Don't bolters also wound on a 2+ (or is it a 3+, can't remember off the top of my head) and ignore their armour? In fact, that's pretty much every basic weapon in the game except yours.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Don't bolters also wound on a 2+ (or is it a 3+, can't remember off the top of my head) and ignore their armour? In fact, that's pretty much every basic weapon in the game except yours.
Bolters wound on a 3+ and ignore the 5+ armor. Some IG players just haven't figured out that guardsmen are priced to die.
To clarify, let's look at Tau shooting vs meqs and geqs. Let's give the tau two marker light counters. Against the geq, let's ignore cover. Against meq, let's get +2 BS.
See how the tau are killing 2.59 pts/shot of meq and 2.08 pts/shot of guardsmen. Learn to understand how the IG works if you want to win with it.
Oh, and that was a TACTICAL marine. Which no one uses. Sub in a sternguard. Now we are up to 4.07 pts/shot. Or how about a terminator? 3.2 pts/shot. Or god forbid a vanguard with a power weapon at 7.4 pts/shot.
Bharring wrote: I can't be the only one who's assaulted things with Fire Warriors...
Enough of them can do a wound or two!
not against 2+ armor they cant, statistically speaking 3 guys out of 10 would hit , and less than 1 would force a save, of those less than 80% of the time would you kill one. to put things lightly youd need at least 30 firewarriors in a single CC to kill 1 terminator reliable, but with this 2 attacks base terminators literally ANY terminator (that isnt an oblit) will kill 1-2 fire warriors each every turn their left alive. after 5 rounds of combat the terminators will have won so badly your fire warriors turn and run.
CC is only good if you want to slow someone down as tau as they basically NEVER win
master of ordinance wrote: Wait, Tau actually have CC stats? I thought they just removed them a while back as they where never used.
I recently played an APOC Game of SM vs Tau,
Calgar had 1W left and charged two firewarriors. Somehow he missed with 6 powerfist hits and wounds and the firewarriors hit back and wounded him. I rolled a 1 on my armor save but I luckily remembered my WL trait of 5+ FnP and saved myself form embarrassment and rolled a 6.
I always like charging vehicles with EMP grenades. It's pretty much my main anti-heavy armour tactic, as I have bad luck with melta-cides. Also, occasionally using a donkey-punch commander to mess with people.
Or when you have 2 6-man fire warrior squads with Pulse Carbines, each with 2xDrones, and there is a single remaining Berserker.
You don't need to beat great CC units on paper to be worth assaulting with. You just need to be able to beat the poor sod in front of you.
(And those 2,MLs thrown in above for free - that's 44pts of Pathfinders.)
OK, I'll bite.
Hotshot lasgun vs Pulse Rifle.
Pulse Rifle vs SM:
(1/2)(2/3)(1/3) = 1/9 kills/shot
Hotshot Lasgun:
(2/3)(1/3)(1) = 2/9 kills/shot
Lasgun
(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) = 1/18 kills/shot
PG on non-vet
(1/2)(5/6)(1) = 5/12 kills/shot.
Don't know points that well for IG.
Looks like Lasguns are half as good as Pulse Rifles. So the signature "crappy" gun designed to be weak but cheap is half as good as the signature "amazing" standard rifle, designed to be the best standard arm in the game. Sure, FW cost less than double a Guardsman, but still doesn't seem off to me.
Oh, and the PG definitely packs a punch per point compared to the Pulse Rifle.
I like carbines they spice up the game a lot, and people who haven't played by never expect tau to get up close an personal. One of the depressing things about the 6th book is that when a lot of new people picked up tau, they all went for the most obvious tactics, castling. So now people thing it's tau's only tactic.
never any reason to assault something with tau , being a initiative 2 army is crippling . Imagine always going last , in almost every scenario .
If there is anything worth assaulting , you better off just over watching it instead . ( Unless it vehicles , and you brought the fire warriors with emp grenades and you screwed up your list and included pulse carbine instead of pulse rifles )
kambien wrote: never any reason to assault something with tau , being a initiative 2 army is crippling . Imagine always going last , in almost every scenario .
If there is anything worth assaulting , you better off just over watching it instead . ( Unless it vehicles , and you brought the fire warriors with emp grenades and you screwed up your list and included pulse carbine instead of pulse rifles )
kambien wrote: never any reason to assault something with tau , being a initiative 2 army is crippling . Imagine always going last , in almost every scenario .
If there is anything worth assaulting , you better off just over watching it instead . ( Unless it vehicles , and you brought the fire warriors with emp grenades and you screwed up your list and included pulse carbine instead of pulse rifles )
Welcome to Codex: Orks (90% of everything is I2).
no reason why Orks are Int 2. baffles me that they would gimp them so hard.
kambien wrote: never any reason to assault something with tau , being a initiative 2 army is crippling . Imagine always going last , in almost every scenario .
If there is anything worth assaulting , you better off just over watching it instead . ( Unless it vehicles , and you brought the fire warriors with emp grenades and you screwed up your list and included pulse carbine instead of pulse rifles )
Welcome to Codex: Orks (90% of everything is I2).
no reason why Orks are Int 2. baffles me that they would gimp them so hard.
Because Orks used to be able to compete with Space Marines..... Ill let you guess where this is going.
kambien wrote: never any reason to assault something with tau , being a initiative 2 army is crippling . Imagine always going last , in almost every scenario .
If there is anything worth assaulting , you better off just over watching it instead . ( Unless it vehicles , and you brought the fire warriors with emp grenades and you screwed up your list and included pulse carbine instead of pulse rifles )
kambien wrote: never any reason to assault something with tau , being a initiative 2 army is crippling . Imagine always going last , in almost every scenario .
If there is anything worth assaulting , you better off just over watching it instead . ( Unless it vehicles , and you brought the fire warriors with emp grenades and you screwed up your list and included pulse carbine instead of pulse rifles )
kambien wrote: never any reason to assault something with tau , being a initiative 2 army is crippling . Imagine always going last , in almost every scenario .
If there is anything worth assaulting , you better off just over watching it instead . ( Unless it vehicles , and you brought the fire warriors with emp grenades and you screwed up your list and included pulse carbine instead of pulse rifles )
Welcome to Codex: Orks (90% of everything is I2).
Or codex Necrons
Cept everything lasts longer than Orks. 4+ FNP without Painboys
kambien wrote: never any reason to assault something with tau , being a initiative 2 army is crippling . Imagine always going last , in almost every scenario .
If there is anything worth assaulting , you better off just over watching it instead . ( Unless it vehicles , and you brought the fire warriors with emp grenades and you screwed up your list and included pulse carbine instead of pulse rifles )
Welcome to Codex: Orks (90% of everything is I2).
no reason why Orks are Int 2. baffles me that they would gimp them so hard.
Because Orks used to be able to compete with Space Marines..... Ill let you guess where this is going.
Funny you should say that given that Orks can still deal with marines pretty damn reasonably well. The grav-spam that every bemoans so much doesn't affect an Ork army nearly as much as others and is overkill on things like our trukks and battlewagons and our prevalent 6+ t-shirt save. I get you have a vendetta against SM players, but don't tie us Ork players with you.
Also, while I think there should be more variation in initiative for certain units in the Ork book (Grotz, for example deserve to be I4 like Ratlings, and at least I3 for sneaky/faster guys like Kommandos) I2 for the basic boy makes sense since it represents the creature's swiftness of reactions, Orks generally are pretty slow witted so I2 is justified.
Martel732 wrote: I don't see Eldar getting less shooty any time soon. Eldar players aren't going to magically stop using the official codex, so that puts us in an awkward position. The only option left to us is making Tau insane. Eldar are what they are.
This. Is it me or are those who are supporting the nerfs mostly eldar players? They come up with the false argument that it makes everything more fair and balanced, while their own codex sticks out as the pinnacle of overpoweredness.
Fine, now everything is nerfed to crap, they can play well against each other, but now, what about playing against eldar (who has been at the absolute pinnacle for 25 years) and necrons (who has been strong since 3rd)?
So now, our only options are spend 3-4 hours playing against eldar and get tabled, or don't play against them? The choice to make seems crystal clear to me.
Looks like Lasguns are half as good as Pulse Rifles. So the signature "crappy" gun designed to be weak but cheap is half as good as the signature "amazing" standard rifle, designed to be the best standard arm in the game. Sure, FW cost less than double a Guardsman, but still doesn't seem off to me.
I do know points well for IG, and just to throw some numbers out there...
Each Guardsman may cost a meager amount of points, but they bring very little to the table aside from weight of numbers and the ability to have a single Special/Heavy in each Infantry Squad.
The weapons you specifically pointed out?
Each Hotshot Lasgun is tied to a Scion. Scions necessitate a minimum points investiture of 70 points for 5 models; one of which has a Pistol/CCW(no Sergeants in this book carry their rifles unlike Tau).
Each additional Scion is 12 points. So 18" Rapid Fire S3 AP3(or S3 AP3 Pistol) is 3 points more than a Fire Warrior. That three points difference is because they're an Elites choice, because they're BS4, or the required Deep Strike rules(take your pick).
Lasguns come either 50 points for 9(remember--Sergeants don't get rifles!) in an Infantry Squad or 60 for 9 in a Veteran Squad. Both of those get you a T3 5+ platform that basically gets annihilated by Pulse Rifle fire.
Oh, and the PG definitely packs a punch per point compared to the Pulse Rifle.
Sure it does.
And a Plasma Gun costs fifteen points no matter if it's on a BS3 or a BS4 platform in the Guard book. So to add that "punch per point" compared to the Pulse Rifle, you're turning what is in some people's eyes already an overpointed model into an even higher points sink.
Martel732 wrote: I don't see Eldar getting less shooty any time soon. Eldar players aren't going to magically stop using the official codex, so that puts us in an awkward position. The only option left to us is making Tau insane. Eldar are what they are.
That's terrible logic because it stuffs like 10 match ups to fix one. Eldar are what they are. Let's not make that sentence Eldar AND Tau are what they are. One game ruining codex is enough.
So by your logic, only eldar, necron, da, and vanilla dex are allowed to win. The rest of us can't be brought up to their level because that would break the game. I get it now.
It means that codex power level should be balanced towards the mean, not towards the outliers. Especially not towards the outlier (eldar) that exists so far out that you have to redesign your entire graph to accommodate it.
The codexes you listed should be nerfed back towards the mean. Other codexes should be buffed towards the mean. That is how you make a balanced game, not by making every new codex the new best.
Vash108 wrote: Girls, girl, you're both pretty. Back to the topic!
Am I pretty?
Yes
No, you know that's exactly not what I'm saying. Nice strawman. Especially since for what I'm saying about Tau applies to the same armies you just mentioned.
FYI I'm a Nids, DE and CSM player. So I know the struggle. But buffing any of these races to Eldars level just complicates the game and unbalances it even further.
Bharring wrote: If everyone is BA, or new Tau, then things aren't unbalanced.
It's too late for that. Codex Eldar, Necrons, DA, and Vanilla marine exist.
Then the solution is to tone down those armies until they fit the mean of the power curve, and boost the armies that don't.
