly as havocs hadn't been selling much before.
chimeara wrote: I for one love this new rule. Really gives me a reason to buy a ton more havocs for my IW.
And GW claps their hand sayign "just as planned"
I think GW has a vision for chaos of being a really agressive army that pushes up and gets in your face. Now if only CSMs could take boltguns AND chainswords...
Or more simply. New models. Got to give something new to sell em. Particularly as havocs hadn't been selling much before.
Yep.
And would you believe it, the new, never before seen weapon that you can only get if you buy the new kit looks strong as all feth/OP. What a weird coincidence.
chimeara wrote: I for one love this new rule. Really gives me a reason to buy a ton more havocs for my IW.
And GW claps their hand sayign "just as planned"
I think GW has a vision for chaos of being a really agressive army that pushes up and gets in your face. Now if only CSMs could take boltguns AND chainswords...
Or more simply. New models. Got to give something new to sell em. Particularly as havocs hadn't been selling much before.
People conveniently forgetting that Chaos Space Marines are the same weak ass unit as before.
Don't like this rule - there should be minimal exceptions to the move-and-fire heavy weapons penalty, and I see no reason why of all things it should be chaos havocs that have it.
So the t5 and ignore heavy for the same cost as devastators?
How much those bonuses should cost, loyalists should be like 10pts then? Or are they too short and old to have equal rules.
Silver144 wrote: So the t5 and ignore heavy for the same cost as devastators?
How much those bonuses should cost, loyalists should be like 10pts then? Or are they too short and old to have equal rules.
Or any other heavy weapons specialist that is unable to bypass the heavy weapon rule. Or any tank ffs? How on earth can they justify that a dude in power armour with spurs is somehow more stable firing a massive heavy weapon than a tank?! Absolute nonsense.
Right. So the important question is what is the best way to convert the heavy bolters into rotor cannons? Does any third party manufacturer make good bits for that?
AnomanderRake wrote: More more to the point, why does the heavy bolter exist when you can now put 2.66 heavy bolters on one model?
Because the Chaincannon also costs as much as 2.66 HBs. Just like you don't put a combi-plasma and a chainfist on every Chaos Termie just because it's the most dakka and krumping per model. It means that you pay a lot more per fielded wound so it turns them into glass cannons.
Galef wrote: The real question is: Will Devs get the same rule AND T5?
Because you will be able to pay an entire Roman legion with the salt that will bring if they don't
Silver144 wrote: So the t5 and ignore heavy for the same cost as devastators?
How much those bonuses should cost, loyalists should be like 10pts then? Or are they too short and old to have equal rules.
Or any other heavy weapons specialist that is unable to bypass the heavy weapon rule. Or any tank ffs? How on earth can they justify that a dude in power armour with spurs is somehow more stable firing a massive heavy weapon than a tank?! Absolute nonsense.
Yep, but this is an equal units with equal costs. But the spiky ones got +1T and relentless for free.
Arachnofiend wrote: It's cause of the little talons on their boots. You crummy loyalists have been making fun of our spikes for so long it's about time they come back to poke you in the ass.
Raptors should get this rule too then.
Because in the grim darkness of the 41st millennium bone spurs actually make you better in combat.
Why people keeps comparing Devastators with Havocs when Devastators have the Cherub and the Sargeant can give +1 to hit to one of the weapons?
Havocs didn't had any of that for all of 8th edition and they costed the same as Devastators, but nobody said anything about giving the same rules for Havocs.
Galef wrote: The real question is: Will Devs get the same rule AND T5?
Because you will be able to pay an entire Roman legion with the salt that will bring if they don't
-
Do the need it? they were better before.
Edit: btw i could live with that i am just wondering.
Yeah sorry - havocs were already better than marine devs. VOTL alone makes them better...plus they can shoot twice.
Silver144 wrote: So the t5 and ignore heavy for the same cost as devastators?
How much those bonuses should cost, loyalists should be like 10pts then? Or are they too short and old to have equal rules.
Or any other heavy weapons specialist that is unable to bypass the heavy weapon rule. Or any tank ffs? How on earth can they justify that a dude in power armour with spurs is somehow more stable firing a massive heavy weapon than a tank?! Absolute nonsense.
Marines should all be relentless. It's been my suggestion since about 5th edition. This vehicles suffering penalty for moving is new to 8th. All vehicles should be able to move and fire with no penalty AND fall back and shoot and move over infantry.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote: Why people keeps comparing Devastators with Havocs when Devastators have the Cherub and the Sargeant can give +1 to hit to one of the weapons?
Havocs didn't had any of that for all of 8th edition and they costed the same as Devastators, but nobody said anything about giving the same rules for Havocs.
Should marine devs also get the ability to shoot twice then?
They should make the Signum give +1 to hit for all members of the squad, but they can't move. And even then Devs would still be behind Havocs due to less mobility and lower Toughness.
Silver144 wrote: So the t5 and ignore heavy for the same cost as devastators?
How much those bonuses should cost, loyalists should be like 10pts then? Or are they too short and old to have equal rules.
Or any other heavy weapons specialist that is unable to bypass the heavy weapon rule. Or any tank ffs? How on earth can they justify that a dude in power armour with spurs is somehow more stable firing a massive heavy weapon than a tank?! Absolute nonsense.
It can make sense if you don't look at it as which platform is more "stable" but rather which platform is better able to readjust their aim after moving.
A dude holding the gun is probably going to be better at that than a dude in a box controlling the gun "remotely".
Arguably, though, most vehicles should have AI that helps this, but because of Grimdark only select vehicles are worthy of such AI systems via Machine Spirit
I think it's perfectly fine for most vehicles to suffer -1 to hit for moving with Heavy Weapons while select units like Havocs and Devs have special rules to mitigate it.
The problem it that those vehicles are often overcosted.
I'm not so concerned about Devs not getting to ignore the -1. They do have Signum and Cherib.
But if Havocs really are T5, Devs should be too. After all they also have reinforced armour.
It sounds more realistic to me than the singular point increase given they messed up Oblit point costs. Take it or leave it, I'm not interested enough to verify.
Crimson wrote: How did they mess up the Obliterator cost?
They have the old 3-6, 65 ppm points cost in the back of the book, but the datasheet is the correct 1-3, implying they should have the 1-3, 115 ppm cost in the back.
I was unaware of any issue with the Havocs points (other than the fact they are insanely good for their points).
I guess one thing about Havocs is they can't take ablative wounds, and you are going to Max out at 12 heavy weapons in an army with them.
Crimson wrote: How did they mess up the Obliterator cost?
They have the old 3-6, 65 ppm points cost in the back of the book, but the datasheet is the correct 1-3, implying they should have the 1-3, 115 ppm cost in the back.
I was unaware of any issue with the Havocs points (other than the fact they are insanely good for their points).
I guess one thing about Havocs is they can't take ablative wounds, and you are going to Max out at 12 heavy weapons in an army with them.
Yeah, it's up in the air if the old or new Oblits cost is real, since GW. New seems likely as old would make them ridiculously broken, but again this is GW.
Haven't heard anything with the Havocs since they went up a point.
People claiming a 1W 3+ save model that will cost at minimun 24 points with no extra wounds is insanely good (And you can't have more than 15 in your army, with only 12 of them having heavy weapons) just because it ignores penalties for moving and firing heavy weapons (When Genstealer Cults has that and more as a Cult tactic) and because it has T5 (And we all know how resilient Plague Marines are with their T5 and 5+ fnp)
Galas wrote: People claiming a 1W 3+ save model that will cost at minimun 24 points with no extra wounds is insanely good (And you can't have more than 15 in your army, with only 12 of them having heavy weapons) just because it ignores penalties for moving and firing heavy weapons (When Genstealer Cults has that and more as a Cult tactic) and because it has T5 (And we all know how resilient Plague Marines are with their T5 and 5+ fnp)
Dark Reapers manage to be silly good as a 34pt model with 1W/3+ armour and T3.
To be fair Dark Reapers have a lot of advantages Havocs don't beyond just move-and-fire, but it's certainly possible for expensive single-wound models to be powerful. I haven't seen the pricing but I'd be surprised if Slaaneshi Havocs under shoot-again can't pop into LOS and make their points back immediately.
Yeah, it's up in the air if the old or new Oblits cost is real, since GW. New seems likely as old would make them ridiculously broken, but again this is GW.
Haven't heard anything with the Havocs since they went up a point.
The Oblit thing is most likely them just forgetting to update the points, but until it is errated, it is a valid cost. It is harder to imagine that there would be a mistake with the Havocs, as they actually did update their points.
Wayniac wrote: All I know is I am psyched for this. 5 Havocs with 4 of the new rotor cannon is 32 24" S5 AP -1 shots that you can make with +1 to hit (Dark Apostle's prayer), and re-roll 1s or all fails (lord/abby), and even +1 to wound (VOTLW).
And you can double that with Endless Cacophony to 64 shots.
Get fethed, hordes.
If it comes like this, it will get nerfed sooner than we think.
Don't go overboard with buying those models.
I think it's definitely hand-wavium tech, and I'm not sure I agree with some of it. As a CSM player, however, I will say there was zero reason to take havocs previously.
Unlike (as mentioned above) Devastators, Havocs had zero special rules, they just carried heavy weapons. So you were better off scattering them in tac squads, or rapiers, or predators, etc.
These rules, while slightly bizarre, now make them a definite take in some instances. They do turn the screw a bit in normal CSM (as do most things now).
Silver144 wrote: So the t5 and ignore heavy for the same cost as devastators?
How much those bonuses should cost, loyalists should be like 10pts then? Or are they too short and old to have equal rules.
Or any other heavy weapons specialist that is unable to bypass the heavy weapon rule. Or any tank ffs? How on earth can they justify that a dude in power armour with spurs is somehow more stable firing a massive heavy weapon than a tank?! Absolute nonsense.
It can make sense if you don't look at it as which platform is more "stable" but rather which platform is better able to readjust their aim after moving.
A dude holding the gun is probably going to be better at that than a dude in a box controlling the gun "remotely".
Arguably, though, most vehicles should have AI that helps this, but because of Grimdark only select vehicles are worthy of such AI systems via Machine Spirit
I think it's perfectly fine for most vehicles to suffer -1 to hit for moving with Heavy Weapons while select units like Havocs and Devs have special rules to mitigate it.
The problem it that those vehicles are often overcosted.
I'm not so concerned about Devs not getting to ignore the -1. They do have Signum and Cherib.
But if Havocs really are T5, Devs should be too. After all they also have reinforced armour.
-
Not sure you need an AI to help out; primitive analog stabilizers (where there's a mechanical layer in between the gun aiming controls and the physical gun that compensates for the motion of the vehicle using a gyroscope as a reference) were first fielded during WWII. You might also expect the Tau (who don't have any qualms about using AI), the Eldar (who might take a lead from whatever system the DE use to make a Dark Lance an Assault weapon when mounted on a vehicle), or the Necrons (who are pretty advanced, or so I've heard) to have come up with something.
Galas wrote: People claiming a 1W 3+ save model that will cost at minimun 24 points with no extra wounds is insanely good (And you can't have more than 15 in your army, with only 12 of them having heavy weapons) just because it ignores penalties for moving and firing heavy weapons (When Genstealer Cults has that and more as a Cult tactic) and because it has T5 (And we all know how resilient Plague Marines are with their T5 and 5+ fnp)
Dark Reapers manage to be silly good as a 34pt model with 1W/3+ armour and T3.
To be fair Dark Reapers have a lot of advantages Havocs don't beyond just move-and-fire, but it's certainly possible for expensive single-wound models to be powerful. I haven't seen the pricing but I'd be surprised if Slaaneshi Havocs under shoot-again can't pop into LOS and make their points back immediately.
All the buffs and stratagems you can put in Havocs will be much better in many other units, with more firepower, that endure more damage and with more mobility.
The reality here is that Havocs were trash tier before. Now they received two decent buffs (The T5 is much less relevant because Havocs are a purely offensive unit) and one big nerf (The lost of ablative wounds). I seriously doubt they will be OP.
And as a loyalist with a good amount of devastators, lol. I wouldn't change my +1 to hit, shoot again with one weapon, rerolling 1's DA with 2-3 ablative wounds devastators for the new Havocs.
And I'm all in favour of bespoken rules to allow units to be more different. As Elbow said, maybe is more fluffy to have your heavy weapon squads to be exactly the same as your normal guys because they are actually just the same unit buth with a different weapon-configuration. But that is not only boring, it makes nearly impossible to make one unit balanced with the other because they have nearly the same tactical role, and one will be more efficient.
Also, tanks (Even light tanks like predators) having as their primary weapons one weapon that can be carried by one super soldier or two normal humans with a tripod (A predator with Lasscannons) is just horsegak.
Galas wrote: People claiming a 1W 3+ save model that will cost at minimun 24 points with no extra wounds is insanely good (And you can't have more than 15 in your army, with only 12 of them having heavy weapons) just because it ignores penalties for moving and firing heavy weapons (When Genstealer Cults has that and more as a Cult tactic) and because it has T5 (And we all know how resilient Plague Marines are with their T5 and 5+ fnp)
Dark Reapers manage to be silly good as a 34pt model with 1W/3+ armour and T3.
To be fair Dark Reapers have a lot of advantages Havocs don't beyond just move-and-fire, but it's certainly possible for expensive single-wound models to be powerful. I haven't seen the pricing but I'd be surprised if Slaaneshi Havocs under shoot-again can't pop into LOS and make their points back immediately.
Of course you are right, but we all know the weapons Havocs have and they aren't the ones Dark Reapers had. The only thing I can be being actually good is a unit of Havocs in a rhino with rottor cannons to munch hordes. But at the same time is a fething rhino. With 5 (Or 10 lol) marines inside. I can't be afraid of that.
Wayniac wrote: All I know is I am psyched for this. 5 Havocs with 4 of the new rotor cannon is 32 24" S5 AP -1 shots that you can make with +1 to hit (Dark Apostle's prayer), and re-roll 1s or all fails (lord/abby), and even +1 to wound (VOTLW).
And you can double that with Endless Cacophony to 64 shots.
Get fethed, hordes.
If it comes like this, it will get nerfed sooner than we think.
Don't go overboard with buying those models.
Especially given that with the pictures I've seen of the sprues it looks like they're going full-on Skitarii here ("Four guns if you build two squads of five! One of each option included in the box!") and the rotor cannon bit is going to be $15 or $20 on the secondary market.
Especially given that with the pictures I've seen of the sprues it looks like they're going full-on Skitarii here ("Four guns if you build two squads of five! One of each option included in the box!") and the rotor cannon bit is going to be $15 or $20 on the secondary market.
You can get heresy rotor cannons from forgeworld - should work just fine with a little work.
Galas wrote: People claiming a 1W 3+ save model that will cost at minimun 24 points with no extra wounds is insanely good (And you can't have more than 15 in your army, with only 12 of them having heavy weapons) just because it ignores penalties for moving and firing heavy weapons (When Genstealer Cults has that and more as a Cult tactic) and because it has T5 (And we all know how resilient Plague Marines are with their T5 and 5+ fnp)
I think this is more a "its not fair if CSM have something better than their Imperial equivalent" thread than an objective look at the unit.
Jump out with 4 reaper chaincannons and you are going to hurt something. But as you say, its 150 points for 5 T5 3+ wounds. I don't see how you are ever going to get a second volley off unless your opponent isn't paying attention. Are we really saying they should give up even more points when they invariably die?
I agree though that the Oblits points are almost certainly a mistake. They are quite comically broken.
Galef wrote: But if Havocs really are T5, Devs should be too. After all they also have reinforced armour.
Havocs don't get T5 because they have reinforced armour. They get T5 because they're slowly merging with their weapons, essentially turning into mini-Obliterators.
Galas wrote: ...And I'm all in favour of bespoken rules to allow units to be more different. As Elbow said, maybe is more fluffy to have your heavy weapon squads to be exactly the same as your normal guys because they are actually just the same unit buth with a different weapon-configuration. But that is not only boring, it makes nearly impossible to make one unit balanced with the other because they have nearly the same tactical role, and one will be more efficient.
Also, tanks (Even light tanks like predators) having as their primary weapons one weapon that can be carried by one super soldier or two normal humans with a tripod (A predator with Lasscannons) is just horsegak.
Maybe. The one gun/five versus four guns at any squad size certainly makes Tacticals/CSM and Devastators/Havocs look very similar, but the bolter-only Tacticals/heavy weapon-only Devastators in the Legion list and with the Primaris (Intercessors/Hellblasters) seem to make the squads very distinct without needing any special rules at all.
Well, yeah, when the units have totally different equipement of course they are different and have different roles without special rules, but when they have the same weapons and the only change is in distribution, thats a problem.
Especially given that with the pictures I've seen of the sprues it looks like they're going full-on Skitarii here ("Four guns if you build two squads of five! One of each option included in the box!") and the rotor cannon bit is going to be $15 or $20 on the secondary market.
You can get heresy rotor cannons from forgeworld - should work just fine with a little work.
