Elite marines rather than horde marines please. Rather than just point reductions, a simple change that would head marines in the right direction would be 5 man squads should be able to take 2 special weapons plus the sergeant. Something sisters and scions ridiculously can already do...
I think that the problem with Marines (and a lot of other troops) is that they are specifically designed to be middle of the road, jack of all trades units, because that’s the aesthetic of line infantry from the real world. Unfortunately in a competitive game setting, that makes them undesirable by default compared to more specialised units.
Ultimately, line infantry are never going to be the awesome, battle winning, must-take units that you want them to be, unless GW does something really radical, like mandate that 50% of your points have to be spent on troop choices. And they aren’t going to do that , because it would murder the flexibility of the game.
I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Honestly, there's a lot of units in the game which would benefit from paying for deep strike as an option instead of having it baked in to their base price.
In general, I'd rather see many units going up in cost so that we have more room to work in. Leave marines where they are and adjust everything up until marines are good.
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Or like Grey Knights pay ~20points more than Space Marines for their Dreadnoughts.
A ranged Dreadnought with Astral Aim is awesome... but the second one paying 20 points for a 12" Smite... ehhh not so much
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
So with more targets it becomes less effective? Riiight.
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
So with more targets it becomes less effective? Riiight.
No, the point is that in larger games, it's easier to focus fire on more units until they are dead and RP cannot be used at all. As much as I hated when RP was basically FnP in 7E (because it's more fun for then to stand back up), it would be far more useful if it was like that in 8E
Alternatively, RP should be allowed to roll immediately if a unit is ever completely destroyed (only once per turn, of course)
Jadenim wrote: I think that the problem with Marines (and a lot of other troops) is that they are specifically designed to be middle of the road, jack of all trades units, because that’s the aesthetic of line infantry from the real world. Unfortunately in a competitive game setting, that makes them undesirable by default compared to more specialised units.
Ultimately, line infantry are never going to be the awesome, battle winning, must-take units that you want them to be, unless GW does something really radical, like mandate that 50% of your points have to be spent on troop choices. And they aren’t going to do that , because it would murder the flexibility of the game.
Well it's pretty obvious why it doesn't work. They pay too much for what they bring to the table. A unit that can shoot 1 unit and then charge another and at least hold it's own is actaully useful. A unit that does half the damage as a unit that costs the same amount then actually does more damage in combat even with a str 3 or ws 4+ and actually out survives because it has double the wounds. It's clear 1 is just better.
A tactical marine at 10 points still sucks. It will at least be capable of "holding it's own" which is what a generalist unit needs to do.
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
So with more targets it becomes less effective? Riiight.
You realize right dead unit gets no roll? In 1k wiping out 20 warriors in turn might actually fail. In 2k that requires more bad luck. In 3k stupidity on opponents part.
Might be usefull in future to check rule in question before commenting if you don't know how it works
Brutus_Apex wrote: Why would the loyalist land raider get that, but not the chaos one? That makes no sense.
No vehicles should be able to be locked into combat by any infantry, period.
Yup, 40k so desperately needs some kind of trampling and free strike rules a la Warmachine.
Try to lock a massive vehicle in melee? No feth you Grots! I'll just run you over. On the flipside we have a dedicated HTH unit that finally gets into melee and is still locked there next turn. The remaining troops simply walk away with zero penalty (yeah, like you were going to shoot with those 2 remaining FW, Orks, whatever...) and the rest of the army opens up on them. Units being safer in HTH was a viable tactic in previous editions and something like the free strike mechanic in WMH where if someone wishes to disengage the opponent gets to hit them on the way out can make the decision to do so a little riskier than it currently is.
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
So with more targets it becomes less effective? Riiight.
You realize right dead unit gets no roll? In 1k wiping out 20 warriors in turn might actually fail. In 2k that requires more bad luck. In 3k stupidity on opponents part.
Might be usefull in future to check rule in question before commenting if you don't know how it works
Basically this. RP would be fine as is, with a couple of buffs to it's support. The best suggestion I've seen is to change the wording on Reserection Orbs so they can activated at anytime. That way you could pop the orb midway through your opponents shooting phase to prevent a unit being wiped out. A 2/3CP stratagem to allow a dead unit to roll RP would also be grand (or you could tie this ability to Spyders, give them a reason to exist. But yeah, you can 'fix' RP without changing the rule itself.
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
So with more targets it becomes less effective? Riiight.
No, the point is that in larger games, it's easier to focus fire on more units until they are dead and RP cannot be used at all.
As much as I hated when RP was basically FnP in 7E (because it's more fun for then to stand back up), it would be far more useful if it was like that in 8E
Alternatively, RP should be allowed to roll immediately if a unit is ever completely destroyed (only once per turn, of course)
-
Yeah then necrons would just be deathgaurd that shoots a lot better. That isn't a good solution ether. Points drops are the best solution. On things like warriors and immortals. They basically suffer from the exact same issues as space marines - they pay too much for stats that get ignored by lots of weapons - that means their stats should come with discounts.
On the issue of RP though. Lets just have a thought experiment.
Lets say a 2000 point army has just enough fire power to kill 1 big necron unit and deny it's RP. At 2500 points it doesn't have enough fire power to kill that big unit twice. So it's going to have residual firepower going into a unit without destroying it. So you will get RP rolls there where you wouldn't at 2000k points. It's pretty easy to figure that more points = more oppertunity to get RP.
I'm just saying now along with a Wraithknight needing a HELL of a point decrease, I believe the starcannon is the exact same as an Avenger Gatling Cannon but is 2D6 instead of straight 12.
I wanted a Wraithknight, I'm new to Eldar completely but I feel it's been punished heavily for editions I never even actively played and everyone's fine with it being awful now for no reason.
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
So with more targets it becomes less effective? Riiight.
No, the point is that in larger games, it's easier to focus fire on more units until they are dead and RP cannot be used at all.
As much as I hated when RP was basically FnP in 7E (because it's more fun for then to stand back up), it would be far more useful if it was like that in 8E
Alternatively, RP should be allowed to roll immediately if a unit is ever completely destroyed (only once per turn, of course)
-
Yeah then necrons would just be deathgaurd that shoots a lot better. That isn't a good solution ether. Points drops are the best solution. On things like warriors and immortals. They basically suffer from the exact same issues as space marines - they pay too much for stats that get ignored by lots of weapons - that means their stats should come with discounts.
On the issue of RP though. Lets just have a thought experiment.
Lets say a 2000 point army has just enough fire power to kill 1 big necron unit and deny it's RP. At 2500 points it doesn't have enough fire power to kill that big unit twice. So it's going to have residual firepower going into a unit without destroying it. So you will get RP rolls there where you wouldn't at 2000k points. It's pretty easy to figure that more points = more oppertunity to get RP.
You're massively underselling the lethality of 8th edition 40K and using convenient maths. Another thought experiment. Necrons at 2000pts, you can wipe out 4 units a turn. Move up to 2500 pts, you can wipe out 5 units a turn instead. No lost efficiency against RP.
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
So with more targets it becomes less effective? Riiight.
No, the point is that in larger games, it's easier to focus fire on more units until they are dead and RP cannot be used at all.
As much as I hated when RP was basically FnP in 7E (because it's more fun for then to stand back up), it would be far more useful if it was like that in 8E
Alternatively, RP should be allowed to roll immediately if a unit is ever completely destroyed (only once per turn, of course)
-
Yeah then necrons would just be deathgaurd that shoots a lot better. That isn't a good solution ether. Points drops are the best solution. On things like warriors and immortals. They basically suffer from the exact same issues as space marines - they pay too much for stats that get ignored by lots of weapons - that means their stats should come with discounts.
On the issue of RP though. Lets just have a thought experiment.
Lets say a 2000 point army has just enough fire power to kill 1 big necron unit and deny it's RP. At 2500 points it doesn't have enough fire power to kill that big unit twice. So it's going to have residual firepower going into a unit without destroying it. So you will get RP rolls there where you wouldn't at 2000k points. It's pretty easy to figure that more points = more oppertunity to get RP.
You're massively underselling the lethality of 8th edition 40K and using convenient maths. Another thought experiment. Necrons at 2000pts, you can wipe out 4 units a turn. Move up to 2500 pts, you can wipe out 5 units a turn instead. No lost efficiency against RP.
Fair enough, but if that's the case you're just saying that RP has no effect at any points value. That's not the case.
I haven't played many games vs necrons, because tbh not many people use them. When I did, a big unit of flayed ones wouldn't quite die (there were 1-2 left), then all of them came back. It was a very frustrating game! RP should have a mechanism where it's pretty reliable throughout - not this binary thing (however appropriate that may be) where either all of them come back or none do.
The system in ~4th edition was that necrons that came back could join other units of the same type. So if a whole unit died then they'd get up again in the next one over. You had to mark each dead necron and it could only get up if there was something within 6" of that model - which was a hassle as you had a lot of dead models lying around the place and generally getting in the way.
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
So with more targets it becomes less effective? Riiight.
No, the point is that in larger games, it's easier to focus fire on more units until they are dead and RP cannot be used at all.
As much as I hated when RP was basically FnP in 7E (because it's more fun for then to stand back up), it would be far more useful if it was like that in 8E
Alternatively, RP should be allowed to roll immediately if a unit is ever completely destroyed (only once per turn, of course)
-
Yeah then necrons would just be deathgaurd that shoots a lot better. That isn't a good solution ether. Points drops are the best solution. On things like warriors and immortals. They basically suffer from the exact same issues as space marines - they pay too much for stats that get ignored by lots of weapons - that means their stats should come with discounts.
On the issue of RP though. Lets just have a thought experiment.
Lets say a 2000 point army has just enough fire power to kill 1 big necron unit and deny it's RP. At 2500 points it doesn't have enough fire power to kill that big unit twice. So it's going to have residual firepower going into a unit without destroying it. So you will get RP rolls there where you wouldn't at 2000k points. It's pretty easy to figure that more points = more oppertunity to get RP.
You're massively underselling the lethality of 8th edition 40K and using convenient maths. Another thought experiment. Necrons at 2000pts, you can wipe out 4 units a turn. Move up to 2500 pts, you can wipe out 5 units a turn instead. No lost efficiency against RP.
Fair enough, but if that's the case you're just saying that RP has no effect at any points value. That's not the case.
I haven't played many games vs necrons, because tbh not many people use them. When I did, a big unit of flayed ones wouldn't quite die (there were 1-2 left), then all of them came back. It was a very frustrating game! RP should have a mechanism where it's pretty reliable throughout - not this binary thing (however appropriate that may be) where either all of them come back or none do.
The system in ~4th edition was that necrons that came back could join other units of the same type. So if a whole unit died then they'd get up again in the next one over. You had to mark each dead necron and it could only get up if there was something within 6" of that model - which was a hassle as you had a lot of dead models lying around the place and generally getting in the way.
The reality is somewhere between my maths and yours, just getting the point across. It can pay off in a big way, but it's hugely unreliable. Also RP is amazing at lower point games because less firepower to concentrate and it's easier to hide behind cover to further reduce the odds of being focused down.
The 4th edition idea is nice, but back then we had like 4 unit types.
I honestly think the solutions I posted above would 'fix' RP. The change to Res Orbs especially, as that would allow necron players to be active in its use, rather than just hoping units didn't get wiped, it would add a tactical layer for us. Not hopeful for anything that major in CA though, so pts drops will have to do for now.
Gir Spirit Bane wrote: I'm just saying now along with a Wraithknight needing a HELL of a point decrease, I believe the starcannon is the exact same as an Avenger Gatling Cannon but is 2D6 instead of straight 12.
I wanted a Wraithknight, I'm new to Eldar completely but I feel it's been punished heavily for editions I never even actively played and everyone's fine with it being awful now for no reason.
Oh it's hugely overcosted.
Compared to a gallant Sword and board WK is a travesty. That varient probably needs to go down 120-150 points get ws2+ and +1 attack. LOL.
The 2x D cannon version shouldn't be much more expensive and the sun cannon versions needs to be the most expensive but probably be around the cost of a knight warden.