Make Scatbikers only take one heavy weapon per three models, go back to 6th edition Distort rules, and make the Wraithknight either a MC or 150 points more expensive. Increase the base cost of Canoptek Wraiths to 50 ppm. Make people have to pay for transports in the Gladius/Demi-Company.
We don't have enough concrete information available yet to judge the power of the new Tau. Any speculation as to their upcoming power level is completely unfounded and not worth talking about.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Because it is better for the money investment that w40k is and for fun one can get out of it when ones codex is like the eldar codex. What were the bad times for people playing eldar through the history? Some parts of one edition where they were only good, and not the best. I could live with 20+years of having great fun and 2-3 years of just having fun, compering to having fun for a year and then having 0 fun for 2+years.
It is like school or a job, as soon as someone reachs a high goal, it stops being a high end goal and becomes the norm that everyone now has to reach.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Because it is better for the money investment that w40k is and for fun one can get out of it when ones codex is like the eldar codex. What were the bad times for people playing eldar through the history? Some parts of one edition where they were only good, and not the best. I could live with 20+years of having great fun and 2-3 years of just having fun, compering to having fun for a year and then having 0 fun for 2+years.
It is like school or a job, as soon as someone reachs a high goal, it stops being a high end goal and becomes the norm that everyone now has to reach.
So lets completely throw balance out of the window, because I get salty when I lose!
Either deal with the fact that not every army is balanced equally, and everyone wants Eldar nerfs, and that the odds are stacked HEAVILY against you when you play them - or just don't play them. It is NOT a good thing if the rest of the game has to deal with multiple Eldar level dexes while there is dexes like CSM, SoB, Nids, Orks, Puppies, DE, hell even Daemons, GK and BA, are completely outclassed by a dex at that power level. God even Crons DA and SM are underpowered incomparison. Balancing Tau towards Eldars level instead of the rest of is ridiculous and it shouldn't even take explanation why.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Well of course he wants it buffed, he plays BA! But seriously, there are a few armies that are too strong right now, and the vast majority of them have newer codexes. Have you seen the Tau changes? They are incredibly minor, with a few units being added on and some formations being added. While Tau weren't OP, they were top of middle tier, or bottom of high tier depending on matchups.
This strongly suggests that other codexes strong codexes will not get nerfs.
Bharring wrote: If everyone is BA, or new Tau, then things aren't unbalanced.
It's too late for that. Codex Eldar, Necrons, DA, and Vanilla marine exist.
The other 3 are slightly above the majority while Eldar is outlandishly so. What they are to the rest of the game, Eldar is to them.
Well, slightly is kind of a subjective term. I guess it depends on who you consider to be the middle of the pack.
From my point of view, those armies are far and away too strong. Some of them is due to formations, and some are due to deathstars, but all of them are not fun games for my Chaos Marines to play in. I'm at the point now where I tend to leave them at home and play my space wolves instead. Not that CSM being shelved for SW is anything new in their history....
The point is, the new codexes, for the most part, are very very strong. Eldar, Necrons, DA, Marines, the Skitarri are all stronger dexes capable of amazing builds. Tau was a newish dex, and was strong (though not as strong as those, it can still play the game) and nothing got worse with them. They got a few units, and are getting a book of formations, and that is about it.
The odds that Eldar, Necrons, or any of the other armies that just got a codex are going to get nerfed are incredibly small. Heck, two of those armies, necrons and eldar, were incredibly strong already and got buffed!
You're much better off hoping that the weaker armies get massive buffs so everyone can play the game. It's not about what is good game design (because yes, nerfing eldar and the others would be the right move) its about what has at least a chance of happening.
You have to be realistic about these things.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Simple: because the "outlier" is not OP, it is just filled with really cool options and choices that allows the player to field a massive variety of different (and roughly equally powerful) armies that represent their full well; on the other hand, the "balanced" codices are bland and mediocre, they are mostly featless, lack options and flavor, and only have a few powerful armies while any other build range from "meh" to "sh*t".
Now, place your hand on your heart and tell me that you want all codices to be like the latter, rather than the former .
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Well of course he wants it buffed, he plays BA! But seriously, there are a few armies that are too strong right now, and the vast majority of them have newer codexes. Have you seen the Tau changes? They are incredibly minor, with a few units being added on and some formations being added. While Tau weren't OP, they were top of middle tier, or bottom of high tier depending on matchups.
This strongly suggests that other codexes strong codexes will not get nerfs.
Bharring wrote: If everyone is BA, or new Tau, then things aren't unbalanced.
It's too late for that. Codex Eldar, Necrons, DA, and Vanilla marine exist.
The other 3 are slightly above the majority while Eldar is outlandishly so. What they are to the rest of the game, Eldar is to them.
Well, slightly is kind of a subjective term. I guess it depends on who you consider to be the middle of the pack.
From my point of view, those armies are far and away too strong. Some of them is due to formations, and some are due to deathstars, but all of them are not fun games for my Chaos Marines to play in. I'm at the point now where I tend to leave them at home and play my space wolves instead. Not that CSM being shelved for SW is anything new in their history....
The point is, the new codexes, for the most part, are very very strong. Eldar, Necrons, DA, Marines, the Skitarri are all stronger dexes capable of amazing builds. Tau was a newish dex, and was strong (though not as strong as those, it can still play the game) and nothing got worse with them. They got a few units, and are getting a book of formations, and that is about it.
The odds that Eldar, Necrons, or any of the other armies that just got a codex are going to get nerfed are incredibly small. Heck, two of those armies, necrons and eldar, were incredibly strong already and got buffed!
You're much better off hoping that the weaker armies get massive buffs so everyone can play the game. It's not about what is good game design (because yes, nerfing eldar and the others would be the right move) its about what has at least a chance of happening.
You have to be realistic about these things.
I play DE, Nids and CSM there is no excuse for throwing balance out the window.
Also, I'm looking at the problem realistically. Way more so than you guys. What do you think the chances are of THE ENTIRE REST OF THE GAME being brought up to Eldars level? Equally as unlikely, if not WAY more unlikely than Eldar ever being nerfed. And then, assuming everyone was up there - Eldar sits where it does for one of two reasons, the person writing the Dex either thinks that this is currently balanced with the rest of the game, or they quite simply want Eldar to be stronger than the rest of the game. Whichever one it is, there is absolutely zero reason to believe that if the entire rest of the game was buffed, that Eldar wouldn't just be raised above them as well. Putting us right back to square one.
Regardless, it's beside the point. There is absolutely no reason to believe that Tau being made super OP like Eldar would have been any indication as to whether or not the rest of the cast will be turned up to that level as well. In fact, history tells us that it isnt.
So forgive if I'm not at all upset that we don't have two of these ridiculous dexes throwing out balance to a stupid extreme.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Simple: because the "outlier" is not OP, it is just filled with really cool options and choices that allows the player to field a massive variety of different (and roughly equally powerful) armies that represent their full well; on the other hand, the "balanced" codices are bland and mediocre, they are mostly featless, lack options and flavor, and only have a few powerful armies while any other build range from "meh" to "sh*t".
Now, place your hand on your heart and tell me that you want all codices to be like the latter, rather than the former .
Internal balance is a very different thing to external balance. This thread and the people in it aren't complaining that the units aren't balanced amongst themselves. They are complaining that the Dex isn't balanced in comparison to Eldar, while ignoring how it's balanced in regards to the rest of the game.
Besides, as said by the poster above me, these two things are not mutually exclusive. Can have all this without completely breaking the game for every other Dex.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Well of course he wants it buffed, he plays BA! But seriously, there are a few armies that are too strong right now, and the vast majority of them have newer codexes. Have you seen the Tau changes? They are incredibly minor, with a few units being added on and some formations being added. While Tau weren't OP, they were top of middle tier, or bottom of high tier depending on matchups.
This strongly suggests that other codexes strong codexes will not get nerfs.
Bharring wrote: If everyone is BA, or new Tau, then things aren't unbalanced.
It's too late for that. Codex Eldar, Necrons, DA, and Vanilla marine exist.
The other 3 are slightly above the majority while Eldar is outlandishly so. What they are to the rest of the game, Eldar is to them.
Well, slightly is kind of a subjective term. I guess it depends on who you consider to be the middle of the pack.
From my point of view, those armies are far and away too strong. Some of them is due to formations, and some are due to deathstars, but all of them are not fun games for my Chaos Marines to play in. I'm at the point now where I tend to leave them at home and play my space wolves instead. Not that CSM being shelved for SW is anything new in their history....
The point is, the new codexes, for the most part, are very very strong. Eldar, Necrons, DA, Marines, the Skitarri are all stronger dexes capable of amazing builds. Tau was a newish dex, and was strong (though not as strong as those, it can still play the game) and nothing got worse with them. They got a few units, and are getting a book of formations, and that is about it.
The odds that Eldar, Necrons, or any of the other armies that just got a codex are going to get nerfed are incredibly small. Heck, two of those armies, necrons and eldar, were incredibly strong already and got buffed!
You're much better off hoping that the weaker armies get massive buffs so everyone can play the game. It's not about what is good game design (because yes, nerfing eldar and the others would be the right move) its about what has at least a chance of happening.
You have to be realistic about these things.
I play DE, Nids and CSM there is no excuse for throwing balance out the window.
This is a straw man, as no one is suggesting that balance get thrown out the window.
As for armies, I own most of the armies in this game (except the multiple marine armies). I own Eldar, CSM, Nids, Orks, Tau, SW, UM, Necrons, etc etc. I don't own Skitarri, IG, and De.
What do you think the chances are of THE ENTIRE REST OF THE GAME being brought up to Eldars level? Equally as unlikely, if not WAY more unlikely than Eldar ever being nerfed.
Considering that Eldar have, never as an army, been nerfed even once by a new codex, while most armies in the game have, at one point in their career, been good/fun to build lists with?
Yeah, I think IG going back to having platoon selection and Chaos getting legion rules is much more likely than Eldar ever getting nerfed.
And yes, again, this is a strawman. No one is suggesting that the other Dexes be brought up to Eldar levels (at least I'm not, the person you quoted). I'm suggesting that it's more likely that the older codexes will get buffs rather than the new codexes get nerfs.
I'd be happy if everyone was about Tau strong. While the Tau are, currently, slightly boring to face, they are fun to build lists with and aren't too op unless your army is bottom tier.
And then, assuming everyone was up there - Eldar sits where it does for one of two reasons, the person writing the Dex either thinks that this is currently balanced with the rest of the game, or they quite simply want Eldar to be stronger than the rest of the game. Whichever one it is, there is absolutely zero reason to believe that if the entire rest of the game was buffed, that Eldar wouldn't just be raised above them as well. Putting us right back to square one.
I doubt eldar will be changed at all. Tau have an older dex then they do, and got very minor changes, some new units, and new formations. Eldar already have new units and new formations.
Any changes to eldar or necrons will be small, if there are any at all. Really, the other codexes being buffed is the only chance of a good change happening at this point.
Perhaps you do not recall but, right before the Eldar dex was released (and the necron one) most people thought the eldar/necrons would mainly get nerfed a bit and that GW would release balanced codexes. They were claiming GW wanted a low powered game, basing it on the Chaos book, among other. At best, they hoped the bad units in the dex would get buffed.