Possibly. Size comparison might end up off; the Heresy rotor cannon is really small-calibre since it's S3. And if the new Havocs are too much bigger you'll have to futz with the ammo feed or it won't go all the way around. Older assault cannon barrels (the Ravenwing upgrade sprue comes with two since you're supposed to be able to build Sammael's Land Speeder off that frame) might look better.
Galas wrote: People claiming a 1W 3+ save model that will cost at minimun 24 points with no extra wounds is insanely good (And you can't have more than 15 in your army, with only 12 of them having heavy weapons) just because it ignores penalties for moving and firing heavy weapons (When Genstealer Cults has that and more as a Cult tactic) and because it has T5 (And we all know how resilient Plague Marines are with their T5 and 5+ fnp)
I think this is more a "its not fair if CSM have something better than their Imperial equivalent" thread than an objective look at the unit.
Jump out with 4 reaper chaincannons and you are going to hurt something. But as you say, its 150 points for 5 T5 3+ wounds. I don't see how you are ever going to get a second volley off unless your opponent isn't paying attention. Are we really saying they should give up even more points when they invariably die?
I agree though that the Oblits points are almost certainly a mistake. They are quite comically broken.
Well also consider people are expecting to run them with an apostle and a lord, so we're talking about 200 extra points as well as 3 CP.
64 shots with all those buffs will kill something like 44 IS.
For that same price you can get about two Tank Commanders with PGCs, which is 80 S5 shots on a tougher platform and no CP spend.
As a 1ksons player I am super salty about the soulreaper cannon mark 2 that the new havocs get. In fact I am really just super salty about this whole release lol.
I wonder if I can convert the 30K heavy bolter into a rotor cannon by using assault cannon barrels. Needless to say I have plenty of those sitting around and since the HB is pretty much useless for havocs now.
bullyboy wrote: I wonder if I can convert the 30K heavy bolter into a rotor cannon by using assault cannon barrels. Needless to say I have plenty of those sitting around and since the HB is pretty much useless for havocs now.
bullyboy wrote: I wonder if I can convert the 30K heavy bolter into a rotor cannon by using assault cannon barrels. Needless to say I have plenty of those sitting around and since the HB is pretty much useless for havocs now.
Hardly. +12" range is pretty important.
with a 30" tactical range for the rotary cannon, no way is anyone taking HBs for their havocs. The meta of hordes just doesn't care about 3 shot HBs, IMHO of course.
I believe TT said the rotary cannon thing was 20 points, that's also double the cost of a heavy bolter. That's not insignificant...and with the 24" range it's probably close to appropriate cost-wise.
bullyboy wrote: I wonder if I can convert the 30K heavy bolter into a rotor cannon by using assault cannon barrels. Needless to say I have plenty of those sitting around and since the HB is pretty much useless for havocs now.
Hardly. +12" range is pretty important.
12" extra range doesn't make up for a 62.5% reduction in firepower in this instance.
If they didn't have move and fire, maybe. But now they can zip about the battlefield without penalty, NOBODY will bother with HB Havocs outside of the most casual lists.
GW probably *wrongly* assumed that Heavy Bolter CSM would have access to the Hellfire Shells Stratagem and thought that would even out the costs. Nevermind the fact that the humongous increase in shots basically even the math out and doesn't cost a CP.
Don't HB also have the d3 MW stratagem?
The change is... -12" of range and 100% of price increase (Ignoring the opportunity cost, because with the Rottor Canon you have much more firepower in a havoc squad even if its more expensive, so better for buffs) for having 8 shots instead of 3.
Galas wrote: Don't HB also have the d3 MW stratagem?
The change is... -12" of range and 100% of price increase (Ignoring the opportunity cost, because with the Rottor Canon you have much more firepower in a havoc squad even if its more expensive, so better for buffs) for having 8 shots instead of 3.
Galas wrote: Don't HB also have the d3 MW stratagem?
The change is... -12" of range and 100% of price increase (Ignoring the opportunity cost, because with the Rottor Canon you have much more firepower in a havoc squad even if its more expensive, so better for buffs) for having 8 shots instead of 3.
That is what I was referencing in my post. And no, CSM do not. It would have sort of tipped the scales otherwise.
According to the WC article, the Havoc kit only comes with 1 Reaper chaincannon but 2 of everything else.
So outside of bitz ordering, most players won't have enough to do full Chaincannon units.
I think it's also been confirmed that they cost twice what a HB does, so you really should compare 1 Chaincannon to 2 HBs. In that case, you trade only 2 shots for extra range.
Chaincannon is still the clear choice, but I don't think the difference is as great as everyone seems to be making it.
You could always do 2 HBs as ablative wound models
A lot of people will kitbash them. Also Forgeworld do rotor cannons.
The proper bit will be very expensive on the secondary market though. You'll probably be spending the best part of the price of the lot again to get a full unit with chaincannons if you don't convert.
I think it's also been confirmed that they cost twice what a HB does, so you really should compare 1 Chaincannon to 2 HBs.
No you shouldn't! Neither heavy bolters or reaper cannons do anything without a Havoc holding them. You must include the cost of the marine to your calculations.
I think it's also been confirmed that they cost twice what a HB does, so you really should compare 1 Chaincannon to 2 HBs.
No you shouldn't! Neither heavy bolters or reaper cannons do anything without a Havoc holding them. You must include the cost of the marine to your calculations.
Indeed. And when you fail a save and lose 1 model, you only lose 3 shots instead of 8. And by being more than 24" away, you should be taking less saves overall.
So yeah, taking more than just the weapon into account is wise.
I'm not saying squads with 4 Reapers WON'T be the new hotness, I'm just saying adding a HB or 2 in the unit isn't a completely garbage idea.
But probably only for units taking Las/ML/Autocannon rather than alongside Reapers
You can put those Heavy Bolter bits to good use by sawing the barrel off and putting an Assault Cannon barrel in its place. The Chaingun and Heavy Bolter are largely the same.
So let's see: A full chaincannon squad is 150 pts, a full HB squad is 110 pts. Those 40 pts take you from 12 shots to 32 shots... HBs ain't looking good. It'd been better for balance if the chaincannon was S4 AP- instead of being almost identical to the HB but with more shots. (and less range)
Dandelion wrote: So let's see: A full chaincannon squad is 150 pts, a full HB squad is 110 pts. Those 40 pts take you from 12 shots to 32 shots... HBs ain't looking good. It'd been better for balance if the chaincannon was S4 AP- instead of being almost identical to the HB but with more shots. (and less range)
Yea HBs are quite dead without a stratagem. Chaincannons are glass cannon-y, but there are so many ways around that.
Agreed. As much as I wish HBs had decent use, something needs to change. Making Astartes HBs RF3 would be a nice alternative for all units involved, no just Havocs/Devs
Top kek at 1 chaincannon but 2 of everything else. Gotta sell more of those havoc boxes.
It does have me thinking though the Chaincannon synergizes better with a regular CSM squad. It's the same range as your bolters and yes, you'll have the penalty to move and fire if you don't move you're getting out extra shots for shredding hordes which seems to be its intended use case.
This lets your havocs sit back and do a long range thing as they should, while being able to reposition due to now being able to move and fire if they need to adjust to get a bead on targets.
Right now I'm thinking something like 2x 5-man CSM squads with 1 chaincannon, and then 2x 5-man havoc squads with like 2 Lascannon and 2 Autocannon or something like that, decidedly anti-vehicle. The ROF on the chaincannon offsets the 4+ BS for moving. That might actually be a solid case for a squad of 10 with plasma + chaincannon, combi-plasma on the champion. That's a lot of firepower on the move that can deal with a variety of threats.
IMHO Havocs with Chaincannons are actually very good to put into transports because they don't have the -1 to hit when they disembark. So put them in a rhino with 5 basic CSM (Or chosen. Can chosen be taken in units of two like company veterans)
To be honest I'm glad that people is actually talking about using Space Marines. I don't think any of this units are gonna be in lists that end up in the top 20 in LVO but ey they look actually competitive outside of the top 3 lists.
I think it's also been confirmed that they cost twice what a HB does, so you really should compare 1 Chaincannon to 2 HBs.
No you shouldn't! Neither heavy bolters or reaper cannons do anything without a Havoc holding them. You must include the cost of the marine to your calculations.
Yes, which means you should consider the cost of the rest of the Havok's statline. You're not getting a token with a gun and a 3+ BS, trying to math is as such is ludicrous.
Short answer: Sales driven rules.
Long answer: Sales driven rules.
LOL, no.
I mean, sort of.
They have new rules clearly because someone went "ooh, cool new sculpts! Let's give them some new rules!".
But the idea that they were made strong to drive sales I'm not convinced about at all. Loads of new kits come with underwhelming rules and don't see competitive play. The fact some are above the curve seems more or less coincidental.
Stux wrote: Loads of new kits come with underwhelming rules and don't see competitive play. The fact some are above the curve seems more or less coincidental.
I don't think HBs are awful statistically - but they are decidedly average and as a result don't really do anything. Your havocs are still a points pinata at over 20 points per wound. In the modern game 24"+6" move is typically enough to target anything relevant that isn't LOSed, and you are in the same boat regardless there.
To those who don't believe the new Havoc rules are sales related I ask if you believe it's a coincidence that the new, previously unheard of weapon just happens to be the best from a damage output (and likely, therefore, competitive) standpoint and just happens to be the only singular heavy weapon in the new kit?
What an odd coincidence indeed.
GW might claim otherwise, but they absolutely give products better rules if they want them to sell. Look at the Castellan. Sometimes they miss the mark or, indeed, don't give great rules to a model (because they know it'll sell regardless).
An Actual Englishman wrote: To those who don't believe the new Havoc rules are sales related I ask if you believe it's a coincidence that the new, previously unheard of weapon just happens to be the best from a damage output (and likely, therefore, competitive) standpoint and just happens to be the only singular heavy weapon in the new kit?
Most likely yes. If new models consistently had powerful rules you would have a case, but that most definitely is not the case. Or how are you liken your new OP Ork buggies?
An Actual Englishman wrote: To those who don't believe the new Havoc rules are sales related I ask if you believe it's a coincidence that the new, previously unheard of weapon just happens to be the best from a damage output (and likely, therefore, competitive) standpoint and just happens to be the only singular heavy weapon in the new kit?
What an odd coincidence indeed.
GW might claim otherwise, but they absolutely give products better rules if they want them to sell. Look at the Castellan. Sometimes they miss the mark or, indeed, don't give great rules to a model (because they know it'll sell regardless).
You know by this reasoing you'll always end up being right, no?
If a model comes with great rules "It was a marketing ploy"
If a model comes with bad rules "They knew it would sell nonetheless"
We have proof sometimes the direction gives order to the rules writters to make something OP like 7th Wraitknight, as that old GW rules writer addmited on his reddit AMA. But I don't think most of the time thats what really happens. I can see how in this specific case it could have been something planned. Maybe something like "If we are gonna greenlight doing this old resin kit in plastic then we'll need for it to sell well enough".
I look forward to the post in a bout a year when the edition changes over and vehicles get the ability to move and fire heavy weapons without penalty and everyone will be complaining about the Havoc's then-redundant rule or something.
An Actual Englishman wrote: To those who don't believe the new Havoc rules are sales related I ask if you believe it's a coincidence that the new, previously unheard of weapon just happens to be the best from a damage output (and likely, therefore, competitive) standpoint and just happens to be the only singular heavy weapon in the new kit?
Most likely yes. If new models consistently had powerful rules you would have a case, but that most definitely is not the case. Or how are you liken your new OP Ork buggies?
I explained this in my post, the part you didn't quote.
They decided that the buggies would sell regardless of their rules (and likely were right).
Generally they give the better rules to resculpts to encourage players that have a ton of the older sculpts to reinvest in the new shiny models. It's more obvious when they give the new sculpts a weapon that just so happens to be incredible or for which there was no previous analogue. Such as the "Dread Bell" or whatever it's called for the GUO or the chaincannon here.
Galas wrote: You know by this reasoing you'll always end up being right, no?
If a model comes with great rules "It was a marketing ploy"
If a model comes with bad rules "They knew it would sell nonetheless"
We have proof sometimes the direction gives order to the rules writters to make something OP like 7th Wraitknight, as that old GW rules writer addmited on his reddit AMA. But I don't think most of the time thats what really happens. I can see how in this specific case it could have been something planned. Maybe something like "If we are gonna greenlight doing this old resin kit in plastic then we'll need for it to sell well enough".
Agreed. It's happened before, it's happening now and it'll happen again.
Oh, it's 100% sales related...same reason Primaris are different rather than a revised and updated classical line of marines. GW knows that despite marines always selling well --- a lot of people were getting to the point of having completed armies of basic Space Marines, so what do you sell "those" players? You sell them some plastic HH crack and then you sell them "different" (and arguably better) new versions of Space Marines.
An Actual Englishman wrote: To those who don't believe the new Havoc rules are sales related I ask if you believe it's a coincidence that the new, previously unheard of weapon just happens to be the best from a damage output (and likely, therefore, competitive) standpoint and just happens to be the only singular heavy weapon in the new kit?
What an odd coincidence indeed.
GW might claim otherwise, but they absolutely give products better rules if they want them to sell. Look at the Castellan. Sometimes they miss the mark or, indeed, don't give great rules to a model (because they know it'll sell regardless).
Counterpoint: The Valiant came out the same week as the Castellan and I've yet to see one outside of a box on my FLGS's shelf (though I just got an insane deal for one on Ebay, so that's about to change). Also, if they were writing rules to sell more Castellans, they wouldn't have even bothered nerfing the stratagems for it. GW making stuff OP to move models is blatant tinfoil hattery and doesn't hold up to any real scrutiny:
The Armiger warglaives were utter trash on release, and even with the reduced points costs, are still pretty terrible.
Helverins are solid, but the only reason to take them is to fill an SHD that already has a bigger Knight
The Knight Preceptor/Canis Rex are both narrative-tier units
The aforementioned Knight Valiant is mediocre at best
The Cloaktek is meh and usually a worse choice than the Chronotek
The new Ork vehicles are all pretty bleh
The GSC stuff is a mixed bag, ranging from hilariously bad (ridgerunner) to awesome (jackals, some of the characters) and everywhere in between
Most of the new Shadowspear units are pretty underwhelming with the Suppressors being a complete joke.
I can go on and on, but the pattern is clear. The vast majority of new releases are not being given amazing rules out of the door as some conspiracy to drive sales.
An Actual Englishman wrote: To those who don't believe the new Havoc rules are sales related I ask if you believe it's a coincidence that the new, previously unheard of weapon just happens to be the best from a damage output (and likely, therefore, competitive) standpoint and just happens to be the only singular heavy weapon in the new kit?
What an odd coincidence indeed.
GW might claim otherwise, but they absolutely give products better rules if they want them to sell. Look at the Castellan. Sometimes they miss the mark or, indeed, don't give great rules to a model (because they know it'll sell regardless).
And let's stack that up with the known points for obliterators. Or that this new weapon isn't even in the csm kit. If it was a sales vehicle why isn't it there, too?
You can't ignore everything else to make a bs point.
An Actual Englishman wrote: To those who don't believe the new Havoc rules are sales related I ask if you believe it's a coincidence that the new, previously unheard of weapon just happens to be the best from a damage output (and likely, therefore, competitive) standpoint and just happens to be the only singular heavy weapon in the new kit?
What an odd coincidence indeed.
GW might claim otherwise, but they absolutely give products better rules if they want them to sell. Look at the Castellan. Sometimes they miss the mark or, indeed, don't give great rules to a model (because they know it'll sell regardless).
Counterpoint: The Valiant came out the same week as the Castellan and I've yet to see one outside of a box on my FLGS's shelf (though I just got an insane deal for one on Ebay, so that's about to change). Also, if they were writing rules to sell more Castellans, they wouldn't have even bothered nerfing the stratagems for it. GW making stuff OP to move models is blatant tinfoil hattery and doesn't hold up to any real scrutiny:
I have seen a fair few Valiants on the table. Lots and lots and lots. I can play anecdotal tennis too! The stratagem nerf did nothing. They have still not changed the points. How many months has it been? Your 'counterpoint' proves my premise that it attempts to dispel. If Castellans do get a nerf, it will be when GW have decided that their sales have plateaued.
An Actual Englishman wrote: To those who don't believe the new Havoc rules are sales related I ask if you believe it's a coincidence that the new, previously unheard of weapon just happens to be the best from a damage output (and likely, therefore, competitive) standpoint and just happens to be the only singular heavy weapon in the new kit?
What an odd coincidence indeed.
GW might claim otherwise, but they absolutely give products better rules if they want them to sell. Look at the Castellan. Sometimes they miss the mark or, indeed, don't give great rules to a model (because they know it'll sell regardless).