Honestly I considered, Decurion stupidly breaking it aside, 7th edition reanimation to be the best portrayal so far. It kept the bookkeeping trivial, and was equal opportunity: A save on every wound treated horde, elite and character units equally rather than prior setups that favoured horde units or the current setup that doesn’t allow characters to benefit from reanimation at all unless they burn command points to try it once per character.
demontalons wrote: I have to agree, anyone who plays necrons knows that you just focus fire each unit down and that’s easier to do the more points you get.
At 1000 PTs necrons are a hard force. Once you get into 1500 or more you’re basically ignoring RP but they’re still paying for it.
Point drops are the only real answer because most games are played in the 1000-2000 range.
If you just give them FNP then they lose their flavor and if you give them an enhanced version of what they already have it’s hard to balance them
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
So with more targets it becomes less effective? Riiight.
No, the point is that in larger games, it's easier to focus fire on more units until they are dead and RP cannot be used at all.
As much as I hated when RP was basically FnP in 7E (because it's more fun for then to stand back up), it would be far more useful if it was like that in 8E
Alternatively, RP should be allowed to roll immediately if a unit is ever completely destroyed (only once per turn, of course)
-
Yeah then necrons would just be deathgaurd that shoots a lot better. That isn't a good solution ether. Points drops are the best solution. On things like warriors and immortals. They basically suffer from the exact same issues as space marines - they pay too much for stats that get ignored by lots of weapons - that means their stats should come with discounts.
On the issue of RP though. Lets just have a thought experiment.
Lets say a 2000 point army has just enough fire power to kill 1 big necron unit and deny it's RP. At 2500 points it doesn't have enough fire power to kill that big unit twice. So it's going to have residual firepower going into a unit without destroying it. So you will get RP rolls there where you wouldn't at 2000k points. It's pretty easy to figure that more points = more oppertunity to get RP.
You're massively underselling the lethality of 8th edition 40K and using convenient maths. Another thought experiment. Necrons at 2000pts, you can wipe out 4 units a turn. Move up to 2500 pts, you can wipe out 5 units a turn instead. No lost efficiency against RP.
Not really how it works.
If you are targeting 5 units with sufficient enough firepower to destroy them (more than you need) but there is maybe a 1 and 6 chance of failing. In which situation are you most likely to have a unit failed to be destroyed? In a situation with 3 units being targeted with a 1/6 chance of failing to be destroyed or with 5 units with a 1/6 chance of failing to be destroyed? Obviously - more chances is more likely to actually get RP. So increased points increases chances of RP getting use. It is common sense really.
IanVanCheese wrote: I'm not as doom and gloom on RP as everyone else, we just pay too much for it. It's a nice rule when it works, but we're paying out the arse for it.
GW seems to assume that rules like this will always go off. Same way GK pay for teleporting, even though half the army has to start on the board and they can't drop in till turn 2 now.
Problem is it becomes less effective the bigger the game. 1k it's nice. 2k it's usefull only by luck. 3k might just as well not exist.
So with more targets it becomes less effective? Riiight.
No, the point is that in larger games, it's easier to focus fire on more units until they are dead and RP cannot be used at all.
As much as I hated when RP was basically FnP in 7E (because it's more fun for then to stand back up), it would be far more useful if it was like that in 8E
Alternatively, RP should be allowed to roll immediately if a unit is ever completely destroyed (only once per turn, of course)
-
Yeah then necrons would just be deathgaurd that shoots a lot better. That isn't a good solution ether. Points drops are the best solution. On things like warriors and immortals. They basically suffer from the exact same issues as space marines - they pay too much for stats that get ignored by lots of weapons - that means their stats should come with discounts.
On the issue of RP though. Lets just have a thought experiment.
Lets say a 2000 point army has just enough fire power to kill 1 big necron unit and deny it's RP. At 2500 points it doesn't have enough fire power to kill that big unit twice. So it's going to have residual firepower going into a unit without destroying it. So you will get RP rolls there where you wouldn't at 2000k points. It's pretty easy to figure that more points = more oppertunity to get RP.
You're massively underselling the lethality of 8th edition 40K and using convenient maths. Another thought experiment. Necrons at 2000pts, you can wipe out 4 units a turn. Move up to 2500 pts, you can wipe out 5 units a turn instead. No lost efficiency against RP.
Not really how it works.
If you are targeting 5 units with sufficient enough firepower to destroy them (more than you need) but there is maybe a 1 and 6 chance of failing. In which situation are you most likely to have a unit failed to be destroyed? In a situation with 3 units being targeted with a 1/6 chance of failing to be destroyed or with 5 units with a 1/6 chance of failing to be destroyed? Obviously - more chances is more likely to actually get RP. So increased points increases chances of RP getting use. It is common sense really.
OK cool, glad we have it sorted. RP is fine everyone, I expect to see Necrons crushing the tournament scene shortly.
RP is incredibly easy to negate. Sure, a few random shots might get wasted at the end on a unit you can't wipe out, but the priority targets will always get focused down and wiped out. You're trying to invent maths to prove something that 100% of necron players will tell you isn't true. RP is easier to negate at higher points levels.
buddha wrote: I'll take any points drops for Necrons but they need a whole rework from the ground up since RP just doesn't work.
This is how I feel about my Daemons, more or less.
Would love to think points will change it, but realistically they're waiting for another book unless I'm content playing nothing but troop choices.
And one of the issues with "X just needs a points drop" is that if A, B, C and X, Y, Z all get dropped in cost, what was the point? The net affect is that X is still more expensive than other options.
It's actually why I really hope the rumors are true that MEQs are only getting dropped by a little, but that chaff units are getting more expensive.
The proportions of cost are what need to be changed, not just a wholesale drop in points.
It's also a pretty lame approach to just lower the cost of a unit that still wound get to use a fun fluffy rule. The rule should be useful too, even if the unit pays less for it.
Not inveting maths. Talking about hypothetical situations.
Just trying to dispel the notion that RP becomes more useless as points go up. It doesn't. Also - it is fine. It's one of the stronger army wide abilities. Necrons just have some bad units that need point drops (this is a big deal).
A better stratagem to improve RP or possibly to strat rolling RP before a unit gets destroyed or maybe a 1 time use ability for units.
Lets say in a small game, you have 3 theats shooting at 1 unit. Lets say they have a 1/6 chance of surviving. So there's a 1/6 chance they get RP.
Lets say a large game has 12 threats shooting at 4 units. You plan to divide it so you have 3 shooting at each. You shoot the first 3 at unit 1, next 3 at unit 2, and so forth. Each, in theory, has a 1/6 chance.
Assuming you don't deviate, there is a higher chance RP (1-(5/6)^4) actually impacts the larger game. However, the impact of one RP happening in the larger game is a quarter of the impact of RP in the smaller game. So it's a more normalized impact. At worst, it's the same boat as the smaller game: each unit has a 1/6 chance of getting RP, with 4 chances at it for a quarter the impact each in the larger game.
However, all that demands you don't deviate. Consider, in the larger game, what happens if your first 2 units wipe out threat #1. Your 3rd unit can now be reallocated, reducing the odds of one of the other units by a lot. There are no situations that take the odds of any of those squads getting RP *up* throughout the turn, but many scenarios that allow reallocation to take the odds *down*.
You might say "but that requires that one of the four sets of units skew high!" - that's true. But if any one of them skews high, the odds of RP on the other sets drops a lot. If any one of them skews low, the odds of RP on the other sets are not impacted.
Finally, there's the bracketing. Lets say it takes 3 of your units to wipe one of his in one turn. Lets say each of those units is worth half of one RP-capable blob. In a game where you have 6 of those units, and he has 3 of his, you can wipe 2 in one turn. In a game where you have 2 and he has 1, you can't wipe even a single unit. However, as points go up, the remainder of [your unit count] mod 3 continues to average the same constant value. Thus, it becomes a smaller and smaller factor in the game. For instance, if you have 4 units and he has 2, having 25% of your units run into RP is much less of a loss than in a game where you have 40 and he has 20: in the latter case, it's only 2.5% of your units that run into RP.
There are many reasons why RP is a bigger deal in smaller games than bigger ones.
Xenomancers wrote: Not inveting maths. Talking about hypothetical situations.
Just trying to dispel the notion that RP becomes more useless as points go up. It doesn't. Also - it is fine. It's one of the stronger army wide abilities. Necrons just have some bad units that need point drops (this is a big deal).
A better stratagem to improve RP or possibly to strat rolling RP before a unit gets destroyed or maybe a 1 time use ability for units.
But your example is wrong. You wont target 5 units and everyone has a chance of surviving. You target the first unit till dead, then the second, and so on. Still there should be a unit or to with loses in the end, but some units will be destroyed.
Still I am also thinking points adjustments should be enough to bring Necrons back on track.
My guess is Grey Knights and Daemons are the hardest to get right.
Xenomancers wrote: Not inveting maths. Talking about hypothetical situations.
Just trying to dispel the notion that RP becomes more useless as points go up. It doesn't. Also - it is fine. It's one of the stronger army wide abilities. Necrons just have some bad units that need point drops (this is a big deal).
A better stratagem to improve RP or possibly to strat rolling RP before a unit gets destroyed or maybe a 1 time use ability for units.
Thats why I love dakkadakka Always knowing the value and strength of certain abilities, units, lists better than actual pro players and their results in tournaments!
Put it this way:
"small" game: You can kill ~30 Warriors a turn.
1 20man dies with high likelyhood.
1 20man has ~ 10 left.
You roll 10 RPs.
"large" game: You can kill 300 Warriors a turn.
14 20man units die with high likelyhood.
1 20man has a ~50/50 of getting a high number of RPs - up to 19.
1 20man unit has ~50/50 chance of getting a low number of RPs.
Those last two cases are mutually exclusive, and added together come out to an EV of just slightly below 20/2 - or 10.
So with those numbers, a small game has ~10 RP rolls and a game 10x that size has ~10 RP rolls. And each successful roll in the small game has 10x the impact of a successful roll in the large game.
Xenomancers wrote: Not inveting maths. Talking about hypothetical situations.
Just trying to dispel the notion that RP becomes more useless as points go up. It doesn't. Also - it is fine. It's one of the stronger army wide abilities. Necrons just have some bad units that need point drops (this is a big deal).
A better stratagem to improve RP or possibly to strat rolling RP before a unit gets destroyed or maybe a 1 time use ability for units.
But your example is wrong. You wont target 5 units and everyone has a chance of surviving. You target the first unit till dead, then the second, and so on. Still there should be a unit or to with loses in the end, but some units will be destroyed.
Still I am also thinking points adjustments should be enough to bring Necrons back on track.
My guess is Grey Knights and Daemons are the hardest to get right.
Grey Knights need pts drops badly, but they'd also benefit massively from getting their old Nemesis Strike Force rule back i.e. let them deepstrike turn 1. They used to be able to do it when no one else could, it was their unique thing.
But yeah, your way of disproving the maths is correct. You focus down units until dead, you don't divide your firepower up into 5ths and then say " oh well, onto the next unit" if your allocated 5th fails to kill a unit. You just keep shooting it until it's gone. There might be some trickle shots at the end that can't finish off a unit, but realistically against a good player, only one unit will ever get to roll RP. The rest will get wiped.
Again - that is not how games work - as the number of target prorities goes up the more difficult it becomes to efficiently target 1 unit.
Things like rapid fire - nonoptimal weapon choices. When you consider these factors - shooting a unit to wipe them out with the wrong weapons - decreases your chances of destroying another unit. It just doesn't work the way you are saying. There is a point where you have to let a unit go so you can shoot the right targets with the right weapons. Plus ofc - the worse you are rolling the more of a factor this is. Since dice roll worse than average 50% of the time...I fail to understand how your units get destroyed every game - everytime - no fail. Maybe check your opponents dice.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: Put it this way:
"small" game: You can kill ~30 Warriors a turn.
1 20man dies with high likelyhood.
1 20man has ~ 10 left.
You roll 10 RPs.
"large" game: You can kill 300 Warriors a turn.
14 20man units die with high likelyhood.
1 20man has a ~50/50 of getting a high number of RPs - up to 19.
1 20man unit has ~50/50 chance of getting a low number of RPs.
Those last two cases are mutually exclusive, and added together come out to an EV of just slightly below 20/2 - or 10.
So with those numbers, a small game has ~10 RP rolls and a game 10x that size has ~10 RP rolls. And each successful roll in the small game has 10x the impact of a successful roll in the large game.