Instead, the Waveserpent was slightly nerfed and every other unit was buffed, with amazing formations. Necrons got wraiths with possibly the best formation in the game. Much "I told you so" was had by all.
Regardless, it's beside the point. There is absolutely no reason to believe that Tau being made super OP like Eldar would have been any indication as to whether or not the rest of the cast will be turned up to that level as well. In fact, history tells us that it isnt.
Again, strawman. Tau didn't get many buffs. Most of the new units are good and offer options, but aren't absurdly powerful like the eldar new releases were.
Tau are probably not going to go up or down in the rankings, just get more options. Considering where they currently rest, this is fine.
So forgive if I'm not at all upset that we don't have two of these ridiculous dexes throwing out balance to a stupid extreme.
That's fine, though I'd ask you to please stop using the strawman argument so much.
"Equally as unlikely, if not WAY more unlikely than Eldar ever being nerfed."
Eldar have never been nerfed, but there have been codices in the past that were as good or almost as good as Eldar. Your point is refuted.
The debate over balance seems silly to me. You pick an accessible point in the power scale and choose that as your balancing point. It doesn't matter where that point is. What matters, though is accessibility. Since Codex Eldar can't be balanced around Sisters, the only choice I see is to go up.
How the hell is it subpar
Fire warriors got better (already the best standard troop in the game) with added towers and new swanky gun if you want it
New stealth suit that you can't hit and nice guns and drones
The storm suit giving tau d weapon or away to kill mass troops and light vehicles and both these can be taken in 3's
Tau commander becomes a flying monsters creature if you like
Add all the cool op stuff they have just now tau are one of the best army's in the game and this release has added more to this.
pm713 wrote: Or you could pick a level and make everything go to that level. So buff bad armies like CSM and nerf OP armies.
We can't make Eldar go down. Eldar have never gone down and there's no reason to think they are getting a new codex anytime soon. In theory I agree with you, but I'm factoring in practicality here as well.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Except only one person is Eldar, and that's Eldar. The rest are not horribly balanced amongst themselves at least nothing a few up n down tweaks could fix to bring em all in line. Why would we balance towards the single greatest outlier, instead of balancing towards the majority's? Absolutely no reason. You just want your army buffed
Simple: because the "outlier" is not OP, it is just filled with really cool options and choices that allows the player to field a massive variety of different (and roughly equally powerful) armies that represent their full well; on the other hand, the "balanced" codices are bland and mediocre, they are mostly featless, lack options and flavor, and only have a few powerful armies while any other build range from "meh" to "sh*t".
Now, place your hand on your heart and tell me that you want all codices to be like the latter, rather than the former .
When I was talking about bringing armies into a balanced state, I didn't mean that everything should be brought down in power. There are plenty of armies with blandexes that equally need to be brought up in power so that the game is more balanced.
Bharring wrote:Its not either/or.
Outside WKs and Serpent Spam, the 6e CWE book had a lot of fun and balanced options.
The Necron book, outside Decurion and Wraiths, has a lot of fun and balanced options.
The SM book, outside Grav and Formations, has a lot of fun and balanced options.
It doesn't need to be OP to have a lot of valid options and be fun.
Are we talking about the same 6th edition Eldar codex? Where Howling Banshees are one of the worst units in the game, Striking Scorpions aren't much better, Swooping Hawks are useless, Fire Dragons and Dark Reapers are simply outclassed, Falcons and Vaul's Wrath aren't even worth fielding, and all the special characters are either ridiculously overpriced or useless.
For better or worse, the 7th edition Eldar codex mas given Eldar players a lot more option sin terms of how to play their army. The problem is that some units were made so absurdly overpowered in the new codex that they make all other armies, including Eldar armies, obsolete.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
They do just fine against those armies, provided the other person isn't just running the power units.
And the next person who makes an argument that brings up "Gladius gets free vehicles" is going to get roundly mocked.
Roundly mocked.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
They do just fine against those armies, provided the other person isn't just running the power units.
And the next person who makes an argument that brings up "Gladius gets free vehicles" is going to get roundly mocked.
Roundly mocked.
Well, yes, but I find that to be the case with pretty much all armies. A lot of OPness seems to come down to the other players power-gaming. Maybe it's just my area?
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
They do just fine against those armies, provided the other person isn't just running the power units.
And the next person who makes an argument that brings up "Gladius gets free vehicles" is going to get roundly mocked.
Roundly mocked.
Well, yes, but I find that to be the case with pretty much all armies. A lot of OPness seems to come down to the other players power-gaming. Maybe it's just my area?
The point I was making is that when we're talking about the "new hotness" top tier stuff, it isn't broken in and of itself. It's a combination of factors that make stuff broken.
In the Space Marine book, for example, you kind of have to actively try to make a broken list.
Nobody is going to accuse my 1st and 10th Company Task Forces with Raptor Chapter Tactics broken. But I start mixing and matching Chapter Tactics among the different formations to get the 'best' perks, start throwing in Allied stuff that is the best from its various Codices.
For Eldar, I don't think I've heard anyone complain that the Guardian Warhosts are broken--but when we start talking about the Windrider Warhost? Different story again.
When we talk about Tau though? It's not the units themselves that are powerful--and that's good! It really is! The only thing that makes Tau an army that I hate fighting is the way Markerlights behave. I would put Tau up higher than a lot of Tau players would, I think. But that's coming from the fact that they can completely shut down my best defense(Cover) with absolutely minimal effort.
The OPness of a codex is directly tied to said codex's ACCESS to OP builds. Not every build has to be OP. Although the 7th ed Eldar codex can field viable lists of random units...
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
They do just fine against those armies, provided the other person isn't just running the power units.
And the next person who makes an argument that brings up "Gladius gets free vehicles" is going to get roundly mocked.
Roundly mocked.
Well, yes, but I find that to be the case with pretty much all armies. A lot of OPness seems to come down to the other players power-gaming. Maybe it's just my area?
It's most likely your area.
There are...maybe 4-5 armies in the game that can't really face Eldar, Crons, or Marines unless the power armies spam their worst unit. A balanced force will wipe out a "Op" force of Chaos Marines, Dark Eldar, Blood Angels, or the other weak armies. Many Eldar cron or marine players don't own spammable levels of crap units (except marines, cause tacticals), so you're essentially asking them to spend money to handicap themselves. I say this as someone who owns armies in every tier.
There are also, in addition to the weak armies, another 3 or so armies that are forced to rip out 70% of their dex to remain competitive. IG, Nids, and a few others belong here. They can play with the big boys, but only if they only spam a few units that are very good, because the vast majority of their dex is awful. Sometimes this units are thematic or were good, so a lot of players own a lot of these bad units (genestealers, wyches, LRBT).
Compare that to Eldar, Necrons, or Marines. They can freely pick units and still go up against any of the other dexes if they bring a balanced force and expect a game. Very few (maybe 1-3) units in those dexes are just awful and unplayable, if there are any at all.
Granted, if the power level is brought up, Eldar, Necrons, and Marines might see themselves with 2-4 units that aren't very good instead of 0/1-3 like it is now. However, you'll see every other dex go from ripping out 70%+ of their dexes to including 70%+ of their dexes, which would be a great thing.
Honestly, if that happened, I'd drop WMH and go back into 40k with a smile. I like the universe more, but in WMH most factions only have a few crap units so I know my collection is still playable.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Tau are "one of the best armies in the game"? News to me. The tau codex is upper mid tier.
Upper mid tier still makes you one of the best armies in the game when it consists of less than 20 armies, several of which are downright gak in terms of power comparison (DE, BA,Orks, CSM, IG).
Eh, semantics I guess. They are in noway comparable to the more powerful armies.
They do just fine against those armies, provided the other person isn't just running the power units.
And the next person who makes an argument that brings up "Gladius gets free vehicles" is going to get roundly mocked. Roundly mocked.
Well, yes, but I find that to be the case with pretty much all armies. A lot of OPness seems to come down to the other players power-gaming. Maybe it's just my area?
The point I was making is that when we're talking about the "new hotness" top tier stuff, it isn't broken in and of itself. It's a combination of factors that make stuff broken.
In the Space Marine book, for example, you kind of have to actively try to make a broken list. Nobody is going to accuse my 1st and 10th Company Task Forces with Raptor Chapter Tactics broken. But I start mixing and matching Chapter Tactics among the different formations to get the 'best' perks, start throwing in Allied stuff that is the best from its various Codices. For Eldar, I don't think I've heard anyone complain that the Guardian Warhosts are broken--but when we start talking about the Windrider Warhost? Different story again.
Oh, I agree completely, it's just that I tend to measure maximum army strength at the maximum power level they can achieve (so, as broken as possible), although I dislike that way of playing. The maximum tau brokenness is far less than the most powerful armies. It did use to be extremely high before 7th hit, but 7th removed most of the shenanigans that powered them up to that level (joining riptides, eldar BB, ect.).
Edit: Oh, and I definitely agree on markerlights, I really wish they were brought back to how they were in 4th. -1 cover worked well withouth being OP, and the -ld was fun to go after high-value units, possibly killing them outright, and if not, then reducing their effectiveness.
Well, yes, but I find that to be the case with pretty much all armies. A lot of OPness seems to come down to the other players power-gaming. Maybe it's just my area?
I play Eldar, I don't use Wraithknights or Wraithguard and I don't spam Scatterlaser jetbikes. I'm 0/5 in terms of wins against new Necrons. My Necron friend doesn't even use too many "OP" combos, and he tends to throw different armies at me each time we play. In the end it doesn't really matter, it's so hard to kill all of his stuff that I can't seem to pull out a win. Personally my experience is that Eldar have a few OP tools in their toolbox, like D Weapons from Wraithguard and the Wraithknight who is an under-costed Gargantuan. But if you don't use those specific models? Eldar seems to pale in comparison to the power of the Necron codex by a pretty large margin.
When I see SOO much hate against Eldar it leads me to believe that most Eldar players powergame a hell of a lot more than I do. Granted though, using Wraithguard or a Wraithknight is a pretty low bar for defining "powergaming". They're just units in the codex.
I was chatting with my Necron friend the other day, and discussing the un-assembled Wraithknight I have and how I might want to use it someday. I mentioned that maybe we'd houserule the Wraithknight to only be a Monstrous Creature instead of Gargantuan to balance it out, or change the D Weapons to be what they were in the 6th Edition codex. Then after we talked about it I thought to myself, "He beats me every game! Maybe I shouldn't be houseruling my own units to be less powerful!"
Oh, I agree completely, it's just that I tend to measure maximum army strength at the maximum power level they can achieve (so, as broken as possible), although I dislike that way of playing. The maximum tau brokenness is far less than the most powerful armies. It did use to be extremely high before 7th hit, but 7th removed most of the shenanigans that powered them up to that level (joining riptides, eldar BB, ect.).
Edit: Oh, and I definitely agree on markerlights, I really wish they were brought back to how they were in 4th. -1 cover worked well withouth being OP, and the -ld was fun to go after high-value units, possibly killing them outright, and if not, then reducing their effectiveness.