Counterpoint: The Valiant came out the same week as the Castellan and I've yet to see one outside of a box on my FLGS's shelf (though I just got an insane deal for one on Ebay, so that's about to change). Also, if they were writing rules to sell more Castellans, they wouldn't have even bothered nerfing the stratagems for it. GW making stuff OP to move models is blatant tinfoil hattery and doesn't hold up to any real scrutiny:
I have seen a fair few Valiants on the table. Lots and lots and lots. I can play anecdotal tennis too! The stratagem nerf did nothing. They have still not changed the points. How many months has it been? Your 'counterpoint' proves my premise that it attempts to dispel. If Castellans do get a nerf, it will be when GW have decided that their sales have plateaued.
What a fething load of garbage. Show me a valiant list at any tournament. And then give me the ratio of valiants to castellans.
And let's stack that up with the known points for obliterators. Or that this new weapon isn't even in the csm kit. If it was a sales vehicle why isn't it there, too?
You can't ignore everything else to make a bs point.
Are you being serious? This proves my point entirely. Its not included perhaps to force you to buy more Havoc kits?!
When Havocs being able to move wins every top table maybe someone will care. Until then they’re a power armoured unit with no ablative wounds. They’ll die to a stiff breeze, no?
And let's stack that up with the known points for obliterators. Or that this new weapon isn't even in the csm kit. If it was a sales vehicle why isn't it there, too?
You can't ignore everything else to make a bs point.
Are you being serious? This proves my point entirely. Its not included perhaps to force you to buy more Havoc kits?!
Wake up and stop defending the indefensible.
Um the tactical marine kit only comes with a missile launcher(as far as heavy weapons go), but could take all the heavy weapons, which were only available in the devastator box.
And let's stack that up with the known points for obliterators. Or that this new weapon isn't even in the csm kit. If it was a sales vehicle why isn't it there, too?
You can't ignore everything else to make a bs point.
Are you being serious? This proves my point entirely. Its not included perhaps to force you to buy more Havoc kits?!
Wake up and stop defending the indefensible.
I posted most of the releases from the past year and the only standout so has been the Castellan and some of the GSC units, all of which you promptly ignored so that you could nitpick at my throwaway line about the Valiant. Also, your local meta must be pretty friendly with all those Valiants running around because I've yet to see one in a top 8 list at any major since they were released.
By your logic, Primaris would have been dominating from the start of 8th ed. Of course, you're going to fall back on "well GW expects Primaris to sell so they don't need to bother making decent rules for them." Which is the same style of argument that conspiracy theorists use to handwave opposing arguments. I suppose then that GW expected the Knight Valiant to outsell the Castellan or the Warglaives to outsell the Helverins as well? Did they expect the FOUR new Ork vehicles to just fly off the shelves with such mediocre rules? How about that awesome new Ridgerunner? Guess GW is just expecting those puppies to move at $40 a pop for a unit with terrible firepower and durability? Your argument is garbage as is your silly conspiracy theory that GW deliberately makes rules to move models.
grav guns were great when they could threaten vehicles in an interesting way. Now their special rules were generic'd down to better AP on a str 5 rapid fire base with shorter range?
Paradoxically, commanders, and even sergeants to some extent, having weaker weapons actually makes sense as they should be commanding/leading not fighting. However, Warhammer 40k follows video game boss logic in that the more important you are the more awesome you are at combat generally.
I'm just going to eat popcorn as I watch everyone come to the realization that this is a game of plastic soldiers and none of this should be causing us all this much stress.
drbored wrote: I'm just going to eat popcorn as I watch everyone come to the realization that this is a game of plastic soldiers and none of this should be causing us all this much stress.
JohnnyHell wrote: When Havocs being able to move wins every top table maybe someone will care. Until then they’re a power armoured unit with no ablative wounds. They’ll die to a stiff breeze, no?
This. Not having any ablative wounds and a unit of Havocs potentially costing 150~ish points for 5 models... yeah it's ok for funsies, but far from amazing and a complete point sink in competitive.
People acting like 5 marines are suddenly unbeatable
JohnnyHell wrote: When Havocs being able to move wins every top table maybe someone will care. Until then they’re a power armoured unit with no ablative wounds. They’ll die to a stiff breeze, no?
This. Not having any ablative wounds and a unit of Havocs potentially costing 150~ish points for 5 models... yeah it's ok for funsies, but far from amazing and a complete point sink in competitive.
People acting like 5 marines are suddenly unbeatable
I'm more irritated by the fact that a tank is less effective as a mobile weapons platform that a group of guys carrying the same guns.
I doubt the new unit will be game breaking, though the rotor cannon is pretty neat.
JohnnyHell wrote: When Havocs being able to move wins every top table maybe someone will care. Until then they’re a power armoured unit with no ablative wounds. They’ll die to a stiff breeze, no?
This. Not having any ablative wounds and a unit of Havocs potentially costing 150~ish points for 5 models... yeah it's ok for funsies, but far from amazing and a complete point sink in competitive.
People acting like 5 marines are suddenly unbeatable
Hiding in losblocks and then move out of it and shoot without any penalties? Rhino bunker? T5 and relentless do much more to survivability than couple more t4 wounds (and you must pay for that, 14 pts per each wound) on stationar unut.
JohnnyHell wrote: When Havocs being able to move wins every top table maybe someone will care. Until then they’re a power armoured unit with no ablative wounds. They’ll die to a stiff breeze, no?
This. Not having any ablative wounds and a unit of Havocs potentially costing 150~ish points for 5 models... yeah it's ok for funsies, but far from amazing and a complete point sink in competitive.
People acting like 5 marines are suddenly unbeatable
Hiding in losblocks and then move out of it and shoot without any penalties? Rhino bunker? T5 and relentless do much more to survivability than couple more t4 wounds (and you must pay for that, 14 pts per each wound) on stationar unut.
Ok. For one turn - then you pay for it and remove them from the table afterwards.
If someone sets up a unit of Slaneesh Havocs with 4 Chaincannons you can bet your ass they will be target numero uno in target priority.
JohnnyHell wrote: When Havocs being able to move wins every top table maybe someone will care. Until then they’re a power armoured unit with no ablative wounds. They’ll die to a stiff breeze, no?
This. Not having any ablative wounds and a unit of Havocs potentially costing 150~ish points for 5 models... yeah it's ok for funsies, but far from amazing and a complete point sink in competitive.
People acting like 5 marines are suddenly unbeatable
Hiding in losblocks and then move out of it and shoot without any penalties? Rhino bunker? T5 and relentless do much more to survivability than couple more t4 wounds (and you must pay for that, 14 pts per each wound) on stationar unut.
Ok. For one turn - then you pay for it and remove them from the table afterwards.
If someone sets up a unit of Slaneesh Havocs with 4 Chaincannons you can bet your ass they will be target numero uno in target priority.
You mean... Like the regular devastators? But those cannot hide in rhino, or behind losblocks and pretty often not be able to shoot a once during tbe game.
And let's stack that up with the known points for obliterators. Or that this new weapon isn't even in the csm kit. If it was a sales vehicle why isn't it there, too?
You can't ignore everything else to make a bs point.
Are you being serious? This proves my point entirely. Its not included perhaps to force you to buy more Havoc kits?!
Wake up and stop defending the indefensible.
I posted most of the releases from the past year and the only standout so has been the Castellan and some of the GSC units, all of which you promptly ignored so that you could nitpick at my throwaway line about the Valiant. Also, your local meta must be pretty friendly with all those Valiants running around because I've yet to see one in a top 8 list at any major since they were released.
By your logic, Primaris would have been dominating from the start of 8th ed. Of course, you're going to fall back on "well GW expects Primaris to sell so they don't need to bother making decent rules for them." Which is the same style of argument that conspiracy theorists use to handwave opposing arguments. I suppose then that GW expected the Knight Valiant to outsell the Castellan or the Warglaives to outsell the Helverins as well? Did they expect the FOUR new Ork vehicles to just fly off the shelves with such mediocre rules? How about that awesome new Ridgerunner? Guess GW is just expecting those puppies to move at $40 a pop for a unit with terrible firepower and durability? Your argument is garbage as is your silly conspiracy theory that GW deliberately makes rules to move models.
I didn't bother responding to the second part of yoje post because it was utter garbage. Your assessment of the units was lacking.
Primaris are a perfect example by the way - they are flat better for the points than standard Marines. Intercessors are better tacticals. Hellblasters are better devs. You realise they could have updated the SM rules to be more like Primaris without releasing an entirely new range right? Money.
The best weapons in the resculpted death guard kits were all new, previously unheard of weapons. Both for the Marines and termies. Then you have units like the PBC that is an utter joke or the stupid tree, or the buffing daemons, or the 'invulnerable to melee while perched on a barrel' bloatdrone.
I'm not going to go into detail on GSC releases, I'll be here all day. Needless to say I completely disagree with your (wrong) sentiment that the new releases are a 'mixed bag'.
Warglaives were in a boxed set that sold well regardless because 'muh new knight models'. Funny how good the later Helverin is in comparison.
Re the Knight Valiant you weren't talking about a tournament setting in your first post where you made your useless, anecdotal comment. You were talking about your meta. I have seen them used. I don't think many local metas have only tournament level players.
Except, you know, when they're not. Which is actually quite a lot of the time.
Hit penalties
Wave serpents and other damage reduction units
Any target with an invulnerable save
Hordes
When your opponent has stacks of D2
Probably other situations I can't think of right now
An Actual Englishman wrote: To those who don't believe the new Havoc rules are sales related I ask if you believe it's a coincidence that the new, previously unheard of weapon just happens to be the best from a damage output (and likely, therefore, competitive) standpoint and just happens to be the only singular heavy weapon in the new kit?
Most likely yes. If new models consistently had powerful rules you would have a case, but that most definitely is not the case. Or how are you liken your new OP Ork buggies?
I explained this in my post, the part you didn't quote.
They decided that the buggies would sell regardless of their rules (and likely were right).
Generally they give the better rules to resculpts to encourage players that have a ton of the older sculpts to reinvest in the new shiny models. It's more obvious when they give the new sculpts a weapon that just so happens to be incredible or for which there was no previous analogue. Such as the "Dread Bell" or whatever it's called for the GUO or the chaincannon here.
Galas wrote: You know by this reasoing you'll always end up being right, no?
If a model comes with great rules "It was a marketing ploy"
If a model comes with bad rules "They knew it would sell nonetheless"
We have proof sometimes the direction gives order to the rules writters to make something OP like 7th Wraitknight, as that old GW rules writer addmited on his reddit AMA. But I don't think most of the time thats what really happens. I can see how in this specific case it could have been something planned. Maybe something like "If we are gonna greenlight doing this old resin kit in plastic then we'll need for it to sell well enough".
Agreed. It's happened before, it's happening now and it'll happen again.
In the biz we call this kind of belief an "unfalsifiable" belief.
You know, like how the new resculpt of CSMs heavily pushes chainswords, and they just HAPPEN to be...completely unusably awful. Wait....
And how the new Tau Fire Warrior sculpt had those Breachers and they just HAPPENED to be...wait, hang on...
And how the new Intercessor box came out with all those new weapon options and they just HAPPENED...to...and the Hellblaster kit, had the assault and heavy versions, and everyone had to....buy them to get...
And the new rubric marines came out and they had warpflamers and soulreaper cannons so everyone had to buy the kit and get the op new...weapons?
Oh, so with resculpts the rules for new weapon options have just about the same random distribution of good/crap that all other releases have?
The new Havoc models are sexy as hell. The rules are awesome. Do the rules make sense? Do Space Elves sense? Does the existence of dark gods by way of human emotions make any real sense? Why do tanks necessarily need to be better, or even equal, at aiming than Havocs? Dark Reapers have been out shooting tanks for years so welcome to yesterday. The suspension of disbelief is enough in 40K to have the Havocs get a pass on that, if you were overly concerned with the logic behind it, lore wise. From a game standpoint, GW is updating the models and are making them somewhat larger, and on larger bases, and probably wanted to add a little more sustenance to their rule set as a result. And it turns out that the rule is actually relevant and useful...
JohnnyHell wrote: When Havocs being able to move wins every top table maybe someone will care. Until then they’re a power armoured unit with no ablative wounds. They’ll die to a stiff breeze, no?
Why would they not have any ablative wounds? Current datasheet allows them to be in squads of up to 10.
Overall the unit seems pretty good. The Reaper Chaincannon is an awesome weapon but against a lot of targets it's still worse than a Grav Cannon. Move and Fire is great. I'm wondering if that's going to be given to the loyalists at some point, or if that's considered a balance against the loyalist Signum+Cherub+Stratagems.
He'res hoping Move and Fire is given to Terminators at the same time.
JohnnyHell wrote: When Havocs being able to move wins every top table maybe someone will care. Until then they’re a power armoured unit with no ablative wounds. They’ll die to a stiff breeze, no?
Why would they not have any ablative wounds? Current datasheet allows them to be in squads of up to 10.
Overall the unit seems pretty good. The Reaper Chaincannon is an awesome weapon but against a lot of targets it's still worse than a Grav Cannon. Move and Fire is great. I'm wondering if that's going to be given to the loyalists at some point, or if that's considered a balance against the loyalist Signum+Cherub+Stratagems.
He'res hoping Move and Fire is given to Terminators at the same time.
The new datasheet does not allow them to have extra bodies. You get 4 Havocs and a Champ, and they all have weapons beyond your basic bolter.
Even at Max 5 models, I still don't see why everyone is assuming they cannot have ablative wounds.
If you were taking 10 before (5 of which had to have bolters, and likely the Champ too), than why not just split that into 2x 5 with each unit only have 2-3 Heavy weapons?
You're getting the same (or MORE) number of Heavy weapons and can have the same "ratio" of ablative wounds if you want.
3 Heavies to 2 Bolters is a pretty good "sweet-spot" if you are dead set on expendable joes in the unit.
Is it as good as having 4 Heavies in 1 unit surrounded by 5-6 Bolter schmoes? Probably not, but it's not fair to say you cannot have ablative wounds for them at all.
Galef wrote: Even at Max 5 models, I still don't see why everyone is assuming they cannot have ablative wounds.
If you were taking 10 before (5 of which had to have bolters, and likely the Champ too), than why not just split that into 2x 5 with each unit only have 2-3 Heavy weapons?
You're getting the same (or MORE) number of Heavy weapons and can have the same "ratio" of ablative wounds if you want.
3 Heavies to 2 Bolters is a pretty good "sweet-spot" if you are dead set on expendable joes in the unit.
Is it as good as having 4 Heavies in 1 unit surrounded by 5-6 Bolter schmoes? Probably not, but it's not fair to say you cannot have ablative wounds for them at all.
-
They can't take ablative wounds. Stock, the Champ has a Flamer and the Havocs have Heavy Bolters.
I might be wrong on this, though-can someone more up to date on the leaks confirm?
[Also, if a man can carry a lascannon, why does a predator have a lascannon as a main gun?]
Both very good questions.
The predator has a twin lascannon as a main gun.
5 dudes with 32 S5 AP1 shots do not shoot better than a TC with 40 S5 AP0 shots - in fact the math comes out exactly even.
They shoot better when you add a DA, and a lord, and 3 CP - and just for that one unit. And then they're going to die horribly. It's also not like they can be safely in range of lots of targets turn 1. If they aren't out of LOS they're in deep gak - even in a rhino.
Galef wrote: Even at Max 5 models, I still don't see why everyone is assuming they cannot have ablative wounds. If you were taking 10 before (5 of which had to have bolters, and likely the Champ too), than why not just split that into 2x 5 with each unit only have 2-3 Heavy weapons?
You're getting the same (or MORE) number of Heavy weapons and can have the same "ratio" of ablative wounds if you want. 3 Heavies to 2 Bolters is a pretty good "sweet-spot" if you are dead set on expendable joes in the unit.
Is it as good as having 4 Heavies in 1 unit surrounded by 5-6 Bolter schmoes? Probably not, but it's not fair to say you cannot have ablative wounds for them at all.
-
They can't take ablative wounds. Stock, the Champ has a Flamer and the Havocs have Heavy Bolters.
I might be wrong on this, though-can someone more up to date on the leaks confirm?
I actually haven't seen the new datasheet, but the old one, as well as the sheet for Devs if that's relevant, gives all models a Bolter by default.
It would make sense, however to default them to HBs. It's the price they pay for the added bulk to make them T5. Hopefully Devs will follow suit But even if that's the case, that gives us a reason to keep 1-2 HBs in the unit - it's the cheapest loadout and closest thing to "ablative" wounds. Or start using Rhinos to hide them
Brutus_Apex wrote: All tanks should be able to fire heavy weapons without penalty and be able to leave combat freely without losing their ability to fire.
Neither of these rules make any sense.
I disagree on the first point. In an edition in which moving denied your ability to fire entirely, vehicles ignoring that penalty did make sense. But in an addition in which moving is only -1 to hit, and vehicles DO NOT have advanced targeting computers, it makes perfect sense for such vehicles to suffer the penalty. A man using his own legs to move around can readjust his aim far more easily and KEEP that aim than a man compensating for the movement of a large box he is in that may not even be piloted by himself.