The argument is that RP is useless in larger games. When you are in fact more likely to get more RP rolls in a large game. Also the way I like to put it - you could have an actually worthless ability called ATSKNF. Also - the majority of RP's power is in forcing non optimal weapons to shoot units to finish them off. That effect only gets bigger as games get bigger.
Any chance we can move on from RP? We can agree that a better RP mechanic would be best for everybody. This same discussion seems to start up every other page. We all hope it ends up being better, because most people want to face capable, thematically colourful Necron armies, and my opponent wants their cool, thematic rule to feel great. I think we're all on the same page, for the most part. Until there's some news or rumours about Necron changes, I'm not sure its worth rehashing this over and over again.
We can talk about how greater daemons are still crap if you like. The only way I can think of fixing them is by allowing lesser daemons absorb wound for them .
dan2026 wrote: We can talk about how greater daemons are still crap if you like. The only way I can think of fixing them is by allowing lesser daemons absorb wound for them .
Hive Tyrants work. Greater Daemons just need a 4+ save and a points drop to be on curve with the Tyrant. Or a big drop in points. Bigger problems are things like Crushers, Fiends, Beasts of Nurgle, Seekers, Screamers, Chariots, Heralds of Tzeentch, ... Okay, like 80% of the book is a problem.
dan2026 wrote: We can talk about how greater daemons are still crap if you like. The only way I can think of fixing them is by allowing lesser daemons absorb wound for them .
Hive Tyrants work. Greater Daemons just need a 4+ save and a points drop to be on curve with the Tyrant. Or a big drop in points. Bigger problems are things like Crushers, Fiends, Beasts of Nurgle, Seekers, Screamers, Chariots, Heralds of Tzeentch, ... Okay, like 80% of the book is a problem.
Horrors. Just make them make any kind of sense in Matched.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I am curious if we will see any actual datasheet changes. Since those Tau rumors were false, it makes that seem less likely.
The only other place I've seen it mentioned was in passing in the original thread where the FWS live stream leaks were gathered. It hinted at there being some, but that the leaker wasn't aware of which ones.
I imagine that's as thin as a rumour can get. Still hope, but probably not that likely...
New rumour from B&C suggested a mini would be involved in the package. Cue the Primaris Lieutenant jokes. I'm not inclined to believe this particular rumour...but I imagine if there's any model that would be included, it would have to be that Sisters of Battle sculpt they originally showed off in the announcement.
dan2026 wrote: We can talk about how greater daemons are still crap if you like. The only way I can think of fixing them is by allowing lesser daemons absorb wound for them .
Hive Tyrants work. Greater Daemons just need a 4+ save and a points drop to be on curve with the Tyrant. Or a big drop in points. Bigger problems are things like Crushers, Fiends, Beasts of Nurgle, Seekers, Screamers, Chariots, Heralds of Tzeentch, ... Okay, like 80% of the book is a problem.
Horrors. Just make them make any kind of sense in Matched.
Horrors are atleast somewhat usable. A unit which gets +1S and Flickering Flames from a Herald has some power. The problem would rather be the overcosted Herald. He costs more than a Neurotrope while being dramatically worse.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I am curious if we will see any actual datasheet changes. Since those Tau rumors were false, it makes that seem less likely.
The only other place I've seen it mentioned was in passing in the original thread where the FWS live stream leaks were gathered. It hinted at there being some, but that the leaker wasn't aware of which ones.
I imagine that's as thin as a rumour can get. Still hope, but probably not that likely...
New rumour from B&C suggested a mini would be involved in the package. Cue the Primaris Lieutenant jokes. I'm not inclined to believe this particular rumour...but I imagine if there's any model that would be included, it would have to be that Sisters of Battle sculpt they originally showed off in the announcement.
Yeah, I hope certain big problem characters, like Guilliman get looked at and possibly new data sheets. Just changing his points doesn't work. But yeah, that is a pretty thin rumor.
As for the mini, I would be fine with a Sister of Battle, even though I don't play them or have any desire to play them. But...it will be a Lieutenant. Because we only have like eight different molds of it. Seriously, not enough.
We're getting a bit off-topic with the wishlisting about reanimation protocols and what GW should do. It's been talked to death; please take that discussion to the 40k Proposed Rules forum.
A little bit of wishlisting is OK, but this debate has gone on long enough.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I am curious if we will see any actual datasheet changes. Since those Tau rumors were false, it makes that seem less likely.
The only other place I've seen it mentioned was in passing in the original thread where the FWS live stream leaks were gathered. It hinted at there being some, but that the leaker wasn't aware of which ones.
I imagine that's as thin as a rumour can get. Still hope, but probably not that likely...
New rumour from B&C suggested a mini would be involved in the package. Cue the Primaris Lieutenant jokes. I'm not inclined to believe this particular rumour...but I imagine if there's any model that would be included, it would have to be that Sisters of Battle sculpt they originally showed off in the announcement.
Yeah, I hope certain big problem characters, like Guilliman get looked at and possibly new data sheets. Just changing his points doesn't work. But yeah, that is a pretty thin rumor.
As for the mini, I would be fine with a Sister of Battle, even though I don't play them or have any desire to play them. But...it will be a Lieutenant. Because we only have like eight different molds of it. Seriously, not enough.
Love it to be the Sister - but yeah its likely yet another Marine. Hoping for some leaks about the Sister beta dex soon!
Love it to be the Sister - but yeah its likely yet another Marine. Hoping for some leaks about the Sister beta dex soon!
Well, keep in mind that the originals sculpt they showed us at Warhammer Fest (not Adepticon, sorry) specifically mentioned this...
This Battle Sister will be the first you’ll be able to get your hands on, a special preview release ahead of the main wave to make the wait a little bit more bearable.
Chapter Approved with a beta Sisters Codex is a great place for that to happen...
Love it to be the Sister - but yeah its likely yet another Marine. Hoping for some leaks about the Sister beta dex soon!
Well, keep in mind that the originals sculpt they showed us at Warhammer Fest (not Adepticon, sorry) specifically mentioned this...
This Battle Sister will be the first you’ll be able to get your hands on, a special preview release ahead of the main wave to make the wait a little bit more bearable.
Chapter Approved with a beta Sisters Codex is a great place for that to happen...
Love it to be the Sister - but yeah its likely yet another Marine. Hoping for some leaks about the Sister beta dex soon!
Well, keep in mind that the originals sculpt they showed us at Warhammer Fest (not Adepticon, sorry) specifically mentioned this...
This Battle Sister will be the first you’ll be able to get your hands on, a special preview release ahead of the main wave to make the wait a little bit more bearable.
Chapter Approved with a beta Sisters Codex is a great place for that to happen...
That is a VERY good point! That has me convinced!
I really hope we get to see something starting next week, but my guess is previews are at least two weeks away. But time will tell.
So far, based on the rumors, I will have a few more points for my army. At the very least, enough to look at more options in my list. If the 5-10% decrease on SM units is true, I can think of a lot of things I can do with 100-200 pts. Maybe even turn my Rhino into a Land Raider Crusader!
I'm sure we'll see quite a few shifts in the meta after all of this. My big hope is that the beta codex is accepted by tournaments for Sisters to use so that we can get a lot of good playtesting at big events from sisters players.
If it's not allowed for whatever dumb reason, then that'll be troublesome.
drbored wrote: I'm sure we'll see quite a few shifts in the meta after all of this. My big hope is that the beta codex is accepted by tournaments for Sisters to use so that we can get a lot of good playtesting at big events from sisters players.
If it's not allowed for whatever dumb reason, then that'll be troublesome.
It will certainly be allowed. Tournaments always use beta rules.
drbored wrote: I'm sure we'll see quite a few shifts in the meta after all of this. My big hope is that the beta codex is accepted by tournaments for Sisters to use so that we can get a lot of good playtesting at big events from sisters players.
If it's not allowed for whatever dumb reason, then that'll be troublesome.
It will certainly be allowed. Tournaments always use beta rules.
Not quite. NOVA, for instance, did not allow any of the Forgeworld Custodes beta rules.
drbored wrote: I'm sure we'll see quite a few shifts in the meta after all of this. My big hope is that the beta codex is accepted by tournaments for Sisters to use so that we can get a lot of good playtesting at big events from sisters players.
If it's not allowed for whatever dumb reason, then that'll be troublesome.
It will certainly be allowed. Tournaments always use beta rules.
Not quite. NOVA, for instance, did not allow any of the Forgeworld Custodes beta rules.
Interesting - they aren't super strong or anything - I wonder why?
They have used all the proposed beta rules for DS/Character targeting/Smite - ect.
drbored wrote: I'm sure we'll see quite a few shifts in the meta after all of this. My big hope is that the beta codex is accepted by tournaments for Sisters to use so that we can get a lot of good playtesting at big events from sisters players.
If it's not allowed for whatever dumb reason, then that'll be troublesome.
It will certainly be allowed. Tournaments always use beta rules.
Not quite. NOVA, for instance, did not allow any of the Forgeworld Custodes beta rules.
Interesting - they aren't super strong or anything - I wonder why?
They have used all the proposed beta rules for DS/Character targeting/Smite - ect.
I have no idea why, but you can read the thread where I asked about them right here on dakkadakka here:
Danarc wrote: - Rites of Banishment is getting removed or changed, seems GK are getting the regular Smite power
If this is true, I wonder if TS Aspiring Sorcerers will get regular Smite as well. It'd go some way towards incentivizing people to actually take Rubrics in a TS army again.
Rubrics need a version of Smite where some aspect of it is based on their squad size. Like Mini smite if 5 or less, regular smite at 6 or more, and casting bonuses above 10 and 15. And 5 man soul reapers back too. I want to bring back my army that is based on a core of 3 10 man rubric squads :( But they are such a huge missed opportunity. There should have been buff powers and strats for them.
Giving Rubrics full smite would essentially make you decide if you want maximum smite value or if you want the Soulreaper Cannon. I think at current points costs you'd want the smite every time, though.
Arachnofiend wrote: Giving Rubrics full smite would essentially make you decide if you want maximum smite value or if you want the Soulreaper Cannon. I think at current points costs you'd want the smite every time, though.
Yeah, between a few cannon shots that need to hit, wound and pass save, versus 1D3 of direct wounds the choice is easy. Especially since upgrading the squad to get the cannon is 113pts, more than a minimal 5-man unit
I will still build my 10-man squad for fluffness, but if the Rubrics/Scarabs get full smite I will be more than happy! I'd prefer to see Rubrics spam than Tzaangor spam personally if it came to that
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in order to cast multiple smites, the roll needed keeps getting higher, right? So, would the winning move be (assuming certain points changes) to have 3-small squads smiting, and a large squad or two with soul reaper cannons to secure objectives in the backfield?
cuda1179 wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but in order to cast multiple smites, the roll needed keeps getting higher, right? So, would the winning move be (assuming certain points changes) to have 3-small squads smiting, and a large squad or two with soul reaper cannons to secure objectives in the backfield?
cuda1179 wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but in order to cast multiple smites, the roll needed keeps getting higher, right? So, would the winning move be (assuming certain points changes) to have 3-small squads smiting, and a large squad or two with soul reaper cannons to secure objectives in the backfield?
1000 sons ignore smite penalty.
Currently, but they certainly would get a penalty, because full fat smite with no penalty is way to easy to cheese.
Giving actual Rubric Squads (and Grey Knight infantry squads) the full current TS smite, but taking it away from characters would be a good way to incentivise people to actually field the (non-Tzangoor/Cultist) infantry units and move away from TS being degraded to character-keyword-protected smite batteries souped into other stuff.
Giving actual Rubric Squads (and Grey Knight infantry squads) the full current TS smite, but taking it away from characters would be a good way to incentivise people to actually field the (non-Tzangoor/Cultist) infantry units and move away from TS being degraded to character-keyword-protected smite batteries souped into other stuff.
I feel like a solution that makes Ahriman worse at magic murder than the psykers of other factions should be dismissed outright.
kombatwombat wrote: Mortal Wounds are an unbalanceable, anti-fun mechanic that need to go away, not become more prolific.
If Smite is given a weapon profile rather than Mortal Wounds then we can talk about upping GK/1kSons’ access to it.