Oh, I agree completely, it's just that I tend to measure maximum army strength at the maximum power level they can achieve (so, as broken as possible), although I dislike that way of playing. The maximum tau brokenness is far less than the most powerful armies. It did use to be extremely high before 7th hit, but 7th removed most of the shenanigans that powered them up to that level (joining riptides, eldar BB, ect.).
Edit: Oh, and I definitely agree on markerlights, I really wish they were brought back to how they were in 4th. -1 cover worked well withouth being OP, and the -ld was fun to go after high-value units, possibly killing them outright, and if not, then reducing their effectiveness.
What the hell are you arguing dude? I have no idea what you've devolved this into, but your fallback of strawman, strawman, strawman every couple of lines is hilarious - you didn't get it right once, it's wildly ironic.
For example, why is your argument against me, to point out Tau didn't get buffed to Eldars level? I've said multiple times that I don't think that they were, you are quoting RESPONSES to the argument put forward in the OP and by further posters, that Tau SHOULD have been buffed to Eldars level. See how ironic it is when you quote me saying "if they WERE buffed it would have been no indication of anything" and respond to it with this, and have the hypocrisy to use the word "strawman" ?
Again, strawman. Tau didn't get many buffs. Most of the new units are good and offer options, but aren't absurdly powerful like the eldar new releases were.
Tau are probably not going to go up or down in the rankings, just get more options. Considering where they currently rest, this is fine.
Lol the word isn't just a universal fallback and if you were aware the meaning of the term you are throwing around at every opportunity you might become AWARE of some serious irony going on in your messages.
And yes, again, this is a strawman. No one is suggesting that the other Dexes be brought up to Eldar levels (at least I'm not, the person you quoted). I'm suggesting that it's more likely that the older codexes will get buffs rather than the new codexes get nerfs.
Ahhhh then you'll have to forgive me for coming to the outlandish conclusion, that when you quoted me saying nothing other than "Armies shouldn't be brought up to ELDARS level" (this post: 8206340) and you saying "your expectations are unrealistic and I disagree" (this post: 8206748), that your argument was armies SHOULD be buffed to Eldars level. And that instead, what you were actually disagreeing with was the statement that weaker armies shouldn't be buffed at all (or not to Tau's level), a statement that I never made, and a statement I entirely disagree with myself. Got it.
I'd be happy if everyone was about Tau strong. While the Tau are, currently, slightly boring to face, they are fun to build lists with and aren't too op unless your army is bottom tier.
For someone who uses the term strawman as liberally as you do, in good conscience I have no other option than recommending you research the meaning of the term. I never once said otherwise. In fact I fully agree, this would be excellent, putting dexes on this power level (at least as far as I can judge it at this stage, slightly weaker than the last Dex but with more options) could get all the dexes a lot closer in power level and wouldn't destroy the game in a Dex to dex meantime. My only statement / argument this entire time has been that buffing Tau up to Eldars level WOULD have been a bad change for balance because then we just have double as many Eldar level dexes destroying the games balance for literally every other race. Why is my argument suddenly that not to buff the weaker dexes at all? My argument is specifically and only this, a Dex of 6th ed TAU's level getting buffed to 7th ed ELDAR's level would be making the game less balanced, and that this thread and anyone agreeing with it are silly for being disappointed that it wasn't. The mention of codexes below Tau was to point repercussions another Eldar level Dex could have, not saying that none of them should be buffed. Seriously though. You gotta research that word strawman if you gunna throw it around like this. Cause this is incredible.
Now, getting past this silliness and giving you a second chance to actually compose a response and explain your perspective, I'm having trouble understanding what you mean by this:
I doubt eldar will be changed at all. Tau have an older dex then they do, and got very minor changes, some new units, and new formations. Eldar already have new units and new formations.
Any changes to eldar or necrons will be small, if there are any at all. Really, the other codexes being buffed is the only chance of a good change happening at this point.
I don't understand what you are saying. So Tau having an older dex receiving minor changes this Dex means other dexes will receive minor changes... I don't get it, now all the other codexes are older than the Eldar Dex as well, why does this blanket logic only apply to the armies that support your argument but not to the ones that don't? And don't *eyeroll* accuse me of strawmanning here because I'm not saying you said anything I'm asking for clarification on your statement because I just don't understand it.
Perhaps you do not recall but, right before the Eldar dex was released (and the necron one) most people thought the eldar/necrons would mainly get nerfed a bit and that GW would release balanced codexes. They were claiming GW wanted a low powered game, basing it on the Chaos book, among other. At best, they hoped the bad units in the dex would get buffed.
Instead, the Waveserpent was slightly nerfed and every other unit was buffed, with amazing formations. Necrons got wraiths with possibly the best formation in the game. Much "I told you so" was had by all.
I also don't understand this one. If the statement that you responded to here with your quote, was made predicting that IF every Dex was buffed to Eldars current level that it would go hand in hand with Eldar being buffed more as well, because gw has clearly decided that them sitting where they CURRENTLY do in regards to the rest of the game is where they WANT them to sit... Than how is what you just said disproving it, and not supporting it? You are arguing that when they were ALREADY well ahead of the majority, they were buffed further slightly to re-cement their spot well above everyone elses.. So exactly why is it that this happening, disproves it happening for a third time in a row if the rest of the game was buffed to Eldars level?
Martel732 wrote: "Equally as unlikely, if not WAY more unlikely than Eldar ever being nerfed."
Eldar have never been nerfed, but there have been codices in the past that were as good or almost as good as Eldar. Your point is refuted.
It's absolutely not refuted at all. I said the entire game, not one codex. I also wasn't referring to Eldars past dexes, where it was never this far ahead of the entire game as it is right now, I'm referring to its current level of how far ahead it is and what it would take to bring the other dexes to that point - an absolute freaking rewrite for the MAJORITY of armies in this game. It's absurd, and FAR more unlikely than any number of things happening to Phil Kelly, including him getting hit by a bus, going into retirement or getting replaced, and the new writer for the Eldar Dex actually caring about more armies than just Eldar.
Ps not that I wish Kelly gets hit by a bus. Just clarifying that the number of possibilities that could result in the Eldar Dex being released from its current iron grip and being rebalanced seem far more likely than the alternative, from where I stand, which stands almost zero chance of happening.
Either way, BOTH are super unlikely, you have to agree. So it's a good thing in my opinion that they didn't decide to add 1 or 2 extra armies to"beyond ridiculous" tier, because I think we all know that the entire rest of the game ain't getting put there as well, and if they didn't, which they wouldn't, then Tau being buffed would only serve to unbalance the game further.
So I'm glad Tau didn't get buffed (from what I'm hearing, I'll reserve my personal judgement on the Dex until I've seen a bit more than week 1 theorycrafting).
The debate over balance seems silly to me. You pick an accessible point in the power scale and choose that as your balancing point. It doesn't matter where that point is. What matters, though is accessibility. Since Codex Eldar can't be balanced around Sisters, the only choice I see is to go up.
Wouldn't the most accessible point be closest to where the majority already sit and would only require tweaks to achieve, rather than the massively insane outlier in the upwards direction that would require entire rewrites for 90% of the game?
Shuppet,
1) the post you referenced isn't me. You do realize that, right?
So that makes everything you posted in regards to myself, false. But if you get mixed up that's understandable. Still, suggesting someone else's argument is mine is....not a strawman I guess?
2) your original claim that the opposition to your idea of eldar being nerfed is a strawman. Nobody is claiming balance is being thrown out the window, you are claiming the other side said that. If you can quote where everyone is saying balance needs to be thrown out the window and everything must be op, and if you can quote me saying that, I'll gladly retract it.
3) you were arguing that eldar being nerfed is more realistic than every other army being buffed. Hence your argument was not that buffing weaker codexes would be bad or anything, but that it's unlikely to happen. 3 links to point 4.
4) I'll explain it to you. You have it backwards, which is probably leading to your confusion.
Tau are a relatively new codex and received very minor changes. Mainly new units and formations.
Eldar necrons and marines are even newer dexes. They are unlikely to receive major changes if the tau, an older dex, did not.
Even older codexes might receive a change, or at the very least new units that will buff them or formations worth taking that might up them in strength.
5) I must admit, you lost me there.
All I'm saying is that when the new codex released for eldar, many people thought that they would get nerfed. The most recent dexes were, mostly, much weaker and it was believed gw was going to swing that way. They did not, and the overall codex got s huge boost in power.
So, your original claim that eldar getting brought in line being the realistic belief is absurd. We had a moment where they were the best faction in the game, many newer dexes were becoming weaker, and they still received a buff. To think they will be nerfed now, when most of the newer dexes are stronger than previously, seems to me to be unrealistic.
Da, a traditionally terrible codex, is now great. That inspires hope that maybe the other bad dexes will get fixed. But I have no hope at all that marines necrons or eldar will get nerfed. Especially eldar.
Akiasura wrote: Shuppet,
1) the post you referenced isn't me. You do realize that, right?
So that makes everything you posted in regards to myself, false. But if you get mixed up that's understandable. Still, suggesting someone else's argument is mine is....not a strawman I guess?
Where? Can you please quote me where I referenced the post that wasn't yours, I just went and double checked my post and while you may be right, it was a big post and it's possible I thought you said something someone else said, it's a big thread, you have similar names, and I have avatars turned off but I'm pretty sure I responded to you each time, can you show me the bit where I didn't?
Da, a traditionally terrible codex, is now great. That inspires hope that maybe the other bad dexes will get fixed. But I have no hope at all that marines necrons or eldar will get nerfed. Especially eldar.
Look I don't want to keep arguing with you because I actually agree with everything you've said, for some reason you quoted me as though I disagree with it all which I really don't understand. I share your perspectives dude, I think everyone should be buffed to the more capable level dexes. I just don't think that we should be disappointed when Tau isnt buffed to Eldars level, a level that makes even good dexes look pitiful, a level that doesn't even let the weaker ones play. I have no idea why you said I said all this stuff disagreeing with low tier dexes getting buffed which I never even insinuated, and that's why I found your incorrect and overusage of the word strawman hilarious ironic... You basically invented an entire argument for me in a debate I hadn't entered, one that if I was to enter, I would SHARE ALL YOUR POINTS AND AGREE WITH YOU! When discussing dexes below Tau and the like we have a common perspective... I don't know if you just completely misunderstood what I was saying and this was just a misunderstanding on how you thought I felt about the issue, but you literally HAD to invent a perspective for me here to make that post even close to working for you, and regardless of what you respond to this with its something you and I both know, and something you can take away and think about how it may come across when you do this and then on top of it spam the word strawman...
Per a Codex update has never nerfed CWE, therefore the odds are lower that they will be nerfed than every single other book in the game will be brought up to their level.
If I roll a d6 5 times, and never get a 6, the *frequency* of rolling a 6 is 0, but the *probability* is 1/6.
There have been, what, 5 or so Eldar books? That means it was tested 4 times? If it were random, that's a 25% chance of happening. If you have 4 or more factions, you're likely to have at least one that fits that pattern, even if the choices were random.
4 binary events all going the same way is suggestive, but not very strongly.