But I'll agree to your second point. It doesn't make sense for vehicles to be "shut down" because some infantry surrounded it.
Brutus_Apex wrote: All tanks should be able to fire heavy weapons without penalty and be able to leave combat freely without losing their ability to fire.
Brutus_Apex wrote: All tanks should be able to fire heavy weapons without penalty and be able to leave combat freely without losing their ability to fire.
Neither of these rules make any sense.
Yea, I don't know about that. That would certainly kill melee as a viable way to shut up tanks.
Brutus_Apex wrote: All tanks should be able to fire heavy weapons without penalty and be able to leave combat freely without losing their ability to fire.
Neither of these rules make any sense.
Yea, I don't know about that. That would certainly kill melee as a viable way to shut up tanks.
Size stat. If you're big enough, you can just plow through something, but if they're big enough (relative to your model) you can't.
So Grots (size 2) can't do jack diddly to stop a Leman Russ or Land Raider (size 8), and even a Marine (size 4) is still half their size and so can't stop them. But a Terminator (size 5) is big enough to stop them.
Brutus_Apex wrote: All tanks should be able to fire heavy weapons without penalty and be able to leave combat freely without losing their ability to fire.
Neither of these rules make any sense.
Yea, I don't know about that. That would certainly kill melee as a viable way to shut up tanks.
Size stat. If you're big enough, you can just plow through something, but if they're big enough (relative to your model) you can't.
So Grots (size 2) can't do jack diddly to stop a Leman Russ or Land Raider (size 8), and even a Marine (size 4) is still half their size and so can't stop them. But a Terminator (size 5) is big enough to stop them.
How many splatted grots does it take to jam up the gears of a battletank I wonder?
Brutus_Apex wrote: All tanks should be able to fire heavy weapons without penalty and be able to leave combat freely without losing their ability to fire.
Neither of these rules make any sense.
Yea, I don't know about that. That would certainly kill melee as a viable way to shut up tanks.
Size stat. If you're big enough, you can just plow through something, but if they're big enough (relative to your model) you can't.
So Grots (size 2) can't do jack diddly to stop a Leman Russ or Land Raider (size 8), and even a Marine (size 4) is still half their size and so can't stop them. But a Terminator (size 5) is big enough to stop them.
See I would like to have the attacks of tanks in CC changed to "D3 mortal wounds on a 4+" instead of some arbitrary number of D6 S6 Ap- attacks that are mostly useless. Hitting tanks with swords and axes is silly, det charges and such make a lot more sense, and getting close to a giant tank, even in powered armor should be lethal.
skchsan wrote: What it is that GW is terrible at remaining consistent for balances' sake while horrifyingly good at skewing balance for the sake of pushing sales.
Again, this bizarre claim. If they were skewing balance to push sales, why do so many units release with sub par rules?
JohnnyHell wrote: When Havocs being able to move wins every top table maybe someone will care. Until then they’re a power armoured unit with no ablative wounds. They’ll die to a stiff breeze, no?
Why would they not have any ablative wounds? Current datasheet allows them to be in squads of up to 10.
Overall the unit seems pretty good. The Reaper Chaincannon is an awesome weapon but against a lot of targets it's still worse than a Grav Cannon. Move and Fire is great. I'm wondering if that's going to be given to the loyalists at some point, or if that's considered a balance against the loyalist Signum+Cherub+Stratagems.
He'res hoping Move and Fire is given to Terminators at the same time.
The new datasheet does not allow them to have extra bodies. You get 4 Havocs and a Champ, and they all have weapons beyond your basic bolter.
skchsan wrote: What it is that GW is terrible at remaining consistent for balances' sake while horrifyingly good at skewing balance for the sake of pushing sales.
Again, this bizarre claim. If they were skewing balance to push sales, why do so many units release with sub par rules?
Maybe GW sometimes just don't want people to play certain armies, and would rather funel them in to playing more specific stuff. So they may release a unit or even whole army with bad rules, just so people that already own those armies buy something new and new people don't pick up the unit or army, because of how bad it is. And if they do it anyway, it is a win/win for GW as they are pushing stuff off shelfs.
Sort of? They are tougher and get to move and shoot, so, ablative wounds aren't as necessary, but you also can't sneak in half assed units.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: Maybe GW sometimes just don't want people to play certain armies, and would rather funel them in to playing more specific stuff. So they may release a unit or even whole army with bad rules, just so people that already own those armies buy something new and new people don't pick up the unit or army, because of how bad it is. And if they do it anyway, it is a win/win for GW as they are pushing stuff off shelfs.
I can't. I just can't. Do people even listen to themselves anymore?
It would make sense, however to default them to HBs. It's the price they pay for the added bulk to make them T5.
Wait a minute, whaaaat? No extra bodies in the unit, obligatory heavy weapons, Sergeant defaulting to Flamer, T5. . . what is going on here?
Well, they are heavy support options. Having them running around like they're standard marines was weird.
I will be staying with my autohavocs. For 5 more points per unit, my guys now have +1 toughness and can hide on the first turn of the game out of LoS. I call that a super win.
Wayniac wrote: All I know is I am psyched for this. 5 Havocs with 4 of the new rotor cannon is 32 24" S5 AP -1 shots that you can make with +1 to hit (Dark Apostle's prayer), and re-roll 1s or all fails (lord/abby), and even +1 to wound (VOTLW).
And you can double that with Endless Cacophony to 64 shots.
Get fethed, hordes.
"Hordes"?
That combo will do 25,92 wounds after saves to MEQ's, 15,55 wounds to Leman Russ-EQ's.
The correct term would be "Get fethed, everyone."
Very tasty indeed.
Which also means you guys KNOW that when the Slaanesh/Noise Marine book hits, they won't have access to it; I can hear the howls of pain already.
I don't understand the question? What is wrong with my train of thought?
Store space costs money , as is making mulds for stuff. Didn't GW scrap their WFB with a ton of models, just because they didn't want people to play it and wanted people to pick up their new game? It is only natural that GW doesn't want people just to stop playing and leave never buying any stuff anymore. So funeling people in to buying new stuff, seems like a good idea for a model company. The whole soup idea seems to be build for it . Why shouldn't GW prioritise one army or unit over another one.
Lets say a unit is popular, but also sold by many second party companies. I doubt GW would want those units or weapon options to be popular. It is better to soft nerf them, and make people pick up something new from GW. And being new always gives GW the edge as other companies require time to sculpt and make new molds for the new "hot" thing. I don't know if sells spike as much in other stores as they do at my store. But if they do, if something is very popular and new it will get picked up by people in the first 3-6 months of it arriving in the store. After that fewer random people pick up something like DA for example. Plus with the CA and FAQ, if something gets pushed out hard by GW, they can nerf if or buff it in a CA/FAQ. This way other companies can never fully keep up with them.
It would make sense, however to default them to HBs. It's the price they pay for the added bulk to make them T5.
Wait a minute, whaaaat? No extra bodies in the unit, obligatory heavy weapons, Sergeant defaulting to Flamer, T5. . . what is going on here?
Well, they are heavy support options. Having them running around like they're standard marines was weird.
I will be staying with my autohavocs. For 5 more points per unit, my guys now have +1 toughness and can hide on the first turn of the game out of LoS. I call that a super win.
That's like a whole different new unit. Havocs used to be able to take big squads and a bunch of special weapons if they wanted to. They were basically Devastators with Heavy options, but could take 5 Plasma Guns instead, if they wanted to.
It would make sense, however to default them to HBs. It's the price they pay for the added bulk to make them T5.
Wait a minute, whaaaat? No extra bodies in the unit, obligatory heavy weapons, Sergeant defaulting to Flamer, T5. . . what is going on here?
Well, they are heavy support options. Having them running around like they're standard marines was weird.
I will be staying with my autohavocs. For 5 more points per unit, my guys now have +1 toughness and can hide on the first turn of the game out of LoS. I call that a super win.
That's like a whole different new unit. Havocs used to be able to take big squads and a bunch of special weapons if they wanted to. They were basically Devastators with Heavy options, but could take 5 Plasma Guns instead, if they wanted to.
We still have chosen for that. I am all for having different units for different roles if you ask me.
Wait a minute, whaaaat? No extra bodies in the unit, obligatory heavy weapons, Sergeant defaulting to Flamer, T5. . . what is going on here?
No bolters in kit = no bolters in rules.
There aren't any bolters in the Marine Devastator kit either. And. . . *gasp*. . . you could add bodies from the Tactical box to the Devastator squad. *hair on fire!*.
There aren't any bolters in the Marine Devastator kit either. And. . . *gasp*. . . you could add bodies from the Tactical box to the Devastator squad. *hair on fire!*.
*shrug* I don't write the rules. That's just been the dynamic for quite some time now.
JohnnyHell wrote: When Havocs being able to move wins every top table maybe someone will care. Until then they’re a power armoured unit with no ablative wounds. They’ll die to a stiff breeze, no?
Why would they not have any ablative wounds? Current datasheet allows them to be in squads of up to 10.
Overall the unit seems pretty good. The Reaper Chaincannon is an awesome weapon but against a lot of targets it's still worse than a Grav Cannon. Move and Fire is great. I'm wondering if that's going to be given to the loyalists at some point, or if that's considered a balance against the loyalist Signum+Cherub+Stratagems.
He'res hoping Move and Fire is given to Terminators at the same time.
The new datasheet does not allow them to have extra bodies. You get 4 Havocs and a Champ, and they all have weapons beyond your basic bolter.
That's incredibly stupid.
Might blame the new GW logic : if it's not in the box, you can't have it. Because they are too stubborn to sell bits outside of FW, and there is a thriving market for third party bits.
Incidentally, Kromlech already offers space marine arms with miniguns, so you could use those.
Also, less than 24 hours since the news that the chainguns would be 1/box, someone sculpted and posted a suitable proxy to 3d print.
There aren't any bolters in the Marine Devastator kit either. And. . . *gasp*. . . you could add bodies from the Tactical box to the Devastator squad. *hair on fire!*.
*shrug* I don't write the rules. That's just been the dynamic for quite some time now.
I get that to an extent. But this feels like it's on a new level. Havocs have been in the game for a looong time, and if this is all true it appears to be a heavy rewrite of a very old and familiar unit, one which has been a mirror to the Marine Devastators. I do not like it.
Wait a minute, whaaaat? No extra bodies in the unit, obligatory heavy weapons, Sergeant defaulting to Flamer, T5. . . what is going on here?
No bolters in kit = no bolters in rules.
There aren't any bolters in the Marine Devastator kit either. And. . . *gasp*. . . you could add bodies from the Tactical box to the Devastator squad. *hair on fire!*.
We still have chosen for that. I am all for having different units for different roles if you ask me.
Too many options scare you?
They literally said the differing roles is a better idea than the last incarnation. This makes them closer to how they feel in 30k, which is a welcome change.
They literally said the differing roles is a better idea than the last incarnation. This makes them closer to how they feel in 30k, which is a welcome change.
You could build the same squad with the last incarnation. You just also got to do other things if you wanted.
They literally said the differing roles is a better idea than the last incarnation. This makes them closer to how they feel in 30k, which is a welcome change.
You could build the same squad with the last incarnation. You just also got to do other things if you wanted.
Well now the new incarnation is more focused for the Heavy Weapon role instead. That's a better datasheet entry than "oh it's another unit that takes a bunch of weapons".
God I love this community. Naively believing that GW doesn't give preferential rules to certain kits while routinely bankrupting themselves to be able to purchase the latest and greatest killer unit/army/faction.
Maybe the Havoc kits (and others that have such "unique" rules) are simply more profitable for GW to make relative to others? Maybe Hellblasters, Breachers and all the other "counter examples" thrown around just don't provide GW with a good enough bottom line?
The most hilarious thing is that GW staff have literally admitted that this happens.
Anyways, it makes no sense to me that a dude can fire a heavy weapon better than a tank, not from a fluff perspective nor from a gameplay perspective. I have fed this back to GW through the Facebook page. I can't be bothered to email them, it's not like they can be bothered to respond.
An Actual Englishman wrote: Anyways, it makes no sense to me that a dude can fire a heavy weapon better than a tank, not from a fluff perspective nor from a gameplay perspective. I have fed this back to GW through the Facebook page. I can't be bothered to email them, it's not like they can be bothered to respond.
This bothers me also, perhaps make Machine Spirit into a re-roll 1s ability for the vehicle and let vehicles move and fire heavy weapons without penalty.
An Actual Englishman wrote: God I love this community. Naively believing that GW doesn't give preferential rules to certain kits while routinely bankrupting themselves to be able to purchase the latest and greatest killer unit/army/faction.
Maybe the Havoc kits (and others that have such "unique" rules) are simply more profitable for GW to make relative to others? Maybe Hellblasters, Breachers and all the other "counter examples" thrown around just don't provide GW with a good enough bottom line?
The most hilarious thing is that GW staff have literally admitted that this happens.
Anyways, it makes no sense to me that a dude can fire a heavy weapon better than a tank, not from a fluff perspective nor from a gameplay perspective. I have fed this back to GW through the Facebook page. I can't be bothered to email them, it's not like they can be bothered to respond.
So you chose the route that is least likely to be read? Emailing gets read; Facebook comments get a “please email” at best.
They literally said the differing roles is a better idea than the last incarnation. This makes them closer to how they feel in 30k, which is a welcome change.
You could build the same squad with the last incarnation. You just also got to do other things if you wanted.
Well now the new incarnation is more focused for the Heavy Weapon role instead. That's a better datasheet entry than "oh it's another unit that takes a bunch of weapons".
"more focused for the Heavy Weapon role instead" What does it do better? It alpha strikes slightly better, natively hitting 66% of the time rather than 50% of the time. Does it take hits better with T5? Not compared to a larger squad at T4 it doesn't.
"That's a better datasheet entry" A better datasheet gives more options for different deployment and/or play styles.
They literally said the differing roles is a better idea than the last incarnation. This makes them closer to how they feel in 30k, which is a welcome change.
You could build the same squad with the last incarnation. You just also got to do other things if you wanted.
Well now the new incarnation is more focused for the Heavy Weapon role instead. That's a better datasheet entry than "oh it's another unit that takes a bunch of weapons".
How is it better. Before I could build them to focus on heavy weapons like the new data sheet. I could also give them special weapons freeing up elite slots now that I don't need to take chosen. I could also take ablative wounds so every wound isn't crippling the unit. The new data sheet restricts, and that's rarely a good thing.
Galef wrote: Even at Max 5 models, I still don't see why everyone is assuming they cannot have ablative wounds. If you were taking 10 before (5 of which had to have bolters, and likely the Champ too), than why not just split that into 2x 5 with each unit only have 2-3 Heavy weapons?
You're getting the same (or MORE) number of Heavy weapons and can have the same "ratio" of ablative wounds if you want. 3 Heavies to 2 Bolters is a pretty good "sweet-spot" if you are dead set on expendable joes in the unit.
Is it as good as having 4 Heavies in 1 unit surrounded by 5-6 Bolter schmoes? Probably not, but it's not fair to say you cannot have ablative wounds for them at all.
-
You can't take bolter havocs. They no longer exist. Havocs have to take heavy weapons.
All my havocs are going into csm squads.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Just realized Havocs may no longer take guns from the special weapons list either.
God damnit GW, I was having so much fun with 10 melta guys in a rhino.
They literally said the differing roles is a better idea than the last incarnation. This makes them closer to how they feel in 30k, which is a welcome change.
You could build the same squad with the last incarnation. You just also got to do other things if you wanted.
Well now the new incarnation is more focused for the Heavy Weapon role instead. That's a better datasheet entry than "oh it's another unit that takes a bunch of weapons".
"more focused for the Heavy Weapon role instead" What does it do better? It alpha strikes slightly better, natively hitting 66% of the time rather than 50% of the time. Does it take hits better with T5? Not compared to a larger squad at T4 it doesn't.
"That's a better datasheet entry" A better datasheet gives more options for different deployment and/or play styles.
Are Space Marines going to turn into Eldar now?
That's under the assumption people actually take that many bolter shields to begin with. If you were taking the four heavy weapons already, the T5 is only 5 more points compared to spending a whole other 13 points on one wound. If that's such a concern, the basic Chaos Marine entry and YES still Chosen exist. It's such a non-complaint about a better unit entry.
And you already have the multiple play styles. You want Special Weapons? Chosen. More Bolter shields for whatever reason? Chaos Marines.
Also specialization makes Eldar in each edition flourish in some manner. So that's not a bad thing. Were Primaris slightly cheaper, they'd be so much better than any other Marine entry it's not even funny. Well outside Reivers which are terrible.
They literally said the differing roles is a better idea than the last incarnation. This makes them closer to how they feel in 30k, which is a welcome change.
You could build the same squad with the last incarnation. You just also got to do other things if you wanted.
Well now the new incarnation is more focused for the Heavy Weapon role instead. That's a better datasheet entry than "oh it's another unit that takes a bunch of weapons".