Agreed. Or, at the very least, be very limited. They should never do more than definitely in any circumstance.
Also agreed. It seems such a waste that psychic army = smite spam this edition. Especially in the case of rubrics. The sorcerer should be there to enhance the rubrics, not just be another smite. It would have been great if they had powers to buff rubric attacks, shooting, defense, range, etc.
And offensive psychic powers are dull and flavorless in general because they all average the same amount of MW with only slight variation.
In AoS you can use the "smite" power only once per turn, so it was hardly that the problem. Tzeenthc in AoS murders you with a spam of mortal wounds from spells, but they all come from Tzeentch specific spells.
Agree on this. GKs and Tsons should have powerful magic, and should be better balanced in general - I think everyone agrees on that.
But the way they should be improved is with reasonable points costs and maybe more access to cool abilities - not by just letting them spam smite all day. That would make the army better, but not more fun to play with or against.
Brutus_Apex wrote: They really need to move away from this mortal wound gak. Why do all spells cause mortal wounds? Why can’t they have normal profiles again?
Apparently it was because of high invul saves.
Which sort of makes sense, but they should really be rarer, or every army should have a way to deny.
You do actually get a save against mortal wounds in the form of FNP, so its not as if there are absolutely no defenses.
Brutus_Apex wrote: They really need to move away from this mortal wound gak. Why do all spells cause mortal wounds? Why can’t they have normal profiles again?
Apparently it was because of high invul saves.
Which sort of makes sense, but they should really be rarer, or every army should have a way to deny.
You do actually get a save against mortal wounds in the form of FNP, so its not as if there are absolutely no defenses.
Yeah, but ONLY mortal wounds makes psychic powers utterly one-note and lame. There should be allowed to be anti-infantry psychic powers AND anti-elite psychic powers and anti tank psychic powers...you know, like we've had in every edition of 40k for all time until this one stupid mechanic was thought up.
Brutus_Apex wrote: They really need to move away from this mortal wound gak. Why do all spells cause mortal wounds? Why can’t they have normal profiles again?
Apparently it was because of high invul saves.
Which sort of makes sense, but they should really be rarer, or every army should have a way to deny.
You do actually get a save against mortal wounds in the form of FNP, so its not as if there are absolutely no defenses.
Yeah, but ONLY mortal wounds makes psychic powers utterly one-note and lame. There should be allowed to be anti-infantry psychic powers AND anti-elite psychic powers and anti tank psychic powers...you know, like we've had in every edition of 40k for all time until this one stupid mechanic was thought up.
Whilst Mortal Wounds works fine as a mechanic = having varied weapons profiles (and multiple for some) for spells including non MW would be fine by me.
Mortal wounds punish elite armies and means nothing to hordes, which encourages everyone to add some sort of cheap horde/screen to their armies. It's probably the one part that I hate the most about 8th edition, the need to bubble wrap everything. Just not my playstyle.
Well, there are some powers which are scaling with unit size. (Roll a d6 for each model in the unit and MW on 6s) The problem here is that many chaff units come in small sizes. There will be 6×10 guardsmen and not 3×20. I would be in favor of more rules to make MSUs worse. Or make min size of chaff units bigger. Would also make Battalion spaming harder.
I think it would be better if psychic attacks had a strength characteristic, and that inflicts a mortal wound.
Like, instead of smite dealing an automatic D3 MW, it would be it deals D3 S4 hits that deal mortal wounds. That way it would hurt light infantry more than heavy infantry, giving guns a reason to exist.
Abilities that already have a good chance of failing shouldn't suffer from this - Da Krunch and Seismic Assault, for example, already need a 6 to proc a mortal wound, and as such a strength value would be unnecessary.
Spoletta wrote: In AoS you can use the "smite" power only once per turn, so it was hardly that the problem. Tzeenthc in AoS murders you with a spam of mortal wounds from spells, but they all come from Tzeentch specific spells.
Didn't stop people from using it above all else when available, at the cost of all other spells.
Smite is selected as a power too often. Nerfing it for everyone would solve that. Buffing everything else would also solve that. Which is easier, do you think?
Spoletta wrote: In AoS you can use the "smite" power only once per turn, so it was hardly that the problem. Tzeenthc in AoS murders you with a spam of mortal wounds from spells, but they all come from Tzeentch specific spells.
Didn't stop people from using it above all else when available, at the cost of all other spells.
Smite is selected as a power too often. Nerfing it for everyone would solve that. Buffing everything else would also solve that. Which is easier, do you think?
Yes, exactly. They changed it in AOS 2 and it is for the better. It still has value, but doesn't overwhelm has spells.
Make smite 1 wound but not nearest target - that way it can target specific units with high invulns but won't be overwhelmingly strong.
Yeah GWs screwed up the Tzeentch daemons psychic powers. I am super mad about that genestealer cult power that is old school Treason of Tzeench and just infinitely better and more usable than the current version.
As far as smite goes it was only broken when a 30pt model could take it and be spammed. Allowing Rubrics access to full smite would not be broken. Hell since 1ksons don't have access to a high amount of heavy weapons I would say it would go along way towards making the codex usable. As of right now it may as well just be called Codex Supreme Command Detachment.
GW just needs to straight move away from almost any mechanic they put into AOS, it’s just a terrible rules system on almost every conceivable level.
Morale phase, psychic/ magic phase, counter-intuitive dice roll modifier mechanics, mortal wounds, removal of USR’s.
All of these things are bringing down the game.
Smite spam would be reined in by bringing back the power dice/dispel dice pool for the psychic phase. Not the 7th Ed. Mechanics though, that was worse than what we have now.
Brutus_Apex wrote: GW just needs to straight move away from almost any mechanic they put into AOS, it’s just a terrible rules system on almost every conceivable level.
Morale phase, psychic/ magic phase, counter-intuitive dice roll modifier mechanics, mortal wounds, removal of USR’s.
All of these things are bringing down the game.
Smite spam would be reined in by bringing back the power dice/dispel dice pool for the psychic phase. Not the 7th Ed. Mechanics though, that was worse than what we have now.
They should really take the magic system from WHFB. That was a solid mechanic. The problem with magic in 8th ed were the spells, not the core mechanic.
I don't understand the hatred of mortal wounds. By all means - turn smite into plasma guns shots. I don't care. You will probably bitch about them then too.
Xenomancers wrote: I don't understand the hatred of mortal wounds. By all means - turn smite into plasma guns shots. I don't care. You will probably bitch about them then too.
To be fair, its probably more to do with the psychic phase. Too many armies lack adequate protection, and smite is too easy to cast. Even with the cumulative modifiers you are probably going to get at least 3 off.
Brutus_Apex wrote: GW just needs to straight move away from almost any mechanic they put into AOS, it’s just a terrible rules system on almost every conceivable level.
Morale phase, psychic/ magic phase, counter-intuitive dice roll modifier mechanics, mortal wounds, removal of USR’s.
All of these things are bringing down the game.
Smite spam would be reined in by bringing back the power dice/dispel dice pool for the psychic phase. Not the 7th Ed. Mechanics though, that was worse than what we have now.
Considering its popularity, more so with AOS 2.0 that's never happening. They are seeing what is working and well liked with AOS and implementing those parts into 40k.
Smite spams a problem, not nearly as much as a problem as command points and allies are.
20% allies rule from AOS would do 40k some good. Wouldn't fix the guard detachment issue but max of 400 points of allies in a 2k game is a step in the right direction.
Cephalobeard wrote: Is smite more difficult to cast than just, for example, firing a 45pt model with an auto hitting lascannon that forces vehicles to explode?
Yes? You still have to wound with a traktor cannon, there are still saves and you only get the damage buff against vehicles that can fly. Do you get saves against smite? Does smite have to wound?
Xenomancers wrote: I don't understand the hatred of mortal wounds. By all means - turn smite into plasma guns shots. I don't care. You will probably bitch about them then too.
To be fair, its probably more to do with the psychic phase. Too many armies lack adequate protection, and smite is too easy to cast. Even with the cumulative modifiers you are probably going to get at least 3 off.
And what should each of my 120 to 160+ point psykers be doing with it's only 18 to 24" weapon that can occasionally cause them to receive mortal wounds for risking it?
Xenomancers wrote: I don't understand the hatred of mortal wounds. By all means - turn smite into plasma guns shots. I don't care. You will probably bitch about them then too.
To be fair, its probably more to do with the psychic phase. Too many armies lack adequate protection, and smite is too easy to cast. Even with the cumulative modifiers you are probably going to get at least 3 off.
Okay so lets say that's 3 TS exaulteds - that's 360 points.
Would you rather be stomped on by a gallant for 15 ws2 str 8 ap-2 d3 damage attacks? The perception of mortal wounds is vastly overblown by the fact it just seems like you are picking up models and are helpless (which in the case of a TS cultist horde you really are because you can't get to what is hurting you) I think it's really about character targeting. That is the source of the hate.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cephalobeard wrote: Is smite more difficult to cast than just, for example, firing a 45pt model with an auto hitting lascannon that forces vehicles to explode?
iGuy91 wrote: Have there been any new leaks from CA at this point?
Nope. Nothing since last Thursday or so. The T'au leaks were apparently faked, so that leaves just the initial leak and the changes to Land Raiders for actual reveals.
Cephalobeard wrote: Is smite more difficult to cast than just, for example, firing a 45pt model with an auto hitting lascannon that forces vehicles to explode?
Yes? You still have to wound with a traktor cannon, there are still saves and you only get the damage buff against vehicles that can fly.
Do you get saves against smite? Does smite have to wound?
You have to cast it, you have to be in range of something worth hitting, you have to roll for between one and three damage, and you have to pay the Psyker tax on the model you're using (in many scenarios).
Let's just use a Disc Herald, as a basic example, and around 100pts.
I can, as Daemons, roll for smite. I need a 5+ then I have to position myself within 18" of a target worth smiting. Most times this is just going to be a screen, at which point those 100pts would have been better as almost anything else.
This argument appears fruitless, but let's not treat smite like it's some big boogieman that is easy to do, when at this point in 8th basically every army has "easy" ways to wound things, and at this point many of them are cheaper and most times easier to use.
Were the Tau rumors ever actually proved fake? I thought the person that posted the obvious fake was different to the one who posted the original Tau leaks?
I figured they just posted to show how easy it would be to fake them, but it doesn't prove they are fake.
IanVanCheese wrote:Were the Tau rumors ever actually proved fake? I thought the person that posted the obvious fake was different to the one who posted the original Tau leaks?
I figured they just posted to show how easy it would be to fake them, but it doesn't prove they are fake.
I thought the original source of them at B&C recanted. I could be wrong about that though.
Darsath wrote:As far as I know, all of the recent Leaks are fake. All we can do is speculate atm.
The initial leak (picture in the OP) came from a source that has literally never been less than 100% accurate, so I think we can treat those as fairly certain.
Brutus_Apex wrote: GW just needs to straight move away from almost any mechanic they put into AOS, it’s just a terrible rules system on almost every conceivable level.
Morale phase, psychic/ magic phase, counter-intuitive dice roll modifier mechanics, mortal wounds, removal of USR’s.
All of these things are bringing down the game.
Smite spam would be reined in by bringing back the power dice/dispel dice pool for the psychic phase. Not the 7th Ed. Mechanics though, that was worse than what we have now.
Interestingly, all of these things you purport as bringing down the game are also the same things that brought so many back.
At least there's still 30k for you if you like all that stuff.
Smite spam is strong, yes, but, it costs so much in terms of points.
A list I’m contemplating for Heat 3 has Ahriman on a Disc, 2 DPs with Wings, 1 Exalted on Disc and 2 Shamans in it.
Sure, I can put out a lot of MWs with those 6 units, but, it also costs me 847 points out of my 1750. Throw in the required Tzaangor bomb for 220 points, I’m now left with 683 points to spend on the rest of the army – 603 if you default to 2 units of Cultists for a Battalion.
Oh, and, when running the Tzaangor bomb you’re likely using 4 of your 11 casts on Weaver, Glamour, Gaze of Fate and possibly Prescience to buff the bomb up. After that, you’re looking at 6 smites and then 1 other power, for a grand total of maybe 21 MW IF all D3s are 3.