Add to that that most updated dexes for most factions tend to be stronger than the previous one (5e dexes in 6e tended to lose to 6e dexes), and he predictive power is even worse.
With Eldar being so OP, its kind of a one-of-a-kind dex. So what are the odds of every single other (20-ish factions) book gets buffed to CWE levels? If it were even odds, we'd be looking at 2^20th, which is less than 1 in a million (literally). But its not likely even odds. If going by frequency, the CWE book is what, 5% of current books? That probability is truly tiny.
You're seeing 4 or so events that seem to line up, and ignore the event occurring in any other line, and taking the implication of that as a hard, irrefutable fact. And so you see any theory that requires the 5th event to buck the trend as impossible.
So, your original claim that eldar getting brought in line being the realistic belief is absurd.
Never once said it was likely. I said it's NEVER going to happen. Quote me saying that I think it could happen. I think it SHOULD happen. I know it won't however.
You know what else is just as absurd however, thinking every other Dex will be buffed to Eldars level while Eldar remains unchanged, or that if by some miracle (a miracle even GREATER than Eldar being nerfed), all the dexes DO get buffed to Eldars level - why in the hell do you think the person behind the recent Eldar dexes would let that happen to his powr level advantage, and not just buff the next Eldar Dex even further as well? Which would put us right back to square one.
And you know what, knowing that that is 100 to 1 odds at least against either these things happening, it's irrelevant which side you sit on, and which one is more likely to happen, neither of them are, so it's a good thing Tau was released as it is, and we didn't throw a random codex or two in with Eldar, leaving the entire rest of the game even worse off, we balance around the majority, not the outlier. Easy.
For over half of 6th, they were bad. When I started, CW Eldar was one of the armies that really appealed to me, but people kept warning me away from them. They had some shenanigans and some good options, but as a whole, they were bad (I'm glad I started as SM first, but for other reasons).
7th ed also hurt CWE, but not enough to bring the 6e book down to reasonable levels.
Bharring wrote: Per a Codex update has never nerfed CWE, therefore the odds are lower that they will be nerfed than every single other book in the game will be brought up to their level.
If I roll a d6 5 times, and never get a 6, the *frequency* of rolling a 6 is 0, but the *probability* is 1/6.
There have been, what, 5 or so Eldar books? That means it was tested 4 times? If it were random, that's a 25% chance of happening. If you have 4 or more factions, you're likely to have at least one that fits that pattern, even if the choices were random.
4 binary events all going the same way is suggestive, but not very strongly.
Add to that that most updated dexes for most factions tend to be stronger than the previous one (5e dexes in 6e tended to lose to 6e dexes), and he predictive power is even worse.
With Eldar being so OP, its kind of a one-of-a-kind dex. So what are the odds of every single other (20-ish factions) book gets buffed to CWE levels? If it were even odds, we'd be looking at 2^20th, which is less than 1 in a million (literally). But its not likely even odds. If going by frequency, the CWE book is what, 5% of current books? That probability is truly tiny.
You're seeing 4 or so events that seem to line up, and ignore the event occurring in any other line, and taking the implication of that as a hard, irrefutable fact. And so you see any theory that requires the 5th event to buck the trend as impossible.
Well said, add to this, the fact that even if they are right, and Eldar is never nerfed again - it doesn't change the fact that every other Dex being put on that level isn't going to happen either (hell logic has it as exponentially less likely to happen), and throwing 1 or two other random dexes into the mix so that we have another year of TauDar master race, is NOT a good change. I'd rather GW just ruined every other army's matches against Eldar, instead of ruining every army's matches Eldar AND Tau
Shuppet,
The main point in contention seems to be that it's much more likely that weaker dexes will be buffed than eldar receiving a nerf.
Both are relatively unlikely, but eldar getting nerfed seems to me to be the more unlikely of the two. That's all I was debating.
And again, I'm not saying buffed to eldar levels. I'm saying buffed to tau levels. Maybe Martel said that, but I did not. Our names don't even start with the same letter, and neither of us have avatars.
Bharring,
Your example falls flat because a die roll is random, codex design is not (though it may seem that way). If eldar have never once been nerfed, than we can say it's extremely unlikely to happen. If chaos has only been buffed one time, then we can say while it's unlikely to happen, it's probably more likely to happen than eldar getting nerfed.
Co'tar,
The eldar dex was weaker, briefly, due to an edition change that made their army weaker (skimmers weren't great and cheap transports were king).
At no point in 40k has a codex release saw eldar drop in power. Even then, they were never bottom of the barrel bad.
pm713 wrote: Or you could pick a level and make everything go to that level. So buff bad armies like CSM and nerf OP armies.
We can't make Eldar go down. Eldar have never gone down and there's no reason to think they are getting a new codex anytime soon. In theory I agree with you, but I'm factoring in practicality here as well.
If we factor in practicality remember that GW does not do any customer research, has incomprehensible and secret release schedule, and barely playtests their rules. They could announce next month that there will be a new eldar codex for all we know. The next eldar codex could remain the same, become the new low, or be buffed to the point that they make scatterbikes look slow and weak.
Whenever we discuss what balance should be, it is all wishlisting. Balancing the game at too high of a power level presents the problem that the game does not scale well. The game does not have any way to increase the armour of models beyond a 2+ save, which works as it was intended to against small arms fire. The problem is that power creep has resulted in a plethora of AP 1 and 2 available at a cheap cost, rendering models like terminators useless. Even worse, once the game started pushing past strength 10 in normal games, there is no way to save against a D weapon. This results in games where models are removed quickly, which makes for quick games, but feels relatively unrewarding as your only tactic is "don't get hit". Balancing the entire game towards a lower power level means that tabling your opponent becomes more difficult, thus making strategy and objectives more important. Tabling should be something that is a rare occurrence, not the go to strategy.
If GW could follow a single design philosophy for an entire codex update cycle or update all codexes (does anyone know the proper plural of codex?) simultaneously, balancing them towards a single power level, that would be nice.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: The only problem with buffing to Tau levels is that Eldar is still an outlier. If everyone is at Eldar level, there are no outliers.
Once the bar is set, the bar is set. The Eldar have set the bar, no matter how much people want to deny it.
Eldar could be nerfed to Tau levels. It could be done, despite your claims on the contrary.
pm713 wrote: Or you could pick a level and make everything go to that level. So buff bad armies like CSM and nerf OP armies.
We can't make Eldar go down. Eldar have never gone down and there's no reason to think they are getting a new codex anytime soon. In theory I agree with you, but I'm factoring in practicality here as well.
If we factor in practicality remember that GW does not do any customer research, has incomprehensible and secret release schedule, and barely playtests their rules. They could announce next month that there will be a new eldar codex for all we know. The next eldar codex could remain the same, become the new low, or be buffed to the point that they make scatterbikes look slow and weak.
Whenever we discuss what balance should be, it is all wishlisting. Balancing the game at too high of a power level presents the problem that the game does not scale well. The game does not have any way to increase the armour of models beyond a 2+ save, which works as it was intended to against small arms fire. The problem is that power creep has resulted in a plethora of AP 1 and 2 available at a cheap cost, rendering models like terminators useless. Even worse, once the game started pushing past strength 10 in normal games, there is no way to save against a D weapon. This results in games where models are removed quickly, which makes for quick games, but feels relatively unrewarding as your only tactic is "don't get hit". Balancing the entire game towards a lower power level means that tabling your opponent becomes more difficult, thus making strategy and objectives more important. Tabling should be something that is a rare occurrence, not the go to strategy.
If GW could follow a single design philosophy for an entire codex update cycle or update all codexes (does anyone know the proper plural of codex?) simultaneously, balancing them towards a single power level, that would be nice.
Fair enough. Especially important since we are tethered to the D6 and therefore, there are only five levels of armor in the game. All of which are ignored on the cheap by many lists.
And again, I'm not saying buffed to eldar levels. I'm saying buffed to tau levels. Maybe Martel said that, but I did not. Our names don't even start with the same letter, and neither of us have avatars.
Sure so then why did you start arguing with me about then about it? And by "it" I mean specifically you quoting me saying it shouldn't be buffed to Eldar levels and starting arguing with me about how all the lower tiers deserve to be buffed to Tau's current level while accusing me of a strawman fallacy? That's great, I agree with all hat gak about buffing the dexes below Tau, and never said otherwise, so don't try shift it on to Martel, I'm responding solely to the big arguments YOU put forth while accusing me of "strawman",
And my response is "I agree". So I'm asking, how exactly is my statement about Eldar that you quoted and specifically labelled as such, a strawman? How is you inventing this big narrative for me about not wanting low tiers buffed not one? And exactly where is the text that I addressed to you that was referring a Martel post and not one of yours?
Answering this with "I'm not saying they should be buffed to Eldars level" blah blah blah, isn't a valid response. I know you aren't saying this, I only mention it to defend and clarifying what my only statement was seeing as you accused me of much more.
Aki,
Of course they are not truly random. But they are unknown events. Both being more powerful and not have probabilities. To claim 4/4 events resolving the same way means the probability of the other way is nearly 0 has very little backing. That was the whole point. We can't know the true mean, but 4/4 going the same way has a 25% chance of occurring even if the true mean is 50%. So it is very, very much not conclusive, after 4 events, that the true mean is past 50/50.
You're arguing that the true mean is lower than the odds of *every* book being released at the 7e CWE book. That has happened once. How many total army lists has 40K produced over the years? Let's go with 50 (I'm sure the real number is higher). So the CWE level has a frequency of 1/50. What are the odds, then, of all 20-ish books being released that way? It'd not hard. (1/50)^19. Mindbogglingly small.
The bulk of any reasonable confidence interval will put the event with 0 for 4 frequency far above the confidence interval around the (1/50)^19th thing. We have a lot of evidence that CWE level books are improbabpe, but a comparatively tiny amount of evidence showing that CWE will get nerfed.
Each are unlikely in the near future, but one requires one event not seen in a tiny sample, and the other requires 20 events seen only once in a large sample.
"Eldar could be nerfed to Tau levels. It could be done, despite your claims on the contrary."
Theoretically possible, but given the recent release of their book, and the past history of Eldar books, I have no reason to think that this would ever happen.
If we are rewriting everything, the d6 is out in my book anyway and then all bets are off.
Martel732 wrote: "Eldar could be nerfed to Tau levels. It could be done, despite your claims on the contrary."
Theoretically possible, but given the recent release of their book, and the past history of Eldar books, I have no reason to think that this would ever happen.
If we are rewriting everything, the d6 is out in my book anyway and then all bets are off.
Just like given everything we know and the past history of the game, we know that it's THEORETICALLY possible they could give an in depth rewrite every single codex in the game to put them on Eldars level and we'd suddenly, but it's never been done, and I have even less reason to think this would happen, especially since it requires like 20 unlikely rewrites instead of just one,
So it's a good thing that Tau alone didn't get random stupid buffs to be on Eldar levels.
Don't forget it's more than just Eldar. DA, Necron, and vanilla marines are often almost as hard to deal with for the have-nots. If I wanted to balance around necrons instead would it suddenly be okay?
You have to reach 50% for balancing that way on one additional thing becomes productive.