How is it better. Before I could build them to focus on heavy weapons like the new data sheet. I could also give them special weapons freeing up elite slots now that I don't need to take chosen. I could also take ablative wounds so every wound isn't crippling the unit. The new data sheet restricts, and that's rarely a good thing.
Yes because you're so limited on Elite slots? Take a Vanguard detachment if that's a concern. Take Renegades & Heretics if you need that CP.
Galef wrote: Even at Max 5 models, I still don't see why everyone is assuming they cannot have ablative wounds.
If you were taking 10 before (5 of which had to have bolters, and likely the Champ too), than why not just split that into 2x 5 with each unit only have 2-3 Heavy weapons?
You're getting the same (or MORE) number of Heavy weapons and can have the same "ratio" of ablative wounds if you want.
3 Heavies to 2 Bolters is a pretty good "sweet-spot" if you are dead set on expendable joes in the unit.
Is it as good as having 4 Heavies in 1 unit surrounded by 5-6 Bolter schmoes? Probably not, but it's not fair to say you cannot have ablative wounds for them at all.
-
You can't take bolter havocs. They no longer exist. Havocs have to take heavy weapons.
All my havocs are going into csm squads.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Just realized Havocs may no longer take guns from the special weapons list either.
God damnit GW, I was having so much fun with 10 melta guys in a rhino.
And you can still do the same thing, but with Chosen!
A: Despite the ability to unlock more Elite slots, Chosen are still limited by the rule of 3.
B: "That's under the assumption people actually take that many bolter shields to begin with." It's not an assumption. I took extra bolter bodies with my Havocs.
C: "specialization makes Eldar in each edition flourish in some manner." Exotic rules make Eldar flourish in some manner, and it's different in every edition. Being able to move without penalty is not on par with always hitting on 3s. Your own example of Primaris marines shows that specialization does not always mean better.
Units to concentrate Special Weapons
Space Marines Command Squads
Sternguard Squads
Vanguard Squads (dual plasma pistol load out)
Hellblasters
Interceptors
Chaos Space Marines Chosen
Havocs
Removal of options is generally bad. Imo this was a poor move in game design terms.
A: Despite the ability to unlock more Elite slots, Chosen are still limited by the rule of 3.
B: "That's under the assumption people actually take that many bolter shields to begin with." It's not an assumption. I took extra bolter bodies with my Havocs.
C: "specialization makes Eldar in each edition flourish in some manner." Exotic rules make Eldar flourish in some manner, and it's different in every edition. Being able to move without penalty is not on par with always hitting on 3s. Your own example of Primaris marines shows that specialization does not always mean better.
Units to concentrate Special Weapons
Space Marines Command Squads
Sternguard Squads
Vanguard Squads (dual plasma pistol load out)
Hellblasters
Interceptors
Chaos Space Marines Chosen
Havocs
Removal of options is generally bad. Imo this was a poor move in game design terms.
Marines do not have Possessed, Obliterators, Daemon Engines, Dark Apostles, etc. It isn't very relevant to call out special weapons when they have so many other tools.
A: Despite the ability to unlock more Elite slots, Chosen are still limited by the rule of 3.
B: "That's under the assumption people actually take that many bolter shields to begin with." It's not an assumption. I took extra bolter bodies with my Havocs.
C: "specialization makes Eldar in each edition flourish in some manner." Exotic rules make Eldar flourish in some manner, and it's different in every edition. Being able to move without penalty is not on par with always hitting on 3s. Your own example of Primaris marines shows that specialization does not always mean better.
Units to concentrate Special Weapons
Space Marines Command Squads
Sternguard Squads
Vanguard Squads (dual plasma pistol load out)
Hellblasters
Interceptors
Chaos Space Marines Chosen
Havocs
Removal of options is generally bad. Imo this was a poor move in game design terms.
And when you already have exotic shooting units like Noise Marines, Rubric Marines, Obliterators, Etc...what is your point? It was really just a want for cheap Plasma Guns. Chosen are only a point more for an extra attack, which would go a long way for a squad wanting to get close, right?
Also listing Vanguard is a total stretch and you know that (in fact, I'm not even sure why you would list them), and Sternguard get TWO Special Weapons outside the Combi-Weapons.
Also listing Vanguard is a total stretch and you know that (in fact, I'm not even sure why you would list them), and Sternguard get TWO Special Weapons outside the Combi-Weapons.
Disagree about Vanguard. It's two shot Plasma that deep strikes itself. I've even built a squad.
The fact that Sternguard mass Combi-weapons and not Special weapons is a non-starter now that combis aren't limited in shots.
A: Despite the ability to unlock more Elite slots, Chosen are still limited by the rule of 3.
B: "That's under the assumption people actually take that many bolter shields to begin with." It's not an assumption. I took extra bolter bodies with my Havocs.
C: "specialization makes Eldar in each edition flourish in some manner." Exotic rules make Eldar flourish in some manner, and it's different in every edition. Being able to move without penalty is not on par with always hitting on 3s. Your own example of Primaris marines shows that specialization does not always mean better.
Units to concentrate Special Weapons
Space Marines Command Squads
Sternguard Squads
Vanguard Squads (dual plasma pistol load out)
Hellblasters
Interceptors
Chaos Space Marines Chosen
Havocs
Removal of options is generally bad. Imo this was a poor move in game design terms.
Marines do not have Possessed, Obliterators, Daemon Engines, Dark Apostles, etc. It isn't very relevant to call out special weapons when they have so many other tools.
I dare you to count up unit entries from both books and compare.
Also listing Vanguard is a total stretch and you know that (in fact, I'm not even sure why you would list them), and Sternguard get TWO Special Weapons outside the Combi-Weapons.
Disagree about Vanguard. It's two shot Plasma that deep strikes itself. I've even built a squad.
The fact that Sternguard mass Combi-weapons and not Special weapons is a non-starter now that combis aren't limited in shots.
A: Despite the ability to unlock more Elite slots, Chosen are still limited by the rule of 3.
B: "That's under the assumption people actually take that many bolter shields to begin with." It's not an assumption. I took extra bolter bodies with my Havocs.
C: "specialization makes Eldar in each edition flourish in some manner." Exotic rules make Eldar flourish in some manner, and it's different in every edition. Being able to move without penalty is not on par with always hitting on 3s. Your own example of Primaris marines shows that specialization does not always mean better.
Units to concentrate Special Weapons
Space Marines Command Squads
Sternguard Squads
Vanguard Squads (dual plasma pistol load out)
Hellblasters
Interceptors
Chaos Space Marines Chosen
Havocs
Removal of options is generally bad. Imo this was a poor move in game design terms.
Marines do not have Possessed, Obliterators, Daemon Engines, Dark Apostles, etc. It isn't very relevant to call out special weapons when they have so many other tools.
I dare you to count up unit entries from both books and compare.
So basically your argument is "it can't take plasma anymore" if you're that determined to list Vanguard. Chosen are enough if you really want it at this point. Havocs actually do something somewhat unique now and points wise won't break the bank.
I dare you to count up unit entries from both books and compare.
It's not very relevant, because no one was loading up on all plasma all the time. Chosen can fill that role and do it much better than havoks did anyway.
Galef wrote: The real question is: Will Devs get the same rule AND T5?
Because you will be able to pay an entire Roman legion with the salt that will bring if they don't
-
Even without it they are still a better unit than Havocs.
Galef wrote: The real question is: Will Devs get the same rule AND T5?
Because you will be able to pay an entire Roman legion with the salt that will bring if they don't
-
Even without it they are still a better unit than Havocs.
Literally only because of the Cherub + Helfire exploit. That's literally it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Insectum7 wrote: ^"Havocs actually do something somewhat unique now "
Carry heavy weapons like they could before?
"So basically your argument is "it can't take plasma anymore" if you're that determined to list Vanguard."
How often do you, Slayer-Fan, choose a special weapon other than plasma?
Storm Bolters, typically. Otherwise yeah it'll be Plasma, sure.
Chosen were already a better for that though. You also missed the whole "hey look they got T5 and old school Relentless, so you got mobile infantry with heavy weapons and stuff".
Galef wrote: The real question is: Will Devs get the same rule AND T5?
Because you will be able to pay an entire Roman legion with the salt that will bring if they don't
-
Even without it they are still a better unit than Havocs.
Literally only because of the Cherub + Helfire exploit. That's literally it.
lol what the
Why is that an exploit? That's their rules, and it makes them way better than Havocs. Hell, Cherub alone makes them better than Havocs.
Is Havocs now being able move and shoot also an exploit? lol
Galef wrote: The real question is: Will Devs get the same rule AND T5?
Because you will be able to pay an entire Roman legion with the salt that will bring if they don't
-
Even without it they are still a better unit than Havocs.
Literally only because of the Cherub + Helfire exploit. That's literally it.
lol what the
Why is that an exploit? That's their rules, and it makes them way better than Havocs. Hell, Cherub alone makes them better than Havocs.
Is Havocs now being able move and shoot also an exploit? lol
It's 2D3 Mortal Wounds for one turn.
And yeah that IS an exploit. It was made to work like that after an FAQ.
Old havocs started with bolters and changed them for heavies or specials. New havocs start with heavy bolters. I dont think bolters are an option because they never were but one could make a case for specials.
Of course I wouldnt because thats crearly the index rules reaching their breaking point when they were a concession for older players.
Also, arent new havocs called havoks? Thats technically a new unit.
Wait a minute, whaaaat? No extra bodies in the unit, obligatory heavy weapons, Sergeant defaulting to Flamer, T5. . . what is going on here?
No bolters in kit = no bolters in rules.
No thunderhammer in kit = no thunderhamm... oh wait.
Y'all remember when they gave all the Thousand Sons infantry inferno rounds in their bolters and even showed a picture of a Terminator Sorcerer converted with Scarab Occult bits to represent it? No, of course you don't.
Drager wrote: How does this new datasheet interact with the designers commentary about index options?
I'd say you can still play them in the old way, just like Combi-weapons on Plague champions or Plasma Pistols on Plague Marines.
The issue is that as mentioned above - Bolters were never a wargear option. They just started with them. That means that RAW you can't use the designer's commentary to access Bolters on the unit.
A: Despite the ability to unlock more Elite slots, Chosen are still limited by the rule of 3.
B: "That's under the assumption people actually take that many bolter shields to begin with." It's not an assumption. I took extra bolter bodies with my Havocs.
C: "specialization makes Eldar in each edition flourish in some manner." Exotic rules make Eldar flourish in some manner, and it's different in every edition. Being able to move without penalty is not on par with always hitting on 3s. Your own example of Primaris marines shows that specialization does not always mean better.
Units to concentrate Special Weapons
Space Marines Command Squads
Sternguard Squads
Vanguard Squads (dual plasma pistol load out)
Hellblasters
Interceptors
Chaos Space Marines Chosen
Havocs
Removal of options is generally bad. Imo this was a poor move in game design terms.
A: Despite the ability to unlock more Elite slots, Chosen are still limited by the rule of 3.
B: "That's under the assumption people actually take that many bolter shields to begin with." It's not an assumption. I took extra bolter bodies with my Havocs.
C: "specialization makes Eldar in each edition flourish in some manner." Exotic rules make Eldar flourish in some manner, and it's different in every edition. Being able to move without penalty is not on par with always hitting on 3s. Your own example of Primaris marines shows that specialization does not always mean better.
Units to concentrate Special Weapons
Space Marines Command Squads
Sternguard Squads
Vanguard Squads (dual plasma pistol load out)
Hellblasters
Interceptors
Chaos Space Marines Chosen
Havocs
Removal of options is generally bad. Imo this was a poor move in game design terms.
If two plasma pistols is the high, high bar you've taken, then you must add the following to the chaos side :
Bikers (two special weapons in a three man unit)
Raptors (two in a five man unit)
Fallen (same ratio as chosen)*
Khorne Berzerkers (two plasma pistols)
Plague Marines (two for a 5 man squad)
*Have to be taken in their own detachment, but taking three units shouldn't be a problem anyway, on account of you stating that twelve special weapons ain't enough for you.
PS : Those numbers are without the champion who usually can take a combi-weapon.
Insectum7 wrote: ^"Havocs actually do something somewhat unique now "
Carry heavy weapons like they could before?
...They move and fire heavy weapons without penalty? Like. That's what the whole thread is about. You cannot have missed this
They already did something unique in the codex, which is load up on a multitude of heavy weapons on power armored marines.
Move and fire is a unique rule for that purpose, sure. But a better way to do it would have been to keep T4, keep the option for regular bodies and keep the option for specials at the same time. It encourages heavy weapons without forcing it, doesn't interfere with some older builds using specials, and doesn't create the odd situation where a marine with heavy in a havoc squad being T5, while the same model in a CSM squad being T4.
Insectum7 wrote: ^"Havocs actually do something somewhat unique now "
Carry heavy weapons like they could before?
...They move and fire heavy weapons without penalty? Like. That's what the whole thread is about. You cannot have missed this
They already did something unique in the codex, which is load up on a multitude of heavy weapons on power armored marines.
Move and fire is a unique rule for that purpose, sure. But a better way to do it would have been to keep T4, keep the option for regular bodies and keep the option for specials at the same time. It encourages heavy weapons without forcing it, doesn't interfere with some older builds using specials, and doesn't create the odd situation where a marine with heavy in a havoc squad being T5, while the same model in a CSM squad being T4.
Listen pal, if "literally the exact same thing as the troop except can take different wargear" is your definition of unique then you gotta raise your standards a bit.
Insectum7 wrote: ^"Havocs actually do something somewhat unique now "
Carry heavy weapons like they could before?
...They move and fire heavy weapons without penalty? Like. That's what the whole thread is about. You cannot have missed this
They already did something unique in the codex, which is load up on a multitude of heavy weapons on power armored marines.
Move and fire is a unique rule for that purpose, sure. But a better way to do it would have been to keep T4, keep the option for regular bodies and keep the option for specials at the same time. It encourages heavy weapons without forcing it, doesn't interfere with some older builds using specials, and doesn't create the odd situation where a marine with heavy in a havoc squad being T5, while the same model in a CSM squad being T4.
Listen pal, if "literally the exact same thing as the troop except can take different wargear" is your definition of unique then you gotta raise your standards a bit.
well, in that way, making it unique by slapping +1 toughness and relentless is as lazy and uninspiring as "unique" can go honestly.
A: Despite the ability to unlock more Elite slots, Chosen are still limited by the rule of 3.
B: "That's under the assumption people actually take that many bolter shields to begin with." It's not an assumption. I took extra bolter bodies with my Havocs.
C: "specialization makes Eldar in each edition flourish in some manner." Exotic rules make Eldar flourish in some manner, and it's different in every edition. Being able to move without penalty is not on par with always hitting on 3s. Your own example of Primaris marines shows that specialization does not always mean better.
Units to concentrate Special Weapons
Space Marines Command Squads
Sternguard Squads
Vanguard Squads (dual plasma pistol load out)
Hellblasters
Interceptors
Chaos Space Marines Chosen
Havocs
Removal of options is generally bad. Imo this was a poor move in game design terms.
If two plasma pistols is the high, high bar you've taken, then you must add the following to the chaos side :
Bikers (two special weapons in a three man unit)
Raptors (two in a five man unit)
Fallen (same ratio as chosen)*
Khorne Berzerkers (two plasma pistols)
Plague Marines (two for a 5 man squad)
*Have to be taken in their own detachment, but taking three units shouldn't be a problem anyway, on account of you stating that twelve special weapons ain't enough for you.
You may have noticed the warning on the prior page, but I'll point out the issue being saturatuon here. (Not to mention loyalists can match the bikes). Chaos tops out at 5 models with specials like plasma in a squad. Vanguard, not even carrying "official" specials, get the equivalent of ten models, being the entire squad. Three Vanguard squads can alone field the maximum plasma equivalent that all those chosen and fallen with specials combined.
I don't really understand the disconnect about Vanguard. Dual plasma pistols acts like a plasmagun in rapid fire range in most circumstances, except costs a point less. They function like Jump Marines with all plasmaguns. Or Sternguard with plasma that only pay 20 points for a drop pod.
Anyways thats the last I'll respond to that line of posts.
Listen pal, if "literally the exact same thing as the troop except can take different wargear" is your definition of unique then you gotta raise your standards a bit.
Any other choice in the book allow for infantry loading up on a bunch of Lascannons?
Regarding "Index" options for Havocs: As several have stated above, Bolters were never an "option" for them, just the default weapon.
That also means you cannot take Combi-/Special weapons either, since you need to swap a Bolter for those...which you don't have.
Overall, I do not think this is a bad thing since:
A) the Champion can still take Specials/Combis apparently and
B) Chosen are supposed to be the Special/Combi-weapon unit
As long as GW takes steps to be consistent (i.e. give Devs a new datasheet that makes them T5 with HBs as the default weapon) than I think everything will be fine.
Galef wrote: Regarding "Index" options for Havocs: As several have stated above, Bolters were never an "option" for them, just the default weapon.
That also means you cannot take Combi-/Special weapons either, since you need to swap a Bolter for those...which you don't have.