However, in retaliation, all you really have to do is kill the Tzaangor bomb (or at least drop it to a handful of models) and then move around to directly target the characters. Most lists can do this, especially if they get first turn, leaving them in a position to weather turns 1-3 and essentially win in turns 3-6.
IanVanCheese wrote: Were the Tau rumors ever actually proved fake? I thought the person that posted the obvious fake was different to the one who posted the original Tau leaks?
I figured they just posted to show how easy it would be to fake them, but it doesn't prove they are fake.
Yes, the original source from B&C apologized - they weren't reall, they were shared by a member in a separate Tau community and he pushed them out as he found them. Was supposed to be an inside troll job of one person poking fun at another and it blew up, from what I can gather.
IanVanCheese wrote: Were the Tau rumors ever actually proved fake? I thought the person that posted the obvious fake was different to the one who posted the original Tau leaks?
I figured they just posted to show how easy it would be to fake them, but it doesn't prove they are fake.
Yes, the original source from B&C apologized - they weren't reall, they were shared by a member in a separate Tau community and he pushed them out as he found them. Was supposed to be an inside troll job of one person poking fun at another and it blew up, from what I can gather.
Fair enough, sad times. They looked like solid changes.
Interestingly, all of these things you purport as bringing down the game are also the same things that brought so many back.
At least there's still 30k for you if you like all that stuff.
Actually, I think it was more GW’s openness with the community and the destruction of the 7th edition that got people’s interest piqued. AOS was still in its first edition when 8th came out and people still thought it was utter gak. 2nd ed. Hasn’t changed my mind either.
People want to see GW do well, myself included. I didn’t like 7th ed. Any more than anyone else here, but truthfully 40k has always been a bad game, and 8th hasn’t changed that. They’ve just doubled down on the ridiculously stupid and immersion breaking rules of AOS rather than the mind-numbingly convoluted rules of 7th.
All I’m doing is calling it what it is. Bad. I’ve said that they made some good changes with 8, but for every positive change, they made a negative one.
The stuff I listed above is bad, and I don’t know how anyone can look at those rules with a straight face and call them good.
Interestingly, all of these things you purport as bringing down the game are also the same things that brought so many back.
At least there's still 30k for you if you like all that stuff.
Actually, I think it was more GW’s openness with the community and the destruction of the 7th edition that got people’s interest piqued. AOS was still in its first edition when 8th came out and people still thought it was utter gak. 2nd ed. Hasn’t changed my mind either.
People want to see GW do well, myself included. I didn’t like 7th ed. Any more than anyone else here, but truthfully 40k has always been a bad game, and 8th hasn’t changed that. They’ve just doubled down on the ridiculously stupid and immersion breaking rules of AOS rather than the mind-numbingly convoluted rules of 7th.
All I’m doing is calling it what it is. Bad. I’ve said that they made some good changes with 8, but for every positive change, they made a negative one.
The stuff I listed above is bad, and I don’t know how anyone can look at those rules with a straight face and call them good.
It's called 'different strokes for different folks' but with sales climbing and tournament attendance swelling dramatically across the U.S. I think the evidence strongly points to people liking them.
Interestingly, all of these things you purport as bringing down the game are also the same things that brought so many back.
At least there's still 30k for you if you like all that stuff.
Actually, I think it was more GW’s openness with the community and the destruction of the 7th edition that got people’s interest piqued. AOS was still in its first edition when 8th came out and people still thought it was utter gak. 2nd ed. Hasn’t changed my mind either.
People want to see GW do well, myself included. I didn’t like 7th ed. Any more than anyone else here, but truthfully 40k has always been a bad game, and 8th hasn’t changed that. They’ve just doubled down on the ridiculously stupid and immersion breaking rules of AOS rather than the mind-numbingly convoluted rules of 7th.
All I’m doing is calling it what it is. Bad. I’ve said that they made some good changes with 8, but for every positive change, they made a negative one.
The stuff I listed above is bad, and I don’t know how anyone can look at those rules with a straight face and call them good.
Maybe for you. As someone that ran a local gaming club prior to 8th dropping, and then coordinated the start of 4 more since 8th arrived, the 120 people closely related to these clubs have been pretty vocal as to what interested them.
Sure, anecdotal, but my experience has suggested that a vast majority of the people in my local area weren't drawn back or interested simply because GW became more vocal - they aren't the type to be following WarCom or Facebook posts anyway. They just like the simpler ruleset that produces more dynamic, cinematic experiences (to quote a few of our members).
8th has been a success. I don't think that can be argued.
The only reason my local group isn't playing 7th again is that we like a lot of the new models and armies. I mean, I couldn't play my Custodes in 7th. A lot of the new Nurgle daemon stuff wouldn't be usable for our Daemon player.
That said, when Malevolence lands we're very strongly considering giving up on 8th for a while and doing Heresy since our Daemons player will have options finally (He's the reason we haven't made the move already... The rest of us at least have Marine armies we could use, if not straight up 30k ones like me)
I don't get what people dislike about the psychic phase in 8th. It's very straightforward and I've yet to see a game that was actually decided in the psychic phase. (Yeah, I don't know people with Tzeentch armies...) You throw out some buffs here and there but there's nothing overpowered in it and your opponent can react if he/she has a psyker - or not.
I saw batreps about WHFB 8th. edition and got to say the psychic phase there was the most boring and fiddly thing I've ever seen, but still deciding games and making blocks of armies disappear without doing anything. I don't want that in 40K.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: I don't get what people dislike about the psychic phase in 8th. It's very straightforward and I've yet to see a game that was actually decided in the psychic phase. (Yeah, I don't know people with Tzeentch armies...) You throw out some buffs here and there but there's nothing overpowered in it and your opponent can react if he/she has a psyker - or not.
I saw batreps about WHFB 8th. edition and got to say the psychic phase there was the most boring and fiddly thing I've ever seen, but still deciding games and making blocks of armies disappear without doing anything. I don't want that in 40K.
It scales horribly, mostly.
Combo randomised powers with a shared but limited resource pool and you get a recipe for “battery” units that only exist to allow a handful of key powers to go off. I can assure you that even when a psyker-Heavy army was well optimised, it wasn’t remotely fun to play.
Dr. Mills wrote: Glad to see that (hopefully) GW saw sense and instead of increasing points costs of popular choices instead decreased the costs of unpopular choices.
Glad to see my wish for cheaper Custodian wardens and Allarus terminators was granted. The big one though if true is Trajaan Valoris being 175pts rather than 250pts. That is a MASSIVE reduction but sorely needed as he simply was too expensive to take.
Also good to see named characters getting cheaper. I haven't seen any apart from Rowboat Girlyman twice since I started playing 8th.
I'd rather have overperformers being brought back into line, 8th edition already suffers enough from damage creep. Just reducing costs across the board makes every army sans Custodes/ IK a horde army, and that's not what I'd like to see.
Anyhow, if all these rumors are true that has only furthered my interest in letting Custodes represent my SW infantry on the tabletop for a properly elite feel. It just feels bad and wrong to see a Grey Hunter squad be obliterated by a random 10-Guardsmen squad that got FRFSRF.
Xenomancers wrote: I don't understand the hatred of mortal wounds. By all means - turn smite into plasma guns shots. I don't care. You will probably bitch about them then too.
To be fair, its probably more to do with the psychic phase. Too many armies lack adequate protection, and smite is too easy to cast. Even with the cumulative modifiers you are probably going to get at least 3 off.
Okay so lets say that's 3 TS exaulteds - that's 360 points.
Would you rather be stomped on by a gallant for 15 ws2 str 8 ap-2 d3 damage attacks? The perception of mortal wounds is vastly overblown by the fact it just seems like you are picking up models and are helpless (which in the case of a TS cultist horde you really are because you can't get to what is hurting you) I think it's really about character targeting. That is the source of the hate.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cephalobeard wrote: Is smite more difficult to cast than just, for example, firing a 45pt model with an auto hitting lascannon that forces vehicles to explode?
Tractors are OP - smite is just good.
So because Knights are wonky, we leave the mechanic as is?
Smite spam is generally an issue because it is the only power that can be cast multiple times and by any psyker. Maybe they should just add a couple more generic powers that could be cast instead, like a generic buff and he ability.
CP farms, maybe swap the baselines around. 5 cp for battleforged, 3 for a battalion. Keep brigade at 12.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: I don't get what people dislike about the psychic phase in 8th. It's very straightforward and I've yet to see a game that was actually decided in the psychic phase. (Yeah, I don't know people with Tzeentch armies...) You throw out some buffs here and there but there's nothing overpowered in it and your opponent can react if he/she has a psyker - or not.
I saw batreps about WHFB 8th. edition and got to say the psychic phase there was the most boring and fiddly thing I've ever seen, but still deciding games and making blocks of armies disappear without doing anything. I don't want that in 40K.
Let's just put it this way:
My army is made of magical Daemons. Literally Daemons made of magic, serving the god of magic. In previous editions, I would syphon that magical power and turn it into scaling powers, summon allies, or utilize cantrip powers in varying degrees.
In 8th, however, you cannot use a power more than once. This isn't like anything else in any other phase, imagine for example if you paid points for wargear (You do pay a psyker tax) and then the item said you could have many of those guns in your army, but you can only fire one per turn.
Because that's all psychic powers are in 8th. They're just guns in a different phase, and that feels bad for the theme of the army.
You don't fall in love with the lore of an army and paint them, only to put them on the table and go "Hehe, I shoot my BRAIN GUN! I need to roll an 8 to cast it, oops, used a reroll, Hurray! It deals... wait, let's roll a d3 here... Oh, it deals 2 Wounds. Well, at leats I can smite! Oh, you had a screening unit. Well, two of them die, as well! I sure am glad I paid 335 points for this Lord of Change, master of Magic."
Edit: I'll also add, why would it be so wrong for an army or two, or three or four, to be able to "Decide" a game in the psychic phase. We have armies that decide them in the shooting phase, in the combat phase, and often times many armies have little defense against those, either. People love to complain about Knights, Custodes, etc, but I can tell you right now if people could use Smites relatively freely, those things wouldn't be an issue.
I would argue that popularity is never a good indicator of whether or not something is good.
I’m certainly not arguing that 8th has been a success. It absolutely has. And that’s good for everyone in the long run.
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t discuss issues within the edition.
The simplicity I get, but you can only simplify to a point. I’m arguing that the game has been oversimplified to the point where it starts breaking down. Sometimes things need to be more complex to keep the game in check.
And I would argue that 8th ed WHFB had the best mechanics for magic/psychic phase that GW has ever produced. The issues with it were that the top level spells were too powerful and it didn’t scale. But generally the mechanics were sound.
Xenomancers wrote: I don't understand the hatred of mortal wounds. By all means - turn smite into plasma guns shots. I don't care. You will probably bitch about them then too.
To be fair, its probably more to do with the psychic phase. Too many armies lack adequate protection, and smite is too easy to cast. Even with the cumulative modifiers you are probably going to get at least 3 off.
Okay so lets say that's 3 TS exaulteds - that's 360 points.
Would you rather be stomped on by a gallant for 15 ws2 str 8 ap-2 d3 damage attacks? The perception of mortal wounds is vastly overblown by the fact it just seems like you are picking up models and are helpless (which in the case of a TS cultist horde you really are because you can't get to what is hurting you) I think it's really about character targeting. That is the source of the hate.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cephalobeard wrote: Is smite more difficult to cast than just, for example, firing a 45pt model with an auto hitting lascannon that forces vehicles to explode?
Tractors are OP - smite is just good.
So because Knights are wonky, we leave the mechanic as is?
You're not making any sense.
it was just an example of power. That could be a levi dread firing 20 auto cannons shots hitting on 2's. It could be 60 khabs firing 120 poison shots. It is quite clear - smite does not have the damage potential of other units weapons. So complaining about it is really confusing to me.
Eh... Smite is fine, but it really should be included under the Psychic Focus rule.
Battalion detachment needs to go back to 3 CP's. Brigade detachment needs to go back to 9 CP's. It was an incredibly stupid move to change these. CP refunding wasn't an issue until this change occurred.
I just had a thought, I think its new, but I'm not sure... What if there were no limitations on gained / refunded CP's, but rather any gained / refunded CP's need to be used before the end of the turn or they're lost forever and you cannot gain / refund additional CP's off of these.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: It's very straightforward and I've yet to see a game that was actually decided in the psychic phase. (Yeah, I don't know people with Tzeentch armies...)