Whether that 50% is by frequency on the table or options is certainly an option.
You certainly prefer the former. Its all about the winner at the top table to you (and many others).
I, and others, much prefer the other way. We want the game to be more than 'WK vs Skyhammer' rolloffs.
The former is best served by having a single unit be the absolute best. Halve the WK's points and double the stats, and you've entirely balanced the former in a bitterly competitive meta. But I don't want to play WKs.
The latter is harder, but makes the game a lot more fun.
(Also, what kind of vast experience is informing the Eldar-are-always-buffed theory? There exist only 4 or so. You're either claiming that is a lot, or your claim is incorrect.)
Bharring wrote: If everyone is BA, or new Tau, then things aren't unbalanced.
Martel732 wrote: If everyone is the Eldar, then things aren't complicated and not unbalanced.
Chess is unbalanced since it has a turn order, with the advantage always to the white player who plays first. Every game that is turned based is inherently unbalanced, perfectly symmetrical turn based games are possibly more unbalanced than asymmetrical turn based games.
And again, I'm not saying buffed to eldar levels. I'm saying buffed to tau levels. Maybe Martel said that, but I did not. Our names don't even start with the same letter, and neither of us have avatars.
Sure so then why did you start arguing with me about then about it? And by "it" I mean specifically you quoting me saying it shouldn't be buffed to Eldar levels and starting arguing with me about how all the lower tiers deserve to be buffed to Tau's current level while accusing me of a strawman fallacy? That's great, I agree with all hat gak about buffing the dexes below Tau, and never said otherwise, so don't try shift it on to Martel, I'm responding solely to the big arguments YOU put forth while accusing me of "strawman",
And my response is "I agree". So I'm asking, how exactly is my statement about Eldar that you quoted and specifically labelled as such, a strawman? How is you inventing this big narrative for me about not wanting low tiers buffed not one? And exactly where is the text that I addressed to you that was referring a Martel post and not one of yours?
Answering this with "I'm not saying they should be buffed to Eldars level" blah blah blah, isn't a valid response. I know you aren't saying this, I only mention it to defend and clarifying what my only statement was seeing as you accused me of much more.
I really have no idea what you're talking about here.
Like...at all.
Are you asking why I accused you of a strawman? You attributed martels argument as mine and argued against it when speaking directly to me. You mentioned balance being thrown out the window when nobody mentioned that.
If you mix up arguments accidentally, that's fine, it happens. But you did reference another posters argument while responding to me directly.
Honestly I don't even know why it matters if you agree.
Again, we aren't arguing about what would be nice to happen, we are discussing which is more likely.
Bharring,
Again, probability assumes everything has an equal chance to happen and no intelligence is being thrown into the mix. It's why it's used for things like to hit rolls, genetics, but not used in things like predicting who will win in elections (well...it shouldn't be). You can't say there are 6 choices in the democratic primaries, so everyone has a 1/6 chance of winning.
The same is true here.
Eldar have, never once been nerfed. An independent has not won a recent presidential election in America. Could either event happen? Sure. Is it likely to? No.
Other codexes have been buffed and roughly equal in power at least once in their lifetime. I can't think of a dex that hasn't been good at least one time in its history. To me, 1 time, even if it's only one time out of many events, is greater than 0 times, even if the events are from a small pool (which p, to be fair, each codex looked at individually is).
It's like if marine players said, "our codex is probably going to be mid to upper mid tier with 1-2 builds that are op". I'd agree with that, since that is usually what happens to the marine codex. Sure, there have been what, roughly 5 codexes for marines? But it's usually what happens for the vanilla marines.
Edit, it's also how in you present the data.
I could say that 100% of eldar codexes have never contained nerfs. Or, over 15 years of gaming the eldar have never had a bad codex release. Those sound a lot better than 4.
But if 4 is all we have to go on, and the 4 supports they won't get nerfed (especially the 6th to 7th transition), then it's somewhat safe to assume they won't get nerfed again.
Perfect balance is practically impossible. But that doesn't mean we can't hope for better.
Kinda like a perfectly straight clothesline is not possible, but I wouldnt want to make it / leave it with so much slack the middle touches the ground.
Bharring wrote: Perfect balance is practically impossible. But that doesn't mean we can't hope for better.
Kinda like a perfectly straight clothesline is not possible, but I wouldnt want to make it / leave it with so much slack the middle touches the ground.
No question the game should be balanced better, but arguing for a fully symmetrical game doesn't lead to a better game. I believe that asymmetrical games are better balanced for turned based games than symmetrical games.
Back on topic, I've been reading some games about the Stormsurge and it seems to be far more potent than we may have first thought. If the shield generator and early warning override remain support systems and the Stormsurge has access to them, it will be a major threat.
Bharring wrote: Perfect balance is practically impossible. But that doesn't mean we can't hope for better.
Kinda like a perfectly straight clothesline is not possible, but I wouldnt want to make it / leave it with so much slack the middle touches the ground.
No question the game should be balanced better, but arguing for a fully symmetrical game doesn't lead to a better game. I believe that asymmetrical games are better balanced for turned based games than symmetrical games.
Back on topic, I've been reading some games about the Stormsurge and it seems to be far more potent than we may have first thought. If the shield generator and early warning override remain support systems and the Stormsurge has access to them, it will be a major threat.
This^. I don't know why people are so down on it. (with Stabilizing anchors) 2 Str 10/AP2 Large blasts shooting at a deep striking deathstar with Early Warning Override is going to do some serious damage. Add in 8D6 Str5/Ap5 shots (average of 24), 4 Str 8/AP1 missies (single use), and potentially 2 str 4/AP5 Large blast, barrage, ignore cover shots (with airburst fragmentation projector). This is a crazy amount of damage to put out every single turn. All at different targets!
This^. I don't know why people are so down on it. (with Stabilizing anchors) 2 Str 10/AP2 Large blasts shooting at a deep striking deathstar with Early Warning Override is going to do some serious damage. Add in 8D6 Str5/Ap5 shots (average of 24), 4 Str 8/AP1 missies (single use), and potentially 2 str 4/AP5 Large blast, barrage, ignore cover shots (with airburst fragmentation projector). This is a crazy amount of damage to put out every single turn. All at different targets!
Correction: Early Warning Override provides Interceptor, which is used in the enemy's movement phase. The Stabilization anchors benefit is limited to the tau player's shooting phase. Thus, you're getting 1 10/2 Large Blast at the deepstrikeing deathstar BEFORE they get a chance to shoot or 2 of 'em AFTER they get a chance to shoot.
I generally agree with your sentiment, though - Stormsurges have a lot of firepower, most of that firepower has sufficient range to be effective across almost the entirety of the board, and specialized firepower isn't wasted on inappropriate targets (Sure, Hammerhead, fire those SMS at the Landraider. That'll help. ).
They aren't terribly reliable Anti-Knight, though, and utilizing an EWO is a greater tradeoff for the Stormsurge than the "Do I fire now, or fire later with ML support" decision made by most Tau units.
This^. I don't know why people are so down on it. (with Stabilizing anchors) 2 Str 10/AP2 Large blasts shooting at a deep striking deathstar with Early Warning Override is going to do some serious damage. Add in 8D6 Str5/Ap5 shots (average of 24), 4 Str 8/AP1 missies (single use), and potentially 2 str 4/AP5 Large blast, barrage, ignore cover shots (with airburst fragmentation projector). This is a crazy amount of damage to put out every single turn. All at different targets!
Correction: Early Warning Override provides Interceptor, which is used in the enemy's movement phase. The Stabilization anchors benefit is limited to the tau player's shooting phase. Thus, you're getting 1 10/2 Large Blast at the deepstrikeing deathstar BEFORE they get a chance to shoot or 2 of 'em AFTER they get a chance to shoot.
I generally agree with your sentiment, though - Stormsurges have a lot of firepower, most of that firepower has sufficient range to be effective across almost the entirety of the board, and specialized firepower isn't wasted on inappropriate targets (Sure, Hammerhead, fire those SMS at the Landraider. That'll help. ).
They aren't terribly reliable Anti-Knight, though, and utilizing an EWO is a greater tradeoff for the Stormsurge than the "Do I fire now, or fire later with ML support" decision made by most Tau units.
Read the rules on the Stormsurge.
It states that in your Shooting Phase and each subsequent Shooting Phases while the Stormsurge has its Stabilizers deployed can fire twice.
I saw the Storm Surge model painted up in GW shop window today.
What a fething joke! It's open topped and has two little Tau sitting there on top, and has two robot heads. What's that about?
It looks like the designer blew a standard Crisis Suit up by four times and stuck some random bits of equipment off other Tau models on the hull to complete the model.
Kilkrazy wrote: Whatever, it's a load of crap. To be fair, it's not as embarrassing as the Tau flyer models.
What is? The fact that it's open-topped?
The Basilisk, Hydra, and Wyvern would all like a word with you then.
The basilisk, hydra and wyvern are poorly designed.
Is that really the counter-argument you want to use? There's literally no reason for them to not have a closed compartment.
I'll agree with you on that(I have two of the 'new' Hydras but really wish I had the 'old' version and I want to get a pair of the close-topped Basilisks for myself soon)--but I don't think you quite understood why I made those comparisons.
For whatever reason, GW has been shifting things that are best described as "support platforms" into open topped platforms. I have no idea why they consider "support platforms=open-topped".
This^. I don't know why people are so down on it. (with Stabilizing anchors) 2 Str 10/AP2 Large blasts shooting at a deep striking deathstar with Early Warning Override is going to do some serious damage. Add in 8D6 Str5/Ap5 shots (average of 24), 4 Str 8/AP1 missies (single use), and potentially 2 str 4/AP5 Large blast, barrage, ignore cover shots (with airburst fragmentation projector). This is a crazy amount of damage to put out every single turn. All at different targets!
Correction: Early Warning Override provides Interceptor, which is used in the enemy's movement phase. The Stabilization anchors benefit is limited to the tau player's shooting phase. Thus, you're getting 1 10/2 Large Blast at the deepstrikeing deathstar BEFORE they get a chance to shoot or 2 of 'em AFTER they get a chance to shoot.
I generally agree with your sentiment, though - Stormsurges have a lot of firepower, most of that firepower has sufficient range to be effective across almost the entirety of the board, and specialized firepower isn't wasted on inappropriate targets (Sure, Hammerhead, fire those SMS at the Landraider. That'll help. ).
They aren't terribly reliable Anti-Knight, though, and utilizing an EWO is a greater tradeoff for the Stormsurge than the "Do I fire now, or fire later with ML support" decision made by most Tau units.
Read the rules on the Stormsurge.
It states that in your Shooting Phase and each subsequent Shooting Phases while the Stormsurge has its Stabilizers deployed can fire twice.
Is Interceptor firing in a Shooting Phase, or is it firing in a Movement Phase? Because I'm fairly certain its the latter, and nothing in the Stormsurge's rules suggests you're able to fire twice in anything except a Shooting Phase.
Reminds me of the "Multitracker benefits in Overwatch" debate, actually. It is perhaps more ambiguous that I initially thought, but it certainly isn't clearly on your side either.