Overall, I do not think this is a bad thing since:
A) the Champion can still take Specials/Combis apparently and
B) Chosen are supposed to be the Special/Combi-weapon unit
As long as GW takes steps to be consistent (i.e. give Devs a new datasheet that makes them T5 with HBs as the default weapon) than I think everything will be fine.
-
The T5 thing actually makes havocs unique, which I like.
However, Chosen are 'veterans', so are inherently different units than Havocs. The removal of those options was stupid imo, looking from more than purely a rules perspective. (Which I look at it from somewhat, rules aren't everything, fluff wise veterans being the only ones with special weapons en masse seems silly when them being better in combat would seem to indicate they should be getting up close and personal)
GW is moving increasingly towards specialized units, or rather, units with very specific options. If Oldmarines are going to be with us for a while (probably for years to come still) than I would expect changes just like this.
Havoc = Heavy weapons
Chosen = Special and/or melee weapons
Although Chaos =/= Imperium, there are obvious equivalents. Chosen are both Sternguard AND Vanguard Vets rolled into 1 choice, but without the Jump Pack option (because WarpTalons exist)
I think it's a nice rule change to be honest. As someone new(ish) to 40k rules, I always thought it was strange having "tacticals" that can take mostly bolters and some heavy/special weapons, and then having a separate unit (havocs or devastators) that can take. . . bolters and some heavy/special weapons. I know there's definitely more to it than that of course, but I like how the rules create just a bit more focus and flavor for the unit.
I like the T5 and the "relentless" rules as well as a bit of a compensation for loss of ablative wounds, because let's be honest: those ablative wounds were not very points inefficient to begin with. Now you can hide a small unit of 5 out of LOS turn 1, then pop out and fire. Or load them in a rhino if they ever become efficient enough. Sure, they can't pull Dark Reaper shenanigans, but I don't think Dark Reapers are the unit we should be balancing to.
The only thing not to like is that other models (dreadnoughts, preds, etc) haven't gotten similar rules. But, I don't think other units continuing to suck is reason to be upset that the new Havocs are improved.
Galas wrote: Old havocs started with bolters and changed them for heavies or specials. New havocs start with heavy bolters. I dont think bolters are an option because they never were but one could make a case for specials.
Of course I wouldnt because thats crearly the index rules reaching their breaking point when they were a concession for older players.
Also, arent new havocs called havoks? Thats technically a new unit.
No - GW is calling them Havocs. People just switch the c with a k sometimes.
Insectum7 wrote: ^"Havocs actually do something somewhat unique now "
Carry heavy weapons like they could before?
...They move and fire heavy weapons without penalty? Like. That's what the whole thread is about. You cannot have missed this
They already did something unique in the codex, which is load up on a multitude of heavy weapons on power armored marines.
Move and fire is a unique rule for that purpose, sure. But a better way to do it would have been to keep T4, keep the option for regular bodies and keep the option for specials at the same time. It encourages heavy weapons without forcing it, doesn't interfere with some older builds using specials, and doesn't create the odd situation where a marine with heavy in a havoc squad being T5, while the same model in a CSM squad being T4.
Listen pal, if "literally the exact same thing as the troop except can take different wargear" is your definition of unique then you gotta raise your standards a bit.
Not different wargear. Slightly more of the same wargear. The standard wasn't even there!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galef wrote: GW is moving increasingly towards specialized units, or rather, units with very specific options. If Oldmarines are going to be with us for a while (probably for years to come still) than I would expect changes just like this.
Havoc = Heavy weapons
Chosen = Special and/or melee weapons
Although Chaos =/= Imperium, there are obvious equivalents. Chosen are both Sternguard AND Vanguard Vets rolled into 1 choice, but without the Jump Pack option (because WarpTalons exist)
-
Chosen you should think of more like a Command Squad that can get a 6th dude for an additional weapon, as the whole melee aspect is covered in several different areas.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also Devastators have the Cherub and Signum to differentiate them.
Bharring wrote: Some of us *liked* that you had Marines, who could kit out differently for different roles.
The Cherub and Primaris and now the Havoc changes - GW is removing one of my favorite things about Marines.
And how are they still not being kitted out for different roles? The heavy weapons you take have the actual roles, not the Marines themselves. Ergo, the non-weaponry warhead simply makes them better at it.
This really is complaining for the sake of complaining.
"And how are they still not being kitted out for different roles?"
I suppose they still are, like how a Rhino and a Land Raider are kitted for different roles. Or how an Ork Boy and a Fire Warrior are kitted for different roles.
"The heavy weapons you take have the actual roles, not the Marines themselves."
The Lascannon makes you T5? But only sometimes? And you can fire it on the move, but only sometimes?
"Ergo, the non-weaponry warhead simply makes them better at it. "
Then why does the same Marine, with the same Wargear, have different rules just because a different icon is painted on his right shoulderpad? The specific point is I liked the fluff where a Tac Marine with a Heavy had the exact same loadout as a Dev with a Heavy.
"This really is complaining for the sake of complaining. "
I didn't realize I wasn't allowed to like the things I like.
I've done 2 GT's this year so far and AFAIK I was the only one that brought havocs. One was an 84 person event, the other was 60. I ran them as an IW Spearhead.
Bharring wrote: Some of us *liked* that you had Marines, who could kit out differently for different roles.
The Cherub and Primaris and now the Havoc changes - GW is removing one of my favorite things about Marines.
And how are they still not being kitted out for different roles? The heavy weapons you take have the actual roles, not the Marines themselves. Ergo, the non-weaponry warhead simply makes them better at it.
This really is complaining for the sake of complaining.
Bharring wrote: Some of us *liked* that you had Marines, who could kit out differently for different roles.
The Cherub and Primaris and now the Havoc changes - GW is removing one of my favorite things about Marines.
And how are they still not being kitted out for different roles? The heavy weapons you take have the actual roles, not the Marines themselves. Ergo, the non-weaponry warhead simply makes them better at it.
This really is complaining for the sake of complaining.
And you can still do the same thing, but with Chosen!
The chosen guys I already have...
Rule of 3 is a bitch.
Whatever, I'll just ask my group if I can use the old havoc datasheet, it's practically worse anyway.
Well if you needed more than 3 squads of plasma toters, there's other means to D2 weaponry. Obliterators are still good.
You're assuming I was taking plasma? Nah, I load those boys up with bolt pistols and power axes.
Which begs the question of why? Berserker Marines are only a point more...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: "And how are they still not being kitted out for different roles?"
I suppose they still are, like how a Rhino and a Land Raider are kitted for different roles. Or how an Ork Boy and a Fire Warrior are kitted for different roles.
"The heavy weapons you take have the actual roles, not the Marines themselves."
The Lascannon makes you T5? But only sometimes? And you can fire it on the move, but only sometimes?
"Ergo, the non-weaponry warhead simply makes them better at it. "
Then why does the same Marine, with the same Wargear, have different rules just because a different icon is painted on his right shoulderpad? The specific point is I liked the fluff where a Tac Marine with a Heavy had the exact same loadout as a Dev with a Heavy.
"This really is complaining for the sake of complaining. "
I didn't realize I wasn't allowed to like the things I like.
You clearly don't have a grasp on this. Okay then.
The Devastators and Havocs carry heavy weapons, but the ROLE is always going to be based around the weapon they're taking and how effective they are at lugging it around. Due to the special of T5/Relentless or Signum/Cherub, they do the latter part more effectively.
So yeah, you're complaining for the sake of complaining that Chaos Marines have something nice. Not that I expected much from Eldar players anyway.
Fundamentally this sounds like GW is finally admitting that Old Marines as per the V1 codex's didn't cut it in 8th edition.
It seems like they looked at what worked deathguard and decided that T5 was needed to make marines at 20+ points per model less of a autoloose choice.
The Chaincannon is just admiting that heavy bolters suck, this thinm is probably still not anti hoard enough and it too Generalist.
It probably should have been S4 but who knows why GW went with S5.
The move and fire without penalty who knows, it makes them playable but yes it makes no sence the arbitrary lines on who or what gets to move and shoot without penalty.
Which begs the question of why? Berserker Marines are only a point more...
I'm not playing a khornate army, so I don't take units that are forced to khorne.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ice_can wrote: Fundamentally this sounds like GW is finally admitting that Old Marines as per the V1 codex's didn't cut it in 8th edition.
It seems like they looked at what worked deathguard and decided that T5 was needed to make marines at 20+ points per model less of a autoloose choice.
The Chaincannon is just admiting that heavy bolters suck, this thinm is probably still not anti hoard enough and it too Generalist.
It probably should have been S4 but who knows why GW went with S5.
The move and fire without penalty who knows, it makes them playable but yes it makes no sence the arbitrary lines on who or what gets to move and shoot without penalty.
Yeah, S4 does a lot more for it to make it not do better against marines than guard.
Which begs the question of why? Berserker Marines are only a point more...
I'm not playing a khornate army, so I don't take units that are forced to khorne.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ice_can wrote: Fundamentally this sounds like GW is finally admitting that Old Marines as per the V1 codex's didn't cut it in 8th edition.
It seems like they looked at what worked deathguard and decided that T5 was needed to make marines at 20+ points per model less of a autoloose choice.
The Chaincannon is just admiting that heavy bolters suck, this thinm is probably still not anti hoard enough and it too Generalist.
It probably should have been S4 but who knows why GW went with S5.
The move and fire without penalty who knows, it makes them playable but yes it makes no sence the arbitrary lines on who or what gets to move and shoot without penalty.
Yeah, S4 does a lot more for it to make it not do better against marines than guard.
Well unless you're specifically playing Emperor's Children, I think you'll be just fine.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ice_can wrote: Fundamentally this sounds like GW is finally admitting that Old Marines as per the V1 codex's didn't cut it in 8th edition.
It seems like they looked at what worked deathguard and decided that T5 was needed to make marines at 20+ points per model less of a autoloose choice.
The Chaincannon is just admiting that heavy bolters suck, this thinm is probably still not anti hoard enough and it too Generalist.
It probably should have been S4 but who knows why GW went with S5.
The move and fire without penalty who knows, it makes them playable but yes it makes no sence the arbitrary lines on who or what gets to move and shoot without penalty.
You gotta think of it like this.
1 Rotor Cannon has two more shots. 2 Heavy Bolters have 2 less shots but an extra 12" of range.
Heavy Bolters are generally outclassed by Autocannons though so...
"The Devastators and Havocs carry heavy weapons, but the ROLE is always going to be based around the weapon they're taking and how effective they are at lugging it around. Due to the special of T5/Relentless or Signum/Cherub, they do the latter part more effectively. "
So a Tac squad holed up in a building consisting of 4 bolter-doods and a Lascannon are going to perform differently than the same 5 guys last week when they were a Dev squad with 4 bolter-doods and a Lascannon? In other words, the same guys, the same gear, and the same role? Same with Chaos Marine/Havoks, of course.
"So yeah, you're complaining for the sake of complaining that Chaos Marines have something nice."
Not at all. Chaos Marines should have something nice. But they shouldn't reinvent what Marines are to make it happen.
"Not that I expected much from Eldar players anyway."
I get that it's a cardinal sin to you to enjoy Eldar, but that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to also like my Marines.
I want the basic Marine units (Tac, Dev, ASM, and their counterpoints) to be viable. But I want them to still be the basic Marine units I know and love. This "Havoks get +1T/Relentless" style rule means they're not basic Marine units anymore.
And, believe it or not, not all complaints are about balance. I wouldn't want my Tacs to be T5 if my ASM and Devs weren't. Similarly, if you tried to make Dire Avengers T4 while the rest of the Aspect Warriors were T3, I'd also object.
The Chaincannon is just admiting that heavy bolters suck, this thinm is probably still not anti hoard enough and it too Generalist.
It probably should have been S4 but who knows why GW went with S5.
The move and fire without penalty who knows, it makes them playable but yes it makes no sence the arbitrary lines on who or what gets to move and shoot without penalty.
Heavy bolters don't suck. They just don't make the mathematical splash that chaincannons do. Additionally, CSM lacked access to something that could chew up infantry like a PGC does. But I'd bet a Havoc unit with 4 HBs would crush a 4 CC unit just based on range.
Hell with move and shoot it makes HBs more appealing as they walk back, they're dirt cheap by comparison, and you don't need to babysit them with lots of points.
The more I think on it the more i'm pretty sure my CC will go to CSM and then i'll have 4 AC, 4 HB, and 4 LC havoc units.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2):
Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord
Exalted Champion
Warp Smith
3x10 Cultist Squads
3x5 Chaos Space Marines
3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino)
3x3 Biker Squads
2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino)
1x10 Havoc Squad
1x Predator
2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway.
I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2):
Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord
Exalted Champion
Warp Smith
3x10 Cultist Squads
3x5 Chaos Space Marines
3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino)
3x3 Biker Squads
2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino)
1x10 Havoc Squad
1x Predator
2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway.
I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
A bunch of melta havocs are cool and all, but AC havocs will be hitting from turn 1.
Meltas tagging a 5++ knight at 12" will do 3.1 wounds at 27 points a model and then die. AC will do 1.8 each and every turn at 24 points a model that can move and shoot and it way more durable when they're out of range of any guns they would like to shoot them.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2): Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord Exalted Champion Warp Smith 3x10 Cultist Squads 3x5 Chaos Space Marines 3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino) 3x3 Biker Squads 2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino) 1x10 Havoc Squad 1x Predator 2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway. I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
A bunch of melta havocs are cool and all, but AC havocs will be hitting from turn 1.
Meltas tagging a 5++ knight at 12" will do 3.1 wounds at 27 points a model and then die. AC will do 1.8 each and every turn at 24 points a model that can move and shoot and it way more durable when they're out of range of any guns they would like to shoot them.
It's not about how good it is, it's about the fact that my army (Actual models btw), were invalidated because GW removed options which they could have left in and it wouldn't have effected much at all.
This may be an edge case, but unless GW allows us to use the old datasheet (Which is totally possible), it's invalidating some army's and that's just stupid.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2):
Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord
Exalted Champion
Warp Smith
3x10 Cultist Squads
3x5 Chaos Space Marines
3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino)
3x3 Biker Squads
2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino)
1x10 Havoc Squad
1x Predator
2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway.
I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
Iron Warriors literally had the ability to take Berserker Marines in the past...
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2):
Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord
Exalted Champion
Warp Smith
3x10 Cultist Squads
3x5 Chaos Space Marines
3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino)
3x3 Biker Squads
2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino)
1x10 Havoc Squad
1x Predator
2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway.
I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
Iron Warriors literally had the ability to take Berserker Marines in the past...
Did they? Well, either way there's still an issue because I need HS slots, I basically have to restructure the entire army, the berserker marines isn't the point
It's that GW removing options that people previously used within the same edition is annoying, it's invalidating armies and it's stupid.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2):
Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord
Exalted Champion
Warp Smith
3x10 Cultist Squads
3x5 Chaos Space Marines
3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino)
3x3 Biker Squads
2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino)
1x10 Havoc Squad
1x Predator
2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway.
I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
Iron Warriors literally had the ability to take Berserker Marines in the past...
They still do, some people (like me) don't use them. I do however use a lot of Havocs. So I'm pretty exited about the new changes.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2):
Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord
Exalted Champion
Warp Smith
3x10 Cultist Squads
3x5 Chaos Space Marines
3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino)
3x3 Biker Squads
2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino)
1x10 Havoc Squad
1x Predator
2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway.
I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
Iron Warriors literally had the ability to take Berserker Marines in the past...
Did they? Well, either way there's still an issue because I need HS slots, I basically have to restructure the entire army, the berserker marines isn't the point
It's that GW removing options that people previously used within the same edition is annoying, it's invalidating armies and it's stupid.
You haven't scratched the surface of this. At least you can play your melta havocs as melta chosen. I own 9 lictors. Used to have this thing for a full 9+ deathleaper army. then 8th edition comes, and Lictors become single model datasheets. No upgrade, no model up plus rule of three means that I simply cannot play 6 out of my 9 models ever again in this edition.
At least now people will be safe from my 9 lictor masterplan.
It's not about how good it is, it's about the fact that my army (Actual models btw), were invalidated because GW removed options which they could have left in and it wouldn't have effected much at all.
This may be an edge case, but unless GW allows us to use the old datasheet (Which is totally possible), it's invalidating some army's and that's just stupid.
Those models themselves are not invalid. They can still be CSM melta holders.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2):
Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord
Exalted Champion
Warp Smith
3x10 Cultist Squads
3x5 Chaos Space Marines
3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino)
3x3 Biker Squads
2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino)
1x10 Havoc Squad
1x Predator
2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway.
I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
Iron Warriors literally had the ability to take Berserker Marines in the past...
Did they? Well, either way there's still an issue because I need HS slots, I basically have to restructure the entire army, the berserker marines isn't the point
It's that GW removing options that people previously used within the same edition is annoying, it's invalidating armies and it's stupid.