Well, my first game ended when my Herald of Slaanesh took the last wounds from a knight a la Smite. So....yeah....
Everytimes you shoot a dissie - the next time you shoot a dessie it should be -1 to hit and -1 in addition for each consecutive shot.
Here you go - beta smite applied to the shooting phase^
Doesn't that just sound dumb? By applying this beta smite to the game they are basically saying that smite spam is stronger than shooting spam. Which I can prove to you with math - is not even close to being true. Shooting is way more powerful than smite.
Xenomancers wrote: I don't understand the hatred of mortal wounds. By all means - turn smite into plasma guns shots. I don't care. You will probably bitch about them then too.
I agree. Mortal wounds were one of the necessary additions to the game for anyone thats played competitively in the last 10 years. Do you folks realize how utterly impossible to beat armies like custodes or talos spam become when you remove that mechanic? Unkillable units suck the life out of the game faster then mortal wounds. People are conflating two issues here. Horde coupled with smite is too strong and invalidates elite units. It's a one two combo. They need to make chaf suffer immense damage to moral again so it isn't the only way to build out your army. They were stupid and designed reserves and tanks so you require screening. Allow tank shock and shooting when falling back for tanks and suddenly chaf isn't nearly as necessary, especially if they crack down on all the stupid fearless mechanics.
oni wrote: Eh... Smite is fine, but it really should be included under the Psychic Focus rule.
Battalion detachment needs to go back to 3 CP's. Brigade detachment needs to go back to 9 CP's. It was an incredibly stupid move to change these. CP refunding wasn't an issue until this change occurred.
I just had a thought, I think its new, but I'm not sure... What if there were no limitations on gained / refunded CP's, but rather any gained / refunded CP's need to be used before the end of the turn or they're lost forever and you cannot gain / refund additional CP's off of these.
The entire method of generating CP is flawed. It should scale based on investment in a detachment. So for example, you need to spend a minimum of say 300pts on a battalion to gain the 3 CP, if you spend 450 you get the 5 CP. It would make it so everyone is on level ground and can get to the same total rather then 184pts loyal 32nd IG being pimped out left and right. It would also mean armies that have expensive troops can compete, and armies with cheap troops just get more points to spend on elites, FA, flyers and heavy support from that same battalion before they get that CP.
Interestingly, all of these things you purport as bringing down the game are also the same things that brought so many back.
At least there's still 30k for you if you like all that stuff.
Actually, I think it was more GW’s openness with the community and the destruction of the 7th edition that got people’s interest piqued. AOS was still in its first edition when 8th came out and people still thought it was utter gak. 2nd ed. Hasn’t changed my mind either.
People want to see GW do well, myself included. I didn’t like 7th ed. Any more than anyone else here, but truthfully 40k has always been a bad game, and 8th hasn’t changed that. They’ve just doubled down on the ridiculously stupid and immersion breaking rules of AOS rather than the mind-numbingly convoluted rules of 7th.
All I’m doing is calling it what it is. Bad. I’ve said that they made some good changes with 8, but for every positive change, they made a negative one.
The stuff I listed above is bad, and I don’t know how anyone can look at those rules with a straight face and call them good.
AOS is a brilliant game, best I've played and a far better game than 40k has ever been(played since 3rd) or WHFB(played from 6th). Of course, that doesn't mean rules need to be taken from it - rules don't exist in a vacuum.
FYI I do agree with you about 8th ed magic. That was a beautiful system.
Part of the smite problem is only some armies are even going to take psykers, not all of them can. So casually I see a lot of armies with no anti psychic ability. So when they run into an opponent with psykers it's "uhmagerd OP!". Internet lists are pushing "efficiency" and getting every CP possible from as little points as possible. That approach for many doesn't look to include psykers.
My own feeling is that stratagems have become a crutch for lazy rules writing and poor playtesting. How long did it take to get a stratagem to provide turn 1 cover against alpha strike ?
The most damning thing for me is that I managed to get most of my player group into AoS and 40k with the new editions. People love AoS but 40k has been largely dumped because they see it as being more fiddly to play and armies harder to build. The ever growing restrictions are stupid , yes I know you can ignore them but we want legal armies for events.
I must have missed the fluff piece where Azrael deployed the Deathwing but told the other 70 they couldn't go for reasons. the whole approach is starting to reflect the early days of Privateer Press destroying Warmahordes.
Cephalobeard wrote: People wouldn't take as many Imperial Knights if they were getting chunked for 9+ Mortal Wounds a turn (low end) from armies, that's for sure.
They get a 5+++ from mortals for 1 CP point and they have 24 wounds. That is going to require 18 actual smites. To average a dead knight. So basically your whole army. A simple Farseer and 14 harliquen jetbikes will do just as much damage. Targeting the knight they want.
Cephalobeard wrote: People wouldn't take as many Imperial Knights if they were getting chunked for 9+ Mortal Wounds a turn (low end) from armies, that's for sure.
They get a 5+++ from mortals for 1 CP point and they have 24 wounds. That is going to require 18 actual smites. To average a dead knight. So basically your whole army. A simple Farseer and 14 harliquen jetbikes will do just as much damage. Targeting the knight they want.
If we're operating under the assumption that they're a mechanicum knight and that you've devoted yourself to just one rather than having options, sure.
A counter point will always exist, you understood my primary point, there's no need for us to be pedantic about it.
Cephalobeard wrote: People wouldn't take as many Imperial Knights if they were getting chunked for 9+ Mortal Wounds a turn (low end) from armies, that's for sure.
They get a 5+++ from mortals for 1 CP point and they have 24 wounds. That is going to require 18 actual smites. To average a dead knight. So basically your whole army. A simple Farseer and 14 harliquen jetbikes will do just as much damage. Targeting the knight they want.
If we're operating under the assumption that they're a mechanicum knight and that you've devoted yourself to just one rather than having options, sure.
A counter point will always exist, you understood my primary point, there's no need for us to be pedantic about it.
Nah my point is that mortal wounds aren't any better at killing knights that anti knight weapons and people still bring knights.
Beta smite was one of the dumbest rules I've ever seen and it actually made it through. It ruined your army as you pointed out. It really screwed my tyranids too.
Nah my point is that mortal wounds aren't any better at killing knights that anti knight weapons and people still bring knights.
Beta smite was one of the dumbest rules I've ever seen and it actually made it through. It ruined your army as you pointed out. It really screwed my tyranids too.
You're viewing the beta rule from a biased position. There's a limit to how much you can make IG psykers cost before they're totally worthless rag dolls.
Nah my point is that mortal wounds aren't any better at killing knights that anti knight weapons and people still bring knights.
Beta smite was one of the dumbest rules I've ever seen and it actually made it through. It ruined your army as you pointed out. It really screwed my tyranids too.
You're viewing the beta rule from a biased position. There's a limit to how much you can make IG psykers cost before they're totally worthless rag dolls.
There is also a limit on how many primaris psykers you can include in an army anyways. I was talking about TS smite anyways. It's not half as effective as harlequin jet bikes against knights.
Cephalobeard wrote: Is smite more difficult to cast than just, for example, firing a 45pt model with an auto hitting lascannon that forces vehicles to explode?
It's a krak missile. As comparison, you're getting more hits with a Typhoon Missile Launcher assuming BS3+ and no modifiers. Also, it only forces fliers to explode AFAIK. Lastly, math has established the Smasha Gun as more cost-effective in all situations, even against fliers.
Sounds less and less like people are taking issue with the psychic phase and more like people are taking issue work their army's performance in said phase. Not helpful to conflate those.
Well seen as we're talking about powers and crap.... if I had my way smite would only be allowed to be cast once and all other powers would be like the Ork powers able to teleport your units, give them more attacks, better saves, make them invisible (hehehehe joking on lastnone... we all remember what happened last time that happened).
Here's an idea for a Smite nerf... Keep all the current rules exactly as they are(range, damage, +1 to cast, and all of that), but if you fail a Smite attempt you can no longer cast Smite in that Psychic Phase or, if you wanted to get real crazy, if you fail a Smite attempt your whole Psychic Phase ends immediately. That would at least make you reconsider some of your spell choices possibly.
The problem with limiting how many times you can cast smite (or making you lose the rest of your phase entirely if it fails, yikes) is that you screw over psyker-heavy armies.
Smite really is not a problem anymore, not since Maelfic Lords got neutered and the "+1 for each successive casting attempt" rule was added.
Yep, the main problem with smite have been cheap psykers being spamed. With the rule of 3 and most of those nerfed, smite is pretty fine. I would agree that most of the other powers could need a buff, as Smite should always be your backup choice, and not your game plan. Limiting the psychic phase further as it is now will just drop it from okayish to utter garbage. Saying the phase should be over after one failed attempt is like saying you are only allowed to shoot until you failed one shot and then the shooting phase is done. Limiting Smite to one cast per turn would also be a no go. There are armys like Tyranids, Daemons and Thousand Sons which can easily bring enough psykers to run out of powers. More generic powers would also be cool, would give psykers some flexibility back.
Interestingly, all of these things you purport as bringing down the game are also the same things that brought so many back.
At least there's still 30k for you if you like all that stuff.
Actually, I think it was more GW’s openness with the community and the destruction of the 7th edition that got people’s interest piqued. AOS was still in its first edition when 8th came out and people still thought it was utter gak. 2nd ed. Hasn’t changed my mind either.
People want to see GW do well, myself included. I didn’t like 7th ed. Any more than anyone else here, but truthfully 40k has always been a bad game, and 8th hasn’t changed that. They’ve just doubled down on the ridiculously stupid and immersion breaking rules of AOS rather than the mind-numbingly convoluted rules of 7th.
All I’m doing is calling it what it is. Bad. I’ve said that they made some good changes with 8, but for every positive change, they made a negative one.
The stuff I listed above is bad, and I don’t know how anyone can look at those rules with a straight face and call them good.
AOS is a brilliant game, best I've played and a far better game than 40k has ever been(played since 3rd) or WHFB(played from 6th). Of course, that doesn't mean rules need to be taken from it - rules don't exist in a vacuum.
FYI I do agree with you about 8th ed magic. That was a beautiful system.
You're both high. The 8th ed magic system was trash that had all the blandness of the current system combined with the OP bullgakness of 7th ed 40k layered on a cake of pointless tedium. The 7th edition 40k 'magic' system was easily the worst but WHFB 8th's was a close second.
Brutus_Apex wrote: I would argue that popularity is never a good indicator of wheather or not some this good.
I’m certainly not arguing that 8th has been a success. It absolutely has. And that’s good for everyone in the long run.
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t discuss issues within the edition.
The simplicity I get, but you can only simplify to a point. I’m arguing that the game has been oversimplified to the point where it starts breaking down. Sometimes things need to be more complex to keep the game in check.
And I would argue that 8th ed WHFB had the best mechanics for magic/psychic phase that GW has ever produced. The issues with it were that the top level spells were too powerful and it didn’t scale. But generally the mechanics were sound.
Couldn't agree more
the current psychic phase is even worse and blander than the ''pass LD test'' we had a few editions ago. one of the main reason why I lost interest in 40k for the time being
You're both high. The 8th ed magic system was trash that had all the blandness of the current system combined with the OP bullgakness of 7th ed 40k layered on a cake of pointless tedium. The 7th edition 40k 'magic' system was easily the worst but WHFB 8th's was a close second
Spoken like someone who hasn't got a clue what good rules look like. Don't you actually like AoS? The fact that you can defend that garbage pretty much says it all.
I guess we're really trying to hit rock bottom with these brain dead, oversimplified rules just so Timmy and his friends can smash models together.
You're both high. The 8th ed magic system was trash that had all the blandness of the current system combined with the OP bullgakness of 7th ed 40k layered on a cake of pointless tedium. The 7th edition 40k 'magic' system was easily the worst but WHFB 8th's was a close second
Spoken like someone who hasn't got a clue what good rules look like. Don't you actually like AoS? The fact that you can defend that garbage pretty much says it all.
I guess we're really trying to hit rock bottom with these brain dead, oversimplified rules just so Timmy and his friends can smash models together.