Unless the wording changed and I missed it, Interceptor happens at the end of the opponents "movement" phase.
I think the Stormsurge got screwed on that...though they went out of their way to say shooting phase. Maybe they didn't want it double tapping interceptor.
This^. I don't know why people are so down on it. (with Stabilizing anchors) 2 Str 10/AP2 Large blasts shooting at a deep striking deathstar with Early Warning Override is going to do some serious damage. Add in 8D6 Str5/Ap5 shots (average of 24), 4 Str 8/AP1 missies (single use), and potentially 2 str 4/AP5 Large blast, barrage, ignore cover shots (with airburst fragmentation projector). This is a crazy amount of damage to put out every single turn. All at different targets!
Correction: Early Warning Override provides Interceptor, which is used in the enemy's movement phase. The Stabilization anchors benefit is limited to the tau player's shooting phase. Thus, you're getting 1 10/2 Large Blast at the deepstrikeing deathstar BEFORE they get a chance to shoot or 2 of 'em AFTER they get a chance to shoot.
I generally agree with your sentiment, though - Stormsurges have a lot of firepower, most of that firepower has sufficient range to be effective across almost the entirety of the board, and specialized firepower isn't wasted on inappropriate targets (Sure, Hammerhead, fire those SMS at the Landraider. That'll help. ).
They aren't terribly reliable Anti-Knight, though, and utilizing an EWO is a greater tradeoff for the Stormsurge than the "Do I fire now, or fire later with ML support" decision made by most Tau units.
Read the rules on the Stormsurge.
It states that in your Shooting Phase and each subsequent Shooting Phases while the Stormsurge has its Stabilizers deployed can fire twice.
Is Interceptor firing in a Shooting Phase, or is it firing in a Movement Phase? Because I'm fairly certain its the latter, and nothing in the Stormsurge's rules suggests you're able to fire twice in anything except a Shooting Phase.
Reminds me of the "Multitracker benefits in Overwatch" debate, actually. It is perhaps more ambiguous that I initially thought, but it certainly isn't clearly on your side either.
Ya, trying to go into detail about overwatch and intercepter and "shooting phase" cause the rules to break down, such as Heavy weapons being limited to the shooting phase as that is the only time it defines how many shots you fire with them.
If the support Signature Signature Systems still say to the effect of "can be used in the shooting phase but not during overwatch" my HIWPI is Shooting Phase rules trigger anytime you are allowed to shoot.
Sorry that got a bit YMDC.
The one thing I want to say in this discussion is that are there any out there who feel that Dark Angels don't deserve their brief time in the top tier spotlight after 20 years of gak-tier codices?
Think about that. 2 decades being the worse version of vanilla marines and now A FEW BUILDS that have been viable in the competitive scene for a few months make people cry for nerfs. I say that there are absolutely no armies that deserve their time playing with the big boys as Dark Angels do. The long wait is over and now we can play our army just the way we want to instead of just green marines. Anyway I wouldn't mind if the codex was truly the book that people make it out to be instead of Codex: Ravenwing & Lion's Blade.
Has anyone on here ripped DA? I have no problem with DA being competitive, but I do have a problem when that means they can run over 80% of the lists in the game without trying hard.
If I roll a d6 5 times, and never get a 6, the *frequency* of rolling a 6 is 0, but the *probability* is 1/6.
There have been, what, 5 or so Eldar books? That means it was tested 4 times? If it were random, that's a 25% chance of happening. If you have 4 or more factions, you're likely to have at least one that fits that pattern, even if the choices were random.
4 binary events all going the same way is suggestive, but not very strongly.
Add to that that most updated dexes for most factions tend to be stronger than the previous one (5e dexes in 6e tended to lose to 6e dexes), and he predictive power is even worse.
With Eldar being so OP, its kind of a one-of-a-kind dex. So what are the odds of every single other (20-ish factions) book gets buffed to CWE levels? If it were even odds, we'd be looking at 2^20th, which is less than 1 in a million (literally). But its not likely even odds. If going by frequency, the CWE book is what, 5% of current books? That probability is truly tiny.
You're seeing 4 or so events that seem to line up, and ignore the event occurring in any other line, and taking the implication of that as a hard, irrefutable fact. And so you see any theory that requires the 5th event to buck the trend as impossible.
This is a false analogy. You take codex power levels to be entirely random, when in fact, it is biased to a large degree, seeing that there is massive human involvement and influence over them.
The hard facts are, every single eldar codex phil kelly writes seems to "one up" all the codexes around him, and the current CWE codex fits it to a T.
The only way to solve this is for phil to be fired, the same way the only way for tyranids to be strong is for cruddace to be fired.
Of course its not random. Most things aren't. But our understanding of what drives them is from analyzing frequencies. That is how we can determine the biases. And that is where those numbers come into play. Four events in all of history is hardly conclusive.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Look at it this way.
Whether an impeached president is thrown out of office is not random.
Every president ever impeached (2) has finished their full term.
That is certainly not enough data to say getting impeached guarantees that the president will finish their full term.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I suppose that analogy requires a comparison.
That first argument would suggest there may be unlikely to be thrown out of office if impeached, but its unlikely.
There is one US president whos father was a goat herder..
Which is more likely? That every single future presedent will be the son of a goat herder, or that the next impeached president will be kicked out of office?
The former has happened once, the latter never. But the latter is certainly more likely (even though both are unlikely).
casvalremdeikun wrote: Wow, that makes the "Waah! My codex isn't broken!" people look a little silly now. The frickin' Stormsurge is a monster! That Ghostkeel formation is crazy powerful.
I don't want a broken codex. I want a codex on par with SM. Not much to ask, is it?
Still waiting for changes in other units. D missiles and stealth formation apart, all others were expected
Rules for Hunter Cadre:
- Defensive fire at 12"
- Can run and the shoot. In this order.
Rules for Hunter Contigent:
- Reroll Warlord trait
- Units can combine their shooting attacks, and shoot as if they were a single unit. So they can get benefit from special rules and the same markerlight, for example. This is really, really powerful.
We're Warmachine now Way more interesting than doubling markerlight rumour. Bravo, GW.
Yeah, Tau are truly bottom feeders now!
Good job Dakka, please don't ever change - I've really needed a good laugh since Tuesday!
News just in, markerlights make the Stormsurge's Destroyer missiles str D and the stealth suit formation is ridiculous. Native ignored cover, +1BS and always hit a vehicle's rear armour.
nudibranch wrote: News just in, markerlights make the Stormsurge's Destroyer missiles str D and the stealth suit formation is ridiculous. Native ignored cover, +1BS and always hit a vehicle's rear armour.
It is a sad day to be an IG/AM player. Though, I wasn't expecting any less .
nudibranch wrote: News just in, markerlights make the Stormsurge's Destroyer missiles str D and the stealth suit formation is ridiculous. Native ignored cover, +1BS and always hit a vehicle's rear armour.
Where did you get this info because seriously I won't play against that gak.
nudibranch wrote: News just in, markerlights make the Stormsurge's Destroyer missiles str D and the stealth suit formation is ridiculous. Native ignored cover, +1BS and always hit a vehicle's rear armour.
Where did you get this info because seriously I won't play against that gak.
Then I highly suggest you don't go and read the currently exploding New & Rumors Tau release thread...
nudibranch wrote: News just in, markerlights make the Stormsurge's Destroyer missiles str D and the stealth suit formation is ridiculous. Native ignored cover, +1BS and always hit a vehicle's rear armour.
Where did you get this info because seriously I won't play against that gak.
Dude called Iuchiban on Warseer got the Codex early and is answering questions. A lot of the information he's posted is on the N&R thread.
nudibranch wrote: News just in, markerlights make the Stormsurge's Destroyer missiles str D and the stealth suit formation is ridiculous. Native ignored cover, +1BS and always hit a vehicle's rear armour.
nudibranch wrote: News just in, markerlights make the Stormsurge's Destroyer missiles str D and the stealth suit formation is ridiculous. Native ignored cover, +1BS and always hit a vehicle's rear armour.
Because this game needs more ranged D
Specifically, 4 str D shots that can be fired at four separate targets in one turn...
Looks like there is also a new rule in formations for Riptides, Ghostkheels, Hammerheads, and Skyrays. They get 'Fire Team' special rule giving +1 BS for taking squads of 3 of the same unit.
That means take 3 riptides, 4BS for said riptides.
Take 3 Hammerheads/Skyrays, 5 BS for them.
nudibranch wrote: News just in, markerlights make the Stormsurge's Destroyer missiles str D and the stealth suit formation is ridiculous. Native ignored cover, +1BS and always hit a vehicle's rear armour.
Where did you get this info because seriously I won't play against that gak.
Then I highly suggest you don't go and read the currently exploding New & Rumors Tau release thread...
Bach wrote: Looks like there is also a new rule in formations for Riptides, Ghostkheels, Hammerheads, and Skyrays. They get 'Fire Team' special rule giving +1 BS for taking squads of 3 of the same unit above.
That means take 3 riptides, 4BS for said riptides.
Take 3 Hammerheads/Skyrays, 5 BS for them.
This needs a second to sink in... ;D
Tsh - Potentially 12 str D shots on Turn 1 to up to 12 different targets. Moving on...
Kilkrazy wrote: Open topped, and put together from a bunch of bits pinched from other Tau vehicles.
For £90.
What bits were "pinched from other Tau vehicles"?
Serious question, did you expect it to look radically different from the existing Tau stuff?
Absolutely not, yet the machine looks as if rather than designing it, the Tau engineers did a supermarket sweep in a spare parts warehouse and stuck all the bits they grabbed on the top of a pumped up Crisis Suit.
There's a bit of cockpit off a Piranha, a couple of ducted fan intakes off a Devilfish, a head off a Crisis Suit, another head off a different Crisis Suit, a Smart Missile off a Hammerhead, a pilot cabin off a Devilfish, a railgun off a Hammerhead, a couple of flamers off a Crisis suit...
Why would a long range artillery unit be equipped with flamethrowers anyway?
And finally, the cherry on top of this cheese sundae, the Tau Hunter Cadre formation. Basically, when one unit shoots at an enemy unit, all other units in the formation gain that first unit's special rules (and Marker Points, I think). Consider the Buffmander and cry.
nudibranch wrote: And finally, the cherry on top of this cheese sundae, the Tau Hunter Cadre formation. Basically, when one unit shoots at an enemy unit, all other units in the formation gain that first unit's special rules (and Marker Points, I think). Consider the Buffmander and cry.
I can only see rivers of money flowing to GW as the new rules are coming out and the "20%" of players throw them all their wages to get 3 skyrays/hammerheads/ghostkeels/stormsurges...
nudibranch wrote: And finally, the cherry on top of this cheese sundae, the Tau Hunter Cadre formation. Basically, when one unit shoots at an enemy unit, all other units in the formation gain that first unit's special rules (and Marker Points, I think). Consider the Buffmander and cry.
Yes, this is the most ridiculous part of Tau that has been revealed so far. However, the Buffmander may not still be a thing, as the wargear page has yet to be spoiled for us yet.