You haven't scratched the surface of this. At least you can play your melta havocs as melta chosen. I own 9 lictors. Used to have this thing for a full 9+ deathleaper army. then 8th edition comes, and Lictors become single model datasheets. No upgrade, no model up plus rule of three means that I simply cannot play 6 out of my 9 models ever again in this edition.
At least now people will be safe from my 9 lictor masterplan.
That stuff does happen, especially with some of the more exotic units. The thing is, Havocs have been a stable unit for a loong time*. Essentially Chaos Devastators, who instead of having access to Multi-Meltas, Plsama Cannons, and recently Grav Cannons, have been able to take Special weapons, plus the standard CSM bolter/bolt pistol+chainsword to fill out the squad. Giving the unit some nice rules to boost their appeal, that's all great. Drastically reducing their options for no good reason? Why? It's not like they don't produce the models for the potential options anymore.
Here's hoping they FAQ it like the Chosen-Chainsword thing.
*~17 years since Chaos 3.5 book gave them access to Special Weapons.
~21 years since the 3rd Edition rule book created the unit.
The Chaincannon is just admiting that heavy bolters suck, this thinm is probably still not anti hoard enough and it too Generalist.
It probably should have been S4 but who knows why GW went with S5.
The move and fire without penalty who knows, it makes them playable but yes it makes no sence the arbitrary lines on who or what gets to move and shoot without penalty.
Heavy bolters don't suck. They just don't make the mathematical splash that chaincannons do. Additionally, CSM lacked access to something that could chew up infantry like a PGC does. But I'd bet a Havoc unit with 4 HBs would crush a 4 CC unit just based on range.
Hell with move and shoot it makes HBs more appealing as they walk back, they're dirt cheap by comparison, and you don't need to babysit them with lots of points.
The more I think on it the more i'm pretty sure my CC will go to CSM and then i'll have 4 AC, 4 HB, and 4 LC havoc units.
No-one should have the broken mess that is a PGC russ, but thats another issue.
Also you think range is going to matter on a 6 inch move unit with 24 inch range? Especially if you bring a rhino.
Also I whole hearted disagree marine Heavy bolters in 8th suck, they don't scare tanks, don't have the volume of dice to threaten hoards. The think carrying the bolter being overpriced kills it, T5 and relentless makes it less bad because the model holding it starts to justify it's point's, that doesn't make a heavy bolter a good statline for a weapon.
It's not about how good it is, it's about the fact that my army (Actual models btw), were invalidated because GW removed options which they could have left in and it wouldn't have effected much at all.
This may be an edge case, but unless GW allows us to use the old datasheet (Which is totally possible), it's invalidating some army's and that's just stupid.
Those models themselves are not invalid. They can still be CSM melta holders.
Yeah, but I have to basically restructure my entire army around this and almost definitely buy new models. The models aren't invalid, the units are.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2):
Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord
Exalted Champion
Warp Smith
3x10 Cultist Squads
3x5 Chaos Space Marines
3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino)
3x3 Biker Squads
2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino)
1x10 Havoc Squad
1x Predator
2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway.
I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
Iron Warriors literally had the ability to take Berserker Marines in the past...
Did they? Well, either way there's still an issue because I need HS slots, I basically have to restructure the entire army, the berserker marines isn't the point
It's that GW removing options that people previously used within the same edition is annoying, it's invalidating armies and it's stupid.
You haven't scratched the surface of this. At least you can play your melta havocs as melta chosen. I own 9 lictors. Used to have this thing for a full 9+ deathleaper army. then 8th edition comes, and Lictors become single model datasheets. No upgrade, no model up plus rule of three means that I simply cannot play 6 out of my 9 models ever again in this edition.
At least now people will be safe from my 9 lictor masterplan.
I haven't had a problem with heavy bolters, but they're not exciting.
They're not bad, my heavy bolter units have never underperformed, but they don't do anything exciting that makes me feel like I want to go out of my way to seek them out. They're pretty efficient at killing infantry, particularly medium infantry.
Definitely the move-fire and the existence of the chaincannon is really on the HB's toes. S4 or S3 would have differentiated it and stopped it from seriously threatening tanks, but it's just a better HB right now. It might actually be overkill and invite too much firepower on itself by concentration of cost on a fragile target.
The generic Heavy Bolter is a fine weapon. Should it perhaps be closer to 7-8 points? Maybe. But they do work. Strength 5 is good, and -1 can make a large difference.
No-one should have the broken mess that is a PGC russ, but thats another issue.
Also you think range is going to matter on a 6 inch move unit with 24 inch range? Especially if you bring a rhino.
Also I whole hearted disagree marine Heavy bolters in 8th suck, they don't scare tanks, don't have the volume of dice to threaten hoards. The think carrying the bolter being overpriced kills it, T5 and relentless makes it less bad because the model holding it starts to justify it's point's, that doesn't make a heavy bolter a good statline for a weapon.
Range matters. Given those two weapons the CC will never reach the HB as the HB squad can freely back pedal. Taking a rhino just makes them cost more and you'll be guaranteed to get popped and for your opponent to dump into them when they spill out.
The math of CC is great. The application of them won't be so stellar. HB might not be sexy, but they're not bad, either.
Bharring wrote: "The Devastators and Havocs carry heavy weapons, but the ROLE is always going to be based around the weapon they're taking and how effective they are at lugging it around. Due to the special of T5/Relentless or Signum/Cherub, they do the latter part more effectively. "
So a Tac squad holed up in a building consisting of 4 bolter-doods and a Lascannon are going to perform differently than the same 5 guys last week when they were a Dev squad with 4 bolter-doods and a Lascannon? In other words, the same guys, the same gear, and the same role? Same with Chaos Marine/Havoks, of course.
"So yeah, you're complaining for the sake of complaining that Chaos Marines have something nice."
Not at all. Chaos Marines should have something nice. But they shouldn't reinvent what Marines are to make it happen.
"Not that I expected much from Eldar players anyway."
I get that it's a cardinal sin to you to enjoy Eldar, but that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to also like my Marines.
I want the basic Marine units (Tac, Dev, ASM, and their counterpoints) to be viable. But I want them to still be the basic Marine units I know and love. This "Havoks get +1T/Relentless" style rule means they're not basic Marine units anymore.
And, believe it or not, not all complaints are about balance. I wouldn't want my Tacs to be T5 if my ASM and Devs weren't. Similarly, if you tried to make Dire Avengers T4 while the rest of the Aspect Warriors were T3, I'd also object.
Wait a minute! Do Havocs REALLY have T5 now? Could you please post a link to this info. If this is true it´s the most depressing sales driven rule change that GW pulled off in the last twenty years. Their armour looks the same as that of their mates which have a tactical role.
Strg Alt wrote: Their armour looks the same as that of their mates which have a tactical role.
Their armour might be similar, but as they all have to take heavy weapons, the bump in T represents the added mass (just my speculation at fluff justification) In "Tac" units, only 1 per 5 models can have a Heavy weapons, so it doesn't impact the unit's overall T As long as GW updates Devs to be the same, I like this change
This is kind of, well, disappointing. Why can a guy carrying a heavy weapon shoot better than a tank?
[Also, if a man can carry a lascannon, why does a predator have a lascannon as a main gun?]
Like Havocs are the only infantry that can move and fire, are you kidding... Though you are right about vehicles, its stupid that they are penalised when in the 21st century we have perfect gyro-scopic weapons, the abrams tank can sit a pint of beer on top of the barrel while moving. Though come to think of it SM's are pretty much tanks.
"Wait a minute! Do Havocs REALLY have T5 now? Could you please post a link to this info. If this is true it´s the most depressing sales driven rule change that GW pulled off in the last twenty years. Their armour looks the same as that of their mates which have a tactical role."
It's been discussed as fact on every page of this thread, but I'm not seeing it in the original post.
I really hope it's just some rumor, but we'll see.
It's in the new datasheets, seen in countless video reviews of Vigilus Ablaze & the new Codex. And it's not exclusive to the English version, hence I don't think it's a typo.
Strg Alt wrote: Their armour looks the same as that of their mates which have a tactical role.
Their armour might be similar, but as they all have to take heavy weapons, the bump in T represents the added mass (just my speculation at fluff justification)
In "Tac" units, only 1 per 5 models can have a Heavy weapons, so it doesn't impact the unit's overall T
As long as GW updates Devs to be the same, I like this change
-
I am not convinced. If you wear the same armour then you should get the same protective traits.
In addition, this 5-man squad now plays like a glass cannon unit. Take a casualty and lose instantly a heavy weapon. I don´t like it at all. They could have at least put TWO rotor cannons in the box as an incentive for a collector like me who owns a completely painted CSM army to buy two boxes of very nice marines to have a squad entirely made up of gatling cannons as they are my favourite heavy weapon. But nope! Every heavy weapon is represented two times and the one everybody and his dog craves just ONCE. Unbelievable! This is straight from the book "How do I piss off my customers for sure" and GW excelled at this technique again. Pathetic!
Edit:
This move & fire ability without penalties is an interesting design choice which was in the past justified by using suspensors attached to the heavy weapons. Though these suspensors were deemed as more advanced equipment in the lore and were thus only available for loyalists. As a consequence, I would expect the loyalists to get the same treatment for their heavy weapons carried by infantry as apparently nowadays in 40K every street corner vendor sells these items for a bargain.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
inirlan wrote: It's in the new datasheets, seen in countless video reviews of Vigilus Ablaze & the new Codex. And it's not exclusive to the English version, hence I don't think it's a typo.
Strg Alt wrote: Their armour looks the same as that of their mates which have a tactical role.
Their armour might be similar, but as they all have to take heavy weapons, the bump in T represents the added mass (just my speculation at fluff justification)
In "Tac" units, only 1 per 5 models can have a Heavy weapons, so it doesn't impact the unit's overall T
As long as GW updates Devs to be the same, I like this change
-
I am not convinced. If you wear the same armour then you should get the same protective traits.
In addition, this 5-man squad now plays like a glass cannon unit. Take a casualty and lose instantly a heavy weapon. I don´t like it at all. They could have at least put TWO rotor cannons in the box as an incentive for a collector like me who owns a completely painted CSM army to buy two boxes of very nice marines to have a squad entirely made up of gatling cannons as they are my favourite heavy weapon. But nope! Every heavy weapon is represented two times and the one everybody and his dog craves just ONCE. Unbelievable! This is straight from the book "How do I piss off my customers for sure" and GW excelled at this technique again. Pathetic!
Without getting to far into whether or not the change makes them better competitively, I like to look at it more like majority Toughness from prior editions (or even current DW mixed units).
1 Heavy weapons in a unit of 5-10 models isn't going to provide the mass enough to change the overall T of the unit.
But 4 out of 5 models coming default with a big bulky heavy weapon, plus the reinforcements to their grieves that both Havocs and Devs have, DOES provided the mass needed to affect the overall T of they unit.
Personally, I would have gone with +1W instead, but I want that for all MEQs, so that's neither here nor there.
T5 for Havocs, and hopefully Devs soon, can be justified
I've done 2 GT's this year so far and AFAIK I was the only one that brought havocs. One was an 84 person event, the other was 60. I ran them as an IW Spearhead.
I don't think the sky is falling. I just think GW is trying to make marines the attractive choice. Yeah there's some arguments about over why they have rules and such but baby steps
The Havocs' toughness isn't due to armour as much as it is to them fusing with their weapons over the millenia as stated in their fluff. Gamewise it helps differentiating units so Havocs and Devastators will be more than just mirror images.
Still, would've been cool to allow Havocs to have special weapons too, even with the other changes. Option pruning is usually bad, unnecessary or both.
I'd be fine with loyalists receiving similar changes just as soon as renegade knights get a full codex. Most of the really broken stuff falls under keyword imperium, and people are really complaining about havocs moving and shooting?
Move and shoot with no BS penalty. That is OK. I think I would rather have the re-roll 1 that long fangs get.
But I do agree that it is odd that they can do this, and all the 5th edition rule models that could ignore the heavy weapon rules do not. (Tank, bikes, terminators, dreadnoughts.)
What do people think of that crazy chain gun? H8 heavy bolter? All heavy bolters and deathspitters wheep.
^Deathspitters are Assault and only 5 points. There's little jealousy there. For Horde clearing Nids get the marvellous Devilgant squads that can fire 180 shots in a turn.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2):
Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord
Exalted Champion
Warp Smith
3x10 Cultist Squads
3x5 Chaos Space Marines
3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino)
3x3 Biker Squads
2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino)
1x10 Havoc Squad
1x Predator
2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway.
I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
Iron Warriors literally had the ability to take Berserker Marines in the past...
Did they? Well, either way there's still an issue because I need HS slots, I basically have to restructure the entire army, the berserker marines isn't the point
It's that GW removing options that people previously used within the same edition is annoying, it's invalidating armies and it's stupid.
What's there to restructure?
1. Your Chosen were used for melee for whatever absurd reason
2. Use a dab of red paint here and there
3. Suddenly you have Berserker Marines.
If you can't really find 5 points for each squad to drastically improve the melee output, I dunno what to tell you. Chosen have always been bad at it though. The Start Set with the Dark Angels vs CSM had the most ridiculous loadout ever.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2):
Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord
Exalted Champion
Warp Smith
3x10 Cultist Squads
3x5 Chaos Space Marines
3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino)
3x3 Biker Squads
2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino)
1x10 Havoc Squad
1x Predator
2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway.
I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
Iron Warriors literally had the ability to take Berserker Marines in the past...
Did they? Well, either way there's still an issue because I need HS slots, I basically have to restructure the entire army, the berserker marines isn't the point
It's that GW removing options that people previously used within the same edition is annoying, it's invalidating armies and it's stupid.
You haven't scratched the surface of this. At least you can play your melta havocs as melta chosen. I own 9 lictors. Used to have this thing for a full 9+ deathleaper army. then 8th edition comes, and Lictors become single model datasheets. No upgrade, no model up plus rule of three means that I simply cannot play 6 out of my 9 models ever again in this edition.
At least now people will be safe from my 9 lictor masterplan.
That stuff does happen, especially with some of the more exotic units. The thing is, Havocs have been a stable unit for a loong time*. Essentially Chaos Devastators, who instead of having access to Multi-Meltas, Plsama Cannons, and recently Grav Cannons, have been able to take Special weapons, plus the standard CSM bolter/bolt pistol+chainsword to fill out the squad. Giving the unit some nice rules to boost their appeal, that's all great. Drastically reducing their options for no good reason? Why? It's not like they don't produce the models for the potential options anymore.
Here's hoping they FAQ it like the Chosen-Chainsword thing.
*~17 years since Chaos 3.5 book gave them access to Special Weapons.
~21 years since the 3rd Edition rule book created the unit.
Because it's the same unit entry as Command Squads and Chosen and Devastators, which proves the main issue with Marines being that they're all the same unit except they get attacks as they get older. They finally differentiated them and now they can be priced on a different merit. Making CSM not just spiky Vanilla Marines is good.
This may be an edge case, but unless GW allows us to use the old datasheet (Which is totally possible), it's invalidating some army's and that's just stupid
Yeah, but I have to basically restructure my entire army around this and almost definitely buy new models. The models aren't invalid, the units are.
Dont be daft, there is no chance to use the old data sheets.
You most certainly have to restructure but you dont necessarily need to buy new models unless you want to be competitive.
If your just playing with friends just ask them to allow you to play with 1.0 codex with the last updates and not take any of the new rules. Simples.
If you are a competitive player just suck it up, that's how it goes.
Because it's the same unit entry as Command Squads and Chosen and Devastators, which proves the main issue with Marines being that they're all the same unit except they get attacks as they get older. They finally differentiated them and now they can be priced on a different merit. Making CSM not just spiky Vanilla Marines is good.
^Disagree.
Chaos is best when it runs the entire gammut from "bad marines" to "the lost and the damned marines". Some units are the closer chaos mirror of loyalist units (Lords, Sorcerors, CSMs, Raptors, Chosen, Terminators, Havocs). Other units are far down the spiral of chaos, (Daemon Princes, Cult marines, Obliterators, Posessed, Warp Talons). This way the player has the choices available to represent an army at various stages of corruption.
As both a CSM and a SM-player, I welcome everything that increases the difference between units.
Havoc's and Devastator's where basically the same unit in different armies, be it with teeny tiny differences.
Now they're different units in different armies, as it should be. CSM are not (just) spiky SM.
With that said, I do think that Devastators (and regular CSM's/Tacticals, but that's for a different topic) should get some buff, or at least alteration in the new C:SM-codex. The cherub is only really a gimmick for Hellfire rounds. When was the last time you saw someone pick 10 Devastators with 4 heavy weapons (that didn't include at least one Heavy Bolter?)
Sherrypie wrote: The Havocs' toughness isn't due to armour as much as it is to them fusing with their weapons over the millenia as stated in their fluff. Gamewise it helps differentiating units so Havocs and Devastators will be more than just mirror images.
Still, would've been cool to allow Havocs to have special weapons too, even with the other changes. Option pruning is usually bad, unnecessary or both.