Insulting someone and calling a game system garbage in the news and rumors section isnt helping get your point across buddy. Your just part of the problem
You're both high. The 8th ed magic system was trash that had all the blandness of the current system combined with the OP bullgakness of 7th ed 40k layered on a cake of pointless tedium. The 7th edition 40k 'magic' system was easily the worst but WHFB 8th's was a close second
Spoken like someone who hasn't got a clue what good rules look like. Don't you actually like AoS? The fact that you can defend that garbage pretty much says it all.
I guess we're really trying to hit rock bottom with these brain dead, oversimplified rules just so Timmy and his friends can smash models together.
Insulting someone and calling a game system garbage in the news and rumors section isnt helping get your point across buddy. Your just part of the problem
To be fair he was accused of being high for his opinion first. Not saying either party involved is right, but it's ridiculous to call him out and not ERJAK
Opinions vary, never understood why folks get uppity on here as if either sides opinion means jack all to the folks writing the rules. Even if you change the other guys mind the cards are gona turn up the same in the end anyway.
You're both high. The 8th ed magic system was trash that had all the blandness of the current system combined with the OP bullgakness of 7th ed 40k layered on a cake of pointless tedium. The 7th edition 40k 'magic' system was easily the worst but WHFB 8th's was a close second
Spoken like someone who hasn't got a clue what good rules look like. Don't you actually like AoS? The fact that you can defend that garbage pretty much says it all.
I guess we're really trying to hit rock bottom with these brain dead, oversimplified rules just so Timmy and his friends can smash models together.
I happen to like AoS too, a lot in fact. It is better designed than 40K 8th, which is a well designed game. 40K 7th edition psyphase was the worst we ever had, totally bland and without a shred of tactical play. 8th is leagues better in that regard, with actual choices, counterplay and tactical positioning involved. 7th was "Ok here are my 800 dices that i will all dump into this one invisibility power so that you can't dissipate it", also "Oh crap i rolled 15 powers on telepathy and didn't get a single invisibility, GG".
I love this forum. Smite spam hasn't been a viable thing since early 8th when malefic lords were 30 points. Yet here we are still having this same argument. The smite beta rule wasn't even needed TBH but meh whatever. I mean its not like there are way worse things out there at the moment that need attention.
I do tend to agree though that the psychic phase in this edition is not very rewarding. Only being able to cast all powers but smite once is just pure laziness on GW's side. Yes there are some powers that should be limited to one cast only but definitely not all of them. Another thing that bugs me is that all of the zap spells are just smite 2.0 there is no variety. I miss 7th ed Tzeentch psychic shooting I would love for the zap spells to end up more like that.
Well that's too bad, we are all just sitting on our hands waiting for more leaks to come out and wishlisting to fill the time. It's really kind of lame that CA 2018 won't be out until after black friday, because that could definitely inform some of my purchases for the holidays, and without it we are kind of stuck in analysis paralysis.
For my contribution to wishlisting, I'd like allies to be limited to a single detachment, since they are you know allies and not the main force. It would make the game a hell of a lot easier to balance.
I'll second the motion. Allies can only be ONE detachment. That would totally kill the Guard/ Slam Captain/ Knight lists and the Guard/Slam Captain/ Custodes Jetbike Captain lists.
The Salt Mine wrote: I love this forum. Smite spam hasn't been a viable thing since early 8th when malefic lords were 30 points. Yet here we are still having this same argument.
That’s because, as I said a few pages ago, Mortal Wounds are an unbalanceable and anti-fun mechanic that negatively impacts the enjoyment of the game for many people, overall detracting from the health of the game. Smite Spam doesn’t even come into the equation except when people try to argue that it not being the current meta hotness somehow justifies MWs’ continued existence.
While we’re wishlisting for CA, I would like to see some sort of escalating synergy with army cohesion. I’ve advocated for this entire edition something along the lines of:
- Whole army shares Imperium keyword -> Battleforged, can use generic Stratagems
- Whole army shares Adeptus Astartes keyword -> can use Codex Stratagems, Relics and Warlord Traits
- Whole army shares Imperial Fists keyword -> can use Stratagems, Relics and Warlord Traits tied to the Imperial Fists keyword
Coupled with a ‘CP can only be used by the Detachment that generated it, base 3 can be used by Warlord’s faction’ or similar just about foxes Soup, making it still a viable way to build an army that has advantages and disadvantages. You’d also have to include a Mercenaries rule saying that units with that rule don’t count for the purposes of having your whole army containing the respective keywords. This would apply to things like Inquisitors, Assassins, Fabius Bile etc and anything taken in an Auxiliary Detachment (except Super-Heavy Auxiliary).
Won’t happen, but that’s not the point of wishlisting!
Mud Turkey 13 wrote: Here's an idea for a Smite nerf... Keep all the current rules exactly as they are(range, damage, +1 to cast, and all of that), but if you fail a Smite attempt you can no longer cast Smite in that Psychic Phase or, if you wanted to get real crazy, if you fail a Smite attempt your whole Psychic Phase ends immediately. That would at least make you reconsider some of your spell choices possibly.
Right, because the one thing the psychic phase needs is to be more dependent on the outcome of a few dice rolls.
cuda1179 wrote: I'll second the motion. Allies can only be ONE detachment. That would totally kill the Guard/ Slam Captain/ Knight lists and the Guard/Slam Captain/ Custodes Jetbike Captain lists.
Which are, by far, the main issue about 40k. I'd approve the motion as well.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cinderspirit wrote: Yep, the main problem with smite have been cheap psykers being spamed. With the rule of 3 and most of those nerfed, smite is pretty fine. I would agree that most of the other powers could need a buff, as Smite should always be your backup choice, and not your game plan. Limiting the psychic phase further as it is now will just drop it from okayish to utter garbage. Saying the phase should be over after one failed attempt is like saying you are only allowed to shoot until you failed one shot and then the shooting phase is done. Limiting Smite to one cast per turn would also be a no go. There are armys like Tyranids, Daemons and Thousand Sons which can easily bring enough psykers to run out of powers. More generic powers would also be cool, would give psykers some flexibility back.
I agree, there's not a single army or even list that spams Smite sources and is overpowered. In many overpowered lists, on the other hand, there are things that are almost impossible to kill. Knights and custodes are the primary examples.
cuda1179 wrote: I'll second the motion. Allies can only be ONE detachment. That would totally kill the Guard/ Slam Captain/ Knight lists and the Guard/Slam Captain/ Custodes Jetbike Captain lists.
Which are, by far, the main issue about 40k. I'd approve the motion as well.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cinderspirit wrote: Yep, the main problem with smite have been cheap psykers being spamed. With the rule of 3 and most of those nerfed, smite is pretty fine. I would agree that most of the other powers could need a buff, as Smite should always be your backup choice, and not your game plan. Limiting the psychic phase further as it is now will just drop it from okayish to utter garbage. Saying the phase should be over after one failed attempt is like saying you are only allowed to shoot until you failed one shot and then the shooting phase is done. Limiting Smite to one cast per turn would also be a no go. There are armys like Tyranids, Daemons and Thousand Sons which can easily bring enough psykers to run out of powers. More generic powers would also be cool, would give psykers some flexibility back.
I agree, there's not a single army or even list that spams Smite sources and is overpowered. In many overpowered lists, on the other hand, there are things that are almost impossible to kill. Knights and custodes are the primary examples.
Do you know those lists already died with the nerf to CP regen eh?
Blackie wrote: I agree, there's not a single army or even list that spams Smite sources and is overpowered. In many overpowered lists, on the other hand, there are things that are almost impossible to kill. Knights and custodes are the primary examples.
Knights for sure, particularly when they’re allied to a screen that blocks your access to them so they can just blast away at you from afar. But Custodes? The Biker Captains with two 3++ relics are for sure, but that’s more a problem of the Supreme Command Detachment allowing access to multiples of them too easily. One 2+/3++/5+++ T6 W7 Captain is a challenge, 3 is just a drag. The rest of the Custodes army though? Guardians, Wardens, Terminators, Dreadnoughts and Land Raiders? They’re not particularly hard to kill given how much they cost.
Nah, bike captains are fine probably, they were dropped as soon as a better option came along. Compare them to a Daemon Prince for example.
The problem is, again, you get to triple dip on Relics and Stratagems, taking both the 3++ for the Captains but also being able to get your CP regen trait/relic and relic Castellan weapons with a warlord trait etc
Custdoes generally get worse with every new Codex it feels, more MW, more Damage 3, lots of multi damage etc
cuda1179 wrote: I'll second the motion. Allies can only be ONE detachment. That would totally kill the Guard/ Slam Captain/ Knight lists and the Guard/Slam Captain/ Custodes Jetbike Captain lists.
Which are, by far, the main issue about 40k. I'd approve the motion as well.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cinderspirit wrote: Yep, the main problem with smite have been cheap psykers being spamed. With the rule of 3 and most of those nerfed, smite is pretty fine. I would agree that most of the other powers could need a buff, as Smite should always be your backup choice, and not your game plan. Limiting the psychic phase further as it is now will just drop it from okayish to utter garbage. Saying the phase should be over after one failed attempt is like saying you are only allowed to shoot until you failed one shot and then the shooting phase is done. Limiting Smite to one cast per turn would also be a no go. There are armys like Tyranids, Daemons and Thousand Sons which can easily bring enough psykers to run out of powers. More generic powers would also be cool, would give psykers some flexibility back.
I agree, there's not a single army or even list that spams Smite sources and is overpowered. In many overpowered lists, on the other hand, there are things that are almost impossible to kill. Knights and custodes are the primary examples.
Allies aren't the main issue. The fact a codex can't BE by itself is the issue.
You fix a way to make Custodes playable by themselves and MAYBE you won't have this issue.
cuda1179 wrote: I'll second the motion. Allies can only be ONE detachment. That would totally kill the Guard/ Slam Captain/ Knight lists and the Guard/Slam Captain/ Custodes Jetbike Captain lists.
Which are, by far, the main issue about 40k. I'd approve the motion as well.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cinderspirit wrote: Yep, the main problem with smite have been cheap psykers being spamed. With the rule of 3 and most of those nerfed, smite is pretty fine. I would agree that most of the other powers could need a buff, as Smite should always be your backup choice, and not your game plan. Limiting the psychic phase further as it is now will just drop it from okayish to utter garbage. Saying the phase should be over after one failed attempt is like saying you are only allowed to shoot until you failed one shot and then the shooting phase is done. Limiting Smite to one cast per turn would also be a no go. There are armys like Tyranids, Daemons and Thousand Sons which can easily bring enough psykers to run out of powers. More generic powers would also be cool, would give psykers some flexibility back.
I agree, there's not a single army or even list that spams Smite sources and is overpowered. In many overpowered lists, on the other hand, there are things that are almost impossible to kill. Knights and custodes are the primary examples.
Allies aren't the main issue. The fact a codex can't BE by itself is the issue.
You fix a way to make Custodes playable by themselves and MAYBE you won't have this issue.
They are playable by themselves actually. Not top tiers but they do well in any real meta. The right fix would be merge those small factions into bigger ones, but GW politics is to sell more book so it won't gonna happen sadly.
And yes, soups are a huge issue at competitive levels. All the overpowered lists are soups. Not even the superscary drukhari and AM, without allies, are the real top tiers now. Maybe just knights, but again they're an army that shouldn't even exist, they should just be regular LoW and heavy support (the baby ones) choices for SM or some other imperium codexes.
Unfortunaltely in CA we won't have any significant changes to the allies mechanics, I just hope that points changes will be fair. For example I'm not totally in favor of discounting twin weapons like twin lascannons/ass cannons. Orks twin guns cost exactly like 2x the single gun's cost and the codex was released when CA was probably already printed.
BoomWolf wrote: Then isn't that easily solved by nerfing the jetbike captains?
Symptom rather than cause.
If CA changes or removes the supreme command detachment, and/or offers a new style for generating CPs, then I think we'll see more significant changes.
cuda1179 wrote: I'll second the motion. Allies can only be ONE detachment. That would totally kill the Guard/ Slam Captain/ Knight lists and the Guard/Slam Captain/ Custodes Jetbike Captain lists.