I do like how the entire opinion of the forum can change in less than one day. Stay classy, DakkaDakka!
nudibranch wrote: And finally, the cherry on top of this cheese sundae, the Tau Hunter Cadre formation. Basically, when one unit shoots at an enemy unit, all other units in the formation gain that first unit's special rules (and Marker Points, I think). Consider the Buffmander and cry.
Yes, this is the most ridiculous part of Tau that has been revealed so far. However, the Buffmander may not still be a thing, as the wargear page has yet to be spoiled for us yet.
I do like how the entire opinion of the forum can change in less than one day. Stay classy, DakkaDakka!
Well, signature systems remained just about identical to the current ones according to the leaker, so I wouldn't hope on it. The whole "you can still use the old dex" isn't comforting either.
nudibranch wrote: And finally, the cherry on top of this cheese sundae, the Tau Hunter Cadre formation. Basically, when one unit shoots at an enemy unit, all other units in the formation gain that first unit's special rules (and Marker Points, I think). Consider the Buffmander and cry.
Yes, this is the most ridiculous part of Tau that has been revealed so far. However, the Buffmander may not still be a thing, as the wargear page has yet to be spoiled for us yet.
I do like how the entire opinion of the forum can change in less than one day. Stay classy, DakkaDakka!
The one with codex has stated that signature systems seem to be identical.
nudibranch wrote: And finally, the cherry on top of this cheese sundae, the Tau Hunter Cadre formation. Basically, when one unit shoots at an enemy unit, all other units in the formation gain that first unit's special rules (and Marker Points, I think). Consider the Buffmander and cry.
Yes, this is the most ridiculous part of Tau that has been revealed so far. However, the Buffmander may not still be a thing, as the wargear page has yet to be spoiled for us yet.
I do like how the entire opinion of the forum can change in less than one day. Stay classy, DakkaDakka!
The rules leaks have already shown that signature systems are the same, and there are ALOT of crazy shenanigans going on with formations if you look at the thread.
Yes it was silly for people to overexaggerate about how bad the new units were, but its fairly obvious that these newly revealed rules are Eldar level broken.
I mean, the style of how they are broken is similar to the other formation based ones.
Are these the strongest formations in the game? It seems that way.
The bright side being there might be one list the Eldar have to halfway try against to win. Maybe 40K needs relegation. Some codices just are prohibited from playing others.
He's immune. He's Eldar. Just like how WK are immune to everything now.
I have a feeling that the OP will tell us lowly goobs how they were always a brilliant Tau player even back in 5th edition, and that Vanilla Marines will still murder optimised Hunter Cadre lists with a contemptuous flick of their Grav spam.
What, precisely, does the Gladius have on the new Tau formations? With stuff like being able to always hit rear vehicle armor(one of the formations allows this), the ONE thing Gladius has going for it gets taken away by a single turn of shooting. Being able to make super units stack markerlights. Massed StrD due to Stormsurges being able to be taken in groups of three. Never mind the fact that without the formations, Tau are still better than C:SM. All we have is grav. That is it.
casvalremdeikun wrote: What, precisely, does the Gladius have on the new Tau formations? With stuff like being able to always hit rear vehicle armor(one of the formations allows this), the ONE thing Gladius has going for it gets taken away by a single turn of shooting. Being able to make super units stack markerlights. Massed StrD due to Stormsurges being able to be taken in groups of three. Never mind the fact that without the formations, Tau are still better than C:SM. All we have is grav. That is it.
It is a damn powerful formation and people keep treating it like it is the ultimate in derp. That said Tau can quite easily counter it - their basic guns can and will annihilate AV11 spam.
casvalremdeikun wrote: What, precisely, does the Gladius have on the new Tau formations? With stuff like being able to always hit rear vehicle armor(one of the formations allows this), the ONE thing Gladius has going for it gets taken away by a single turn of shooting. Being able to make super units stack markerlights. Massed StrD due to Stormsurges being able to be taken in groups of three. Never mind the fact that without the formations, Tau are still better than C:SM. All we have is grav. That is it.
Actually, that massed SD will be pretty darn hard to pull off because:
- The Blastcannon has poor range.
- The Destroyer Missiles need a markerlight token per missile to become D (and that's a lot of markerlight tokens!).
Also, as an interesting side-note, here is the collection of special rules the Contingent's Focus Fire will share between the units:
/tg/ wrote:>Any special rule that works in the shooting phase and is transferred from one model to the unit (most notably tank/monster hunter and preferred enemy; fearless and stealth/shrouded technically transfer as well, but you'd only beenfit from those if your own models somehow get shot in your own shooting phase).
>Markerlights
>Drone controller (drones in the unit use bearer's bs)
>Multispectral Sensor Suite (aka. the "gives unit ignores cover if bearer does't shoot" relic)
>Command and Control Node (aka. "gives unit rerolls to hit if bearer doesn't shoot" relic)
>Puretide Neurochip (gives tank/monster hunter; you can choose each turn).
>Pathfinder's pulse accelerator drone (pulse weapons in the unit get 6'' extra range)
>Darkstrider's "enemy unit gets -1t when shot by Darkstrider's unit" wargear (assuming he can be taken in the Taucurion; if not you could take a regular Tau detachment with him as the HQ choise and join a Taucurion unit)
>Fireblade's volley fire (all pulse rifles and carbines in the unit get +1 shots, but only if the entire unit didn't move)
>Ethereal's storm of fire (all pulse weapons in affected units get +1 shots at half range)
>Shadowsun's command link drone (unit gets to reroll 1s to hit)
>Longstrike (has tank hunter)
>The warlord trait that lets you reroll 1s to hit
>The warlord trait that gives the warlord and his unit skyfire
>Fire Team special rule (models with the rule get +1 bs if the unit has 3 or more models)
>The Farsight warlord trait that gives warlord and his unit rerolls to wound when shooting
>The Farsight warlord trait that gives warlord tank/monster hunter (choose at the beginning of the game and can't be changed)
>Mirrorcidex from Farsight book (relic that gives +1 to seize the initiative and can give preferred enemy if you pass a roll)
casvalremdeikun wrote: What, precisely, does the Gladius have on the new Tau formations? With stuff like being able to always hit rear vehicle armor(one of the formations allows this), the ONE thing Gladius has going for it gets taken away by a single turn of shooting. Being able to make super units stack markerlights. Massed StrD due to Stormsurges being able to be taken in groups of three. Never mind the fact that without the formations, Tau are still better than C:SM. All we have is grav. That is it.
It is a damn powerful formation and people keep treating it like it is the ultimate in derp. That said Tau can quite easily counter it - their basic guns can and will annihilate AV11 spam.
Gladius is powerful. But it isn't essentially shooting most vehicles at AV10 or 11 powerful. Or, as the poster above me has shown, SHARE ALL THE SPECIAL RULES powerful.
casvalremdeikun wrote: What, precisely, does the Gladius have on the new Tau formations? With stuff like being able to always hit rear vehicle armor(one of the formations allows this), the ONE thing Gladius has going for it gets taken away by a single turn of shooting. Being able to make super units stack markerlights. Massed StrD due to Stormsurges being able to be taken in groups of three. Never mind the fact that without the formations, Tau are still better than C:SM. All we have is grav. That is it.
It is a damn powerful formation and people keep treating it like it is the ultimate in derp. That said Tau can quite easily counter it - their basic guns can and will annihilate AV11 spam.
Especially since they can also now hit the av10 rear of the razorbacks/rhinos as well.
That formation also makes the LRBT worse than ever before
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Experiment 626 wrote: So we'll give it what, 5 minutes or 5 seconds on release day before Dakka gets flooded with the inevitable mass of "New Tau are auto-win" threads?
Experiment 626 wrote: So we'll give it what, 5 minutes or 5 seconds on release day before Dakka gets flooded with the inevitable mass of "New Tau are auto-win" threads?
Experiment 626 wrote: So we'll give it what, 5 minutes or 5 seconds on release day before Dakka gets flooded with the inevitable mass of "New Tau are auto-win" threads?
Experiment 626 wrote: So we'll give it what, 5 minutes or 5 seconds on release day before Dakka gets flooded with the inevitable mass of "New Tau are auto-win" threads?
We need a real one so we can get it out of our system.
....
Hey Dman you busy? We got a job for yeh
People who truly hate Tau don't follow the rumors, and are thus blindsided by all the rules once they play a game. I expect the threads to start 1 hour a 5 minutes after the drop of the codex. Just enough time for one game, and a rage induced forum post.
Co'tor Shas wrote: You think these people actually play a game before declaring tau OP? You poor, naive little man.
How else are they going to know what they are callled? They don't even know what a Fusion Blaster is, let alone a Ghostkeel or Stormsurge until it has burned it into the back of their mind with pulse, ion, and missile spam.
Crazyterran wrote: Is it time to burn all of our non-flyer vehicles? I mean, the ones we accumulated since Codex: Decurion came out?
It certainly does feel that way with every new codex release.
I wouldn't be so sure about flyers. After all, Eldar have the best anti-air flyer in the game, and a formation to make it even better.
Could be worse. Does anyone remember the bad old days of Taudar? At least 7th edition put a stop to that. Tau now have to cheese it alone, but it's not like they need the help now!
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:Tsh - Potentially 12 str D shots on Turn 1 to up to 12 different targets. Moving on...
Sure. If you can also get 12 markerlights on 12 different targets in turn 1.
Also, just to calm everybody's ragepoops, this is what hits rear armor:
It's got limitations. Those little burst and fusion cannons need to be near the Ghostkeel, so sink your fire into that MC with some Ignore Cover to save your vehicles.
Unless it gets passed along with other special rules.
Markerlights are still a ridiculous mechanic, Riptides are still the most underpriced MC in the game, and the formations have basically dialed all of the faction's problematic mechanics up to an 11.
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:Tsh - Potentially 12 str D shots on Turn 1 to up to 12 different targets. Moving on...
Sure. If you can also get 12 markerlights on 12 different targets in turn 1.
Also, just to calm everybody's ragepoops, this is what hits rear armor:
It's got limitations. Those little burst and fusion cannons need to be near the Ghostkeel, so sink your fire into that MC with some Ignore Cover to save your vehicles.
Unless it gets passed along with other special rules.
.
For someone who uses the term strawman as liberally as you do, in good conscience I have no other option than recommending you research the meaning of the term. I never once said otherwise. In fact I fully agree, this would be excellent, putting dexes on this power level (at least as far as I can judge it at this stage, slightly weaker than the last Dex but with more options) could get all the dexes a lot closer in power level and wouldn't destroy the game in a Dex to dex meantime. My only statement / argument this entire time has been that buffing Tau up to Eldars level WOULD have been a bad change for balance because then we just have double as many Eldar level dexes destroying the games balance for literally every other race. Why is my argument suddenly that not to buff the weaker dexes at all? My argument is specifically and only this, a Dex of 6th ed TAU's level getting buffed to 7th ed ELDAR's level would be making the game less balanced, and that this thread and anyone agreeing with it are silly for being disappointed that it wasn't. The mention of codexes below Tau was to point repercussions another Eldar level Dex could have, not saying that none of them should be buffed. Seriously though. You gotta research that word strawman if you gunna throw it around like this. Cause this is incredible.