This is the thing, Havocs T5 and moving and shooting is the issue, pruning options is.
This may be an edge case, but unless GW allows us to use the old datasheet (Which is totally possible), it's invalidating some army's and that's just stupid
Yeah, but I have to basically restructure my entire army around this and almost definitely buy new models. The models aren't invalid, the units are.
Dont be daft, there is no chance to use the old data sheets.
You most certainly have to restructure but you dont necessarily need to buy new models unless you want to be competitive.
If your just playing with friends just ask them to allow you to play with 1.0 codex with the last updates and not take any of the new rules. Simples.
If you are a competitive player just suck it up, that's how it goes.
I'll do that with who I can, but I know not everyone will. I don't play competitively, but the list has to be completely and I doubt it'll be functional without some new models.
Just have to hope for what you can, literally grasping at straws here to not have to completely change around my entire army structure.
1): I'm playing Iron Warriors, undivided, probably one of the least chaosy legions so I think it's silly to run a god specific unit in an army like that (As I leave all my units with no marks, they are undivided, not marked)
2): Iron Warriors Brigade:
Chaos Lord Exalted Champion Warp Smith 3x10 Cultist Squads 3x5 Chaos Space Marines 3x5 Chosen Squads (2 in Rhino) 3x3 Biker Squads 2x5 Havoc Squads (In rhino) 1x10 Havoc Squad 1x Predator 2x Rhinos
This is the list I typically run, the 2x5 havoc's have melta guns and the 10 havoc has heavy weapons. Now I can trim 5 guys from the Havoc Squad, but I have to remove all the melta guys and find something to do with them, as well as find other guys for my Heavy Support slot. This is making me basically rebuild my entire list, and at the end of the day I'm going to have to buy more new models than I planned because of it, which is very annoying as someone without that much money anyway. I've emailed GW asking if the old datasheet is valid in some way, not that I think it is, so you can see why I'm sort of miffed about this.
Them removing options is possibly going to force me to buy new models other than the ones I already planned.
Iron Warriors literally had the ability to take Berserker Marines in the past...
Did they? Well, either way there's still an issue because I need HS slots, I basically have to restructure the entire army, the berserker marines isn't the point It's that GW removing options that people previously used within the same edition is annoying, it's invalidating armies and it's stupid.
What's there to restructure? 1. Your Chosen were used for melee for whatever absurd reason 2. Use a dab of red paint here and there 3. Suddenly you have Berserker Marines. If you can't really find 5 points for each squad to drastically improve the melee output, I dunno what to tell you. Chosen have always been bad at it though. The Start Set with the Dark Angels vs CSM had the most ridiculous loadout ever.
1: Yeah, because they're a veteran unit and it makes sense for them to be used for melee. I made them out of FW and bitz, not the starter set.
Even if I made them berserkers, which I'm not putting god worshipers into my army, I still need more HS slots to fill the brigade and more points if you didn't notice.
Automatically Appended Next Post: My issue with the change is not that Havoc's are different, it's that they changed the core options of the profile, mid edition no less, and it's annoying. My chosen are made to be unique so havoc's really can't stand in for them even if the issues with slots didn't exist.
The removing of options like that which can in turn invalidate people's lists shouldn't be acceptable like that.
"Making CSM not just spiky Vanilla Marines is good"
Vehemently disagree.
CSM are the primary foil of SM. That's always been a major selling point to me. A Marine is a Marine is a Marine - just different kit. And, in CSM's case, a little corruption and diabolical devotion, too.
Obliterators are Devs that go full-on-Demon-crazy in the CSM book. Havoks are Devs that drink blood or get into sex/drugs/rock'n'roll or want to change things or are touched by His gifts.
Further differentiating Marines between Loyalists and their basic Chaos counterpart is a major step in the wrong direction. But so are Primaris, so I guess GW just doesn't want to do the setting I've enjoyed for so long anymore.
"What's there to restructure?
1. Your Chosen were used for melee for whatever absurd reason
2. Use a dab of red paint here and there
3. Suddenly you have Berserker Marines. "
And if I want CCCSM that aren't flying rodent gak-crazy Zerkers?
Because it's the same unit entry as Command Squads and Chosen and Devastators, which proves the main issue with Marines being that they're all the same unit except they get attacks as they get older. They finally differentiated them and now they can be priced on a different merit. Making CSM not just spiky Vanilla Marines is good.
^Disagree.
Chaos is best when it runs the entire gammut from "bad marines" to "the lost and the damned marines". Some units are the closer chaos mirror of loyalist units (Lords, Sorcerors, CSMs, Raptors, Chosen, Terminators, Havocs). Other units are far down the spiral of chaos, (Daemon Princes, Cult marines, Obliterators, Posessed, Warp Talons). This way the player has the choices available to represent an army at various stages of corruption.
Well now you have ultra corrupted Devastators instead and they're functionally different. "Mirroring" Loyalists is exactly the issue with many units and how they function.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: "Making CSM not just spiky Vanilla Marines is good"
Vehemently disagree.
CSM are the primary foil of SM. That's always been a major selling point to me. A Marine is a Marine is a Marine - just different kit. And, in CSM's case, a little corruption and diabolical devotion, too.
Obliterators are Devs that go full-on-Demon-crazy in the CSM book. Havoks are Devs that drink blood or get into sex/drugs/rock'n'roll or want to change things or are touched by His gifts.
Further differentiating Marines between Loyalists and their basic Chaos counterpart is a major step in the wrong direction. But so are Primaris, so I guess GW just doesn't want to do the setting I've enjoyed for so long anymore.
"What's there to restructure?
1. Your Chosen were used for melee for whatever absurd reason
2. Use a dab of red paint here and there
3. Suddenly you have Berserker Marines. "
And if I want CCCSM that aren't flying rodent gak-crazy Zerkers?
Obliterators are dudes that caught a bad flu. Havocs were simply not different, and that's why the unit entry suffers just like with Devastators (who got a Signum for free, and a Cherub for 5 points), which therefore made Havocs much worse. Then if you're just loading them up with Special Weapons, Chosen get more for less of a cost of opportunity (6 dudes can get 5 Specials and a Combi for more effective Strategem use), on top of having triple the attacks for a squad that was gonna get close.
Also if you don't want Berserker Marines, suck it up. Plague Marines are mostly lame but have that flail, Terminators were already more defensively inclined but fill that niche without being 19 points a wound without the offense of Berserker Marines. Possessed aren't terrible and Mutilators are just below mediocre this edition.
You have options and honestly Chosen weren't ever one to begin with.
MinscS2 wrote: As both a CSM and a SM-player, I welcome everything that increases the difference between units.
Havoc's and Devastator's where basically the same unit in different armies, be it with teeny tiny differences.
Now they're different units in different armies, as it should be. CSM are not (just) spiky SM.
I disagree about the "teeny tiny" differences. You could run them with all special weapons and cc weapons if you wanted.
MinscS2 wrote: The cherub is only really a gimmick for Hellfire rounds. When was the last time you saw someone pick 10 Devastators with 4 heavy weapons (that didn't include at least one Heavy Bolter?)
My default is to take three Devastator squads with extra 4-5 extra bodies, one squad has four heavies, one with three and Missile Launcher, and one with three and HB.
Well now you have ultra corrupted Devastators instead and they're functionally different. "Mirroring" Loyalists is exactly the issue with many units and how they function.
Spoken like a true junior game designer. In this case the "Design" case for functionality is outweighed by the "legacy" case for current collections, and the "lore" case for army customization and storybuilding. Especially since you could have hit the "design" goals without mucking with the other two.
I want the core units from each other to be just basic guys in power armour. Havocs shouldn’t have special toughness 5 nonsense. There’s no reason for it.
Then you can branch out from there with specialized units that have special rules and abilities.
But the core SM/CSM should be a good versatile unit that can outshoot combat units and out combat shooting units.
MinscS2 wrote: As both a CSM and a SM-player, I welcome everything that increases the difference between units.
Havoc's and Devastator's where basically the same unit in different armies, be it with teeny tiny differences.
Now they're different units in different armies, as it should be. CSM are not (just) spiky SM.
I disagree about the "teeny tiny" differences. You could run them with all special weapons and cc weapons if you wanted.
MinscS2 wrote: The cherub is only really a gimmick for Hellfire rounds. When was the last time you saw someone pick 10 Devastators with 4 heavy weapons (that didn't include at least one Heavy Bolter?)
My default is to take three Devastator squads with extra 4-5 extra bodies, one squad has four heavies, one with three and Missile Launcher, and one with three and HB.
Well now you have ultra corrupted Devastators instead and they're functionally different. "Mirroring" Loyalists is exactly the issue with many units and how they function.
Spoken like a true junior game designer. In this case the "Design" case for functionality is outweighed by the "legacy" case for current collections, and the "lore" case for army customization and storybuilding. Especially since you could have hit the "design" goals without mucking with the other two.
How is that junior game designer?
1. Most of the Marine units are priced around the same core unit
2. Core unit is bad
3. Most of the Marine units end up bad
4. Shift the design and problem solved.
Sorry I don't care about "legacy". Legacy and keeping things the same is the main problem!
How is that junior game designer?
1. Most of the Marine units are priced around the same core unit
2. Core unit is bad
3. Most of the Marine units end up bad
4. Shift the design and problem solved.
Sorry I don't care about "legacy". Legacy and keeping things the same is the main problem!
Because "game mechanics uber alles!", which includes not caring about "legacy", lore etc. is the sort of reductionist thinking typical of inexperience. It's a useful way to frame problems, but not being able to take a more hollistic approach belies a misunderstanding of the product, generally speaking.
For example, even your numeric breakdown gives us other options to take. If "core unit is bad", why not simply address the issues with the core unit rather than spinning off the sub-unit and fracturing the design space? It's pretty obvious there are other roads to take to address your apparent issue without taking options away from others who prefer the traditional version of the unit.
Furthermore, it doesn't even appear that the new version of Havocs addressed the issue of "core unit is bad", unless you think that T5 would fix marines as a whole. Which also doesn't seem to make sense, as you're constantly saying that marines need to hit harder rather than be more durable. And if that's the case, they could have been given move and fire and their new weapon, without changing anything else in the unit, and that would have gone some distance to satisfy your issue with their offensive output, but not changed anything regarding legacy deployment style. People could have continued to run them as they traditionally have if they wanted to.
I disagree about the "teeny tiny" differences. You could run them with all special weapons and cc weapons if you wanted.
*Sigh*
I didn't think I had to spell it out that I was talking about running them with heavy weapon loadouts, but obviously I did...
Well, the old entry allowed both. If the old entry allowed both the "mirror build" and the "different units in different army build", then it would appear that a solution for the desire to differentiate was already built into the unit, no?
Also if you don't want Berserker Marines, suck it up
And this is the bad attitude here. We shouldn't have to compromise the fluff of our armies because GW can't balance units and removes options from our lists.
"How is that junior game designer?"
Because you're only looking at one aspect - the specific crunch between a very small subset of specific units.
A more senior designer (of games or anything else) considers a much wider variety of concerns. And has a deeper understanding of the tradeoffs.
For instance, a more senior game designer would look to find a way to manage both balance and narrative. The idea of throwing out the primary foil of the primary protaganist of the setting is, at the very least, questionable. How do you show what Marines truly are if you drop the demonstration of the road not taken?
Further, a more senior game designer would see "[multiple book's] Core unit is bad" as a problem for multiple books, not a problem with a single specific variation on that unit.
Shifting the design in a subset of the rules to fix one side of a matched pair is just amateurish. Even from a pure balance perspective, throwing out everything else about the game, you're fixing a tiny subset of the problem while exacerbating the problem everywhere else. Such a local fix does make one thing better, but actually makes the entire game worse. It's a net negative.
TLR - design, beyond trivial systems, is not a trivial problem.
"Sorry I don't care about "legacy". Legacy and keeping things the same is the main problem!"
Not caring about something doesn't mean you must demand no-one else may care about it.
How is that junior game designer?
1. Most of the Marine units are priced around the same core unit
2. Core unit is bad
3. Most of the Marine units end up bad
4. Shift the design and problem solved.
Sorry I don't care about "legacy". Legacy and keeping things the same is the main problem!
Because "game mechanics uber alles!", which includes not caring about "legacy", lore etc. is the sort of reductionist thinking typical of inexperience. It's a useful way to frame problems, but not being able to take a more hollistic approach belies a misunderstanding of the product, generally speaking.
For example, even your numeric breakdown gives us other options to take. If "core unit is bad", why not simply address the issues with the core unit rather than spinning off the sub-unit and fracturing the design space? It's pretty obvious there are other roads to take to address your apparent issue without taking options away from others who prefer the traditional version of the unit.
Furthermore, it doesn't even appear that the new version of Havocs addressed the issue of "core unit is bad", unless you think that T5 would fix marines as a whole. Which also doesn't seem to make sense, as you're constantly saying that marines need to hit harder rather than be more durable. And if that's the case, they could have been given move and fire and their new weapon, without changing anything else in the unit, and that would have gone some distance to satisfy your issue with their offensive output, but not changed anything regarding legacy deployment style. People could have continued to run them as they traditionally have if they wanted to.
I disagree about the "teeny tiny" differences. You could run them with all special weapons and cc weapons if you wanted.
*Sigh*
I didn't think I had to spell it out that I was talking about running them with heavy weapon loadouts, but obviously I did...
Well, the old entry allowed both. If the old entry allowed both the "mirror build" and the "different units in different army build", then it would appear that a solution for the desire to differentiate was already built into the unit, no?
I'm not allowed to address your core unit because you care about legacy. For instance, I did a small proposal for Tactical Marines, and you immediately said no to it because taking ANYTHING above the single special and single heavy in a 10 man squad was "against the fluff". That's not even counting your whole spiel of "nah everything is fine" when it clearly isn't.
Also the fix addressed a few different issues, actually:
1. What's the non-absurd point of fixing durability for a squad carrying mostly heavy weapons, in which the weapons can cost more than the model itself!
2. Lost offense when moving said heavy weapons
3. Why use them to tote Special Weapons when other units do that so much better?
Now point 3 isn't even an issue, and the first two points are fixed.
"What's the non-absurd point of fixing durability for a squad carrying mostly heavy weapons, in which the weapons can cost more than the model itself!"
1. Did they really "fix" durability? They're now T5, but can't take any chumps anymore - they have to pay for a heavy on every model. Not sure that "fixed" durability.
2. Why does carrying mostly heavy weapons provide +1 T if you paint your armor in blood, but not if you're a loyal space nazi, expendable grunt, or monastic space-elf?
"Lost offense when moving said heavy weapons"
Again, why are you better at shooting on the move if you paint your armor in blood, but not if you're a loyal space-nazi, expendable grunt, or piloting a super-tech dogfight-capable tank?
I'm not allowed to address your core unit because you care about legacy. For instance, I did a small proposal for Tactical Marines, and you immediately said no to it because taking ANYTHING above the single special and single heavy in a 10 man squad was "against the fluff". That's not even counting your whole spiel of "nah everything is fine" when it clearly isn't.
Also the fix addressed a few different issues, actually:
1. What's the non-absurd point of fixing durability for a squad carrying mostly heavy weapons, in which the weapons can cost more than the model itself!
2. Lost offense when moving said heavy weapons
3. Why use them to tote Special Weapons when other units do that so much better?
Now point 3 isn't even an issue, and the first two points are fixed.
If you're referring to the suggestion that Tactical marines be allowed to trade their heavy for another special, that doesn't do anything to help other marine units, which is the core of what you seemed to be looking to address. All that would do is address tactical squads.
Furthermore, there's other changes that could be suggested that wouldn't be against "legacy", such as the beta-bolters rile that GW actually implemented. When you say "I'm not allowed to address your core unit because you care about legacy" you're practically giving up before you've even started. You could increase the number of grenades that could be thrown per unit, further increase the number of bolter shots/remove the movement restriction on beta-bolters, make adjustments to ATSKNF, change the aura mechanics, etc. All of which could improve every basic marine unit without changing the makeup of the units themselves.
Even then, you can already field Tac marines in squads of five and generate four specials per 10 guys, and you continually say that one should never use more than min squad sizes for morale purposes. So your suggestion isn't even applicable to what you usually recommend. Your proposed solution doesn't appear to fix your issue to begin with.
I can understand people that is upset Havocs can't take anymore special weapons or go up to 10.
Personally I always found that having a unit like devastators/havocs, and tactical/csm that are basically the same unit but with a different proportion of special weapons a bit silly.
But the devastator route was better than the Havoc one. Now Devastators can still be up to 10 with 4 heavy weapons, and they have their cherub, and the sargeant has the hability to give +1 to hit representing that hes equiped to support heavy weapon units.
Havocs having special rules to represent their sturdier armour (Thats why they have T5, look at the armor, is heavier with that plate thing in front) and their hability to shoot stabiliced is good, it helps making them their own thing. Removing the hability to go up to 10 or taking special weapons isn't.
was cut short by 