Which are, by far, the main issue about 40k. I'd approve the motion as well.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cinderspirit wrote: Yep, the main problem with smite have been cheap psykers being spamed. With the rule of 3 and most of those nerfed, smite is pretty fine. I would agree that most of the other powers could need a buff, as Smite should always be your backup choice, and not your game plan. Limiting the psychic phase further as it is now will just drop it from okayish to utter garbage. Saying the phase should be over after one failed attempt is like saying you are only allowed to shoot until you failed one shot and then the shooting phase is done. Limiting Smite to one cast per turn would also be a no go. There are armys like Tyranids, Daemons and Thousand Sons which can easily bring enough psykers to run out of powers. More generic powers would also be cool, would give psykers some flexibility back.
I agree, there's not a single army or even list that spams Smite sources and is overpowered. In many overpowered lists, on the other hand, there are things that are almost impossible to kill. Knights and custodes are the primary examples.
Allies aren't the main issue. The fact a codex can't BE by itself is the issue.
You fix a way to make Custodes playable by themselves and MAYBE you won't have this issue.
The Thing that keeps them relevant is the -1 to hit banner. Possibly the most broken thing in the entire game.
cuda1179 wrote: I'll second the motion. Allies can only be ONE detachment. That would totally kill the Guard/ Slam Captain/ Knight lists and the Guard/Slam Captain/ Custodes Jetbike Captain lists.
Which are, by far, the main issue about 40k. I'd approve the motion as well.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cinderspirit wrote: Yep, the main problem with smite have been cheap psykers being spamed. With the rule of 3 and most of those nerfed, smite is pretty fine. I would agree that most of the other powers could need a buff, as Smite should always be your backup choice, and not your game plan. Limiting the psychic phase further as it is now will just drop it from okayish to utter garbage. Saying the phase should be over after one failed attempt is like saying you are only allowed to shoot until you failed one shot and then the shooting phase is done. Limiting Smite to one cast per turn would also be a no go. There are armys like Tyranids, Daemons and Thousand Sons which can easily bring enough psykers to run out of powers. More generic powers would also be cool, would give psykers some flexibility back.
I agree, there's not a single army or even list that spams Smite sources and is overpowered. In many overpowered lists, on the other hand, there are things that are almost impossible to kill. Knights and custodes are the primary examples.
Allies aren't the main issue. The fact a codex can't BE by itself is the issue.
You fix a way to make Custodes playable by themselves and MAYBE you won't have this issue.
They are playable by themselves actually. Not top tiers but they do well in any real meta. The right fix would be merge those small factions into bigger ones, but GW politics is to sell more book so it won't gonna happen sadly.
And yes, soups are a huge issue at competitive levels. All the overpowered lists are soups. Not even the superscary drukhari and AM, without allies, are the real top tiers now. Maybe just knights, but again they're an army that shouldn't even exist, they should just be regular LoW and heavy support (the baby ones) choices for SM or some other imperium codexes.
Unfortunaltely in CA we won't have any significant changes to the allies mechanics, I just hope that points changes will be fair. For example I'm not totally in favor of discounting twin weapons like twin lascannons/ass cannons. Orks twin guns cost exactly like 2x the single gun's cost and the codex was released when CA was probably already printed.
How in denial does one have to be to think Custodes work as an individual army?
The Salt Mine wrote: I love this forum. Smite spam hasn't been a viable thing since early 8th when malefic lords were 30 points. Yet here we are still having this same argument.
That’s because, as I said a few pages ago, Mortal Wounds are an unbalanceable and anti-fun mechanic that negatively impacts the enjoyment of the game for many people, overall detracting from the health of the game. Smite Spam doesn’t even come into the equation except when people try to argue that it not being the current meta hotness somehow justifies MWs’ continued existence.
That is great! That is your opinion but you are wrong. The fact that MW spam is in no way shape or form dominating the meta right now proves that they can be balanced. Also anyone who played the disaster that was 7th ed with 2+ re rolling invulnerable saves and invisible death stars knows the necessity of mortal wounds. Just because your personal opinion of a game mechanic is negative doesn't mean that mechanic is any more difficult to balance than anything else or that it is too strong. I don't like playing against T'au and almost never have any fun when I do. Doesn't mean they are too good or, impossible to balance, or a badly designed faction.
As far as wish listing goes I hope Rubric and Scarab Occult get a significant points drop. I would like to see them at 15 ppm instead of 20 ppm. I would also like to see the soul reaper and warp flamer get the kill team treatment and get discounted to 4 points each. Don't know what I would price SOT at but all terminators in general need a huge point drop. They are pretty much the exact same as rubrics just with 2 wounds instead of 1 and twice the shots. Its a hard balancing act since if one option is more cost effective than the other they perform the same role so you would always just take that option. I want to say 30ppm after upgrades but not sure if that would be enough.
They work for fun games, but solo custodies is pure bad for anything remotely completive.
I own and tried it all, 20 bikes, mix, all the 30k stuff they brought over to 40k. the Telemon is great, but the problem is command points. I don't give two crap if they reduce the cost of all of it for them if I still cant get anywhere near the CPs others can get and generate. (also besides the telemon, all the 30k brought to 40k options are pretty crapo)
They work for fun games, but solo custodies is pure bad for anything remotely completive.
I own and tried it all, 20 bikes, mix, all the 30k stuff they brought over to 40k. the Telemon is great, but the problem is command points. I don't give two crap if they reduce the cost of all of it for them if I still cant get anywhere near the CPs others can get and generate. (also besides the telemon, all the 30k brought to 40k options are pretty crapo)
Which is why I said before and I'll say it again, they need a scaling system for CP generated. You should earn X CP for spending Y amount on your [Detachment] which ever it may be. What is breaking the game now is the fact that one faction/s gets the same CP from spending under 200 points that another faction gets for spending 500+ It's stupid. I'll go further and add that they REALLY need to tie CP to the faction that earns them as well. If you ally in guard and they bring with them 5 CP, that 5 CP should be only useable to them and not another faction keyword.
The Salt Mine wrote: I love this forum. Smite spam hasn't been a viable thing since early 8th when malefic lords were 30 points. Yet here we are still having this same argument.
That’s because, as I said a few pages ago, Mortal Wounds are an unbalanceable and anti-fun mechanic that negatively impacts the enjoyment of the game for many people, overall detracting from the health of the game. Smite Spam doesn’t even come into the equation except when people try to argue that it not being the current meta hotness somehow justifies MWs’ continued existence.
That is great! That is your opinion but you are wrong. The fact that MW spam is in no way shape or form dominating the meta right now proves that they can be balanced. Also anyone who played the disaster that was 7th ed with 2+ re rolling invulnerable saves and invisible death stars knows the necessity of mortal wounds. Just because your personal opinion of a game mechanic is negative doesn't mean that mechanic is any more difficult to balance than anything else or that it is too strong. I don't like playing against T'au and almost never have any fun when I do. Doesn't mean they are too good or, impossible to balance, or a badly designed faction.
As far as wish listing goes I hope Rubric and Scarab Occult get a significant points drop. I would like to see them at 15 ppm instead of 20 ppm. I would also like to see the soul reaper and warp flamer get the kill team treatment and get discounted to 4 points each. Don't know what I would price SOT at but all terminators in general need a huge point drop. They are pretty much the exact same as rubrics just with 2 wounds instead of 1 and twice the shots. Its a hard balancing act since if one option is more cost effective than the other they perform the same role so you would always just take that option. I want to say 30ppm after upgrades but not sure if that would be enough.
Ah so because 7th had rerollable 2++ means 8th needs stupid unbalancable mortal wounds despite no rerollable 2++. Yep. Makes sense. NOT!
They work for fun games, but solo custodies is pure bad for anything remotely completive.
I own and tried it all, 20 bikes, mix, all the 30k stuff they brought over to 40k. the Telemon is great, but the problem is command points. I don't give two crap if they reduce the cost of all of it for them if I still cant get anywhere near the CPs others can get and generate. (also besides the telemon, all the 30k brought to 40k options are pretty crapo)
Which is why I said before and I'll say it again, they need a scaling system for CP generated. You should earn X CP for spending Y amount on your [Detachment] which ever it may be. What is breaking the game now is the fact that one faction/s gets the same CP from spending under 200 points that another faction gets for spending 500+ It's stupid. I'll go further and add that they REALLY need to tie CP to the faction that earns them as well. If you ally in guard and they bring with them 5 CP, that 5 CP should be only useable to them and not another faction keyword.
Ehh - it's not really a concern that CP stay with the generated faction if CP are based on points and not cheap troops. I think you'd like my system in which every battle froged army starts with say 15 CP at 2000 points and detachments don't give you CP - they take away.
Batallion/Brigade are -0 for the first and -1 for additionals
All the Elite/HS/FA options are -2 points
All allied detachments are an additional -1 to whatever the cost of your detachment
Super heavy aux -2
patrol -1
ect.
This system really rewards you for bringing 1 detachment. Mono Codex will have the most CP. You can still bring allied detachments but it probably going to cost you at least 2 CP or probably 3.
They work for fun games, but solo custodies is pure bad for anything remotely completive.
I own and tried it all, 20 bikes, mix, all the 30k stuff they brought over to 40k. the Telemon is great, but the problem is command points. I don't give two crap if they reduce the cost of all of it for them if I still cant get anywhere near the CPs others can get and generate. (also besides the telemon, all the 30k brought to 40k options are pretty crapo)
Which is why I said before and I'll say it again, they need a scaling system for CP generated. You should earn X CP for spending Y amount on your [Detachment] which ever it may be. What is breaking the game now is the fact that one faction/s gets the same CP from spending under 200 points that another faction gets for spending 500+ It's stupid. I'll go further and add that they REALLY need to tie CP to the faction that earns them as well. If you ally in guard and they bring with them 5 CP, that 5 CP should be only useable to them and not another faction keyword.
Ehh - it's not really a concern that CP stay with the generated faction if CP are based on points and not cheap troops. I think you'd like my system in which every battle froged army starts with say 15 CP at 2000 points and detachments don't give you CP - they take away.
Batallion/Brigade are -0 for the first and -1 for additionals
All the Elite/HS/FA options are -2 points
All allied detachments are an additional -1 to whatever the cost of your detachment
Super heavy aux -2
patrol -1
ect.
This system really rewards you for bringing 1 detachment. Mono Codex will have the most CP. You can still bring allied detachments but it probably going to cost you at least 2 CP or probably 3.
I kind of like this idea. But 13 CP for someone who brings 4 Baneblades seems wrong. 11CP for 2 Knight SHA's?
-edit note - ** Mistaking Super Heavy Aux for The actual Super Heavy Detachments. But point still stands. This doesn't seem like it would fix the Knights who currently have to use some of their points for a loyal 32 **
They work for fun games, but solo custodies is pure bad for anything remotely completive.
I own and tried it all, 20 bikes, mix, all the 30k stuff they brought over to 40k. the Telemon is great, but the problem is command points. I don't give two crap if they reduce the cost of all of it for them if I still cant get anywhere near the CPs others can get and generate. (also besides the telemon, all the 30k brought to 40k options are pretty crapo)
Which is why I said before and I'll say it again, they need a scaling system for CP generated. You should earn X CP for spending Y amount on your [Detachment] which ever it may be. What is breaking the game now is the fact that one faction/s gets the same CP from spending under 200 points that another faction gets for spending 500+ It's stupid. I'll go further and add that they REALLY need to tie CP to the faction that earns them as well. If you ally in guard and they bring with them 5 CP, that 5 CP should be only useable to them and not another faction keyword.
Ehh - it's not really a concern that CP stay with the generated faction if CP are based on points and not cheap troops. I think you'd like my system in which every battle froged army starts with say 15 CP at 2000 points and detachments don't give you CP - they take away.
Batallion/Brigade are -0 for the first and -1 for additionals
All the Elite/HS/FA options are -2 points
All allied detachments are an additional -1 to whatever the cost of your detachment
Super heavy aux -2
patrol -1
ect.
This system really rewards you for bringing 1 detachment. Mono Codex will have the most CP. You can still bring allied detachments but it probably going to cost you at least 2 CP or probably 3.
I kind of like this idea. But 13 CP for someone who brings 4 Baneblades seems wrong. 11CP for 2 Knight SHA's?
-edit note - ** Mistaking Super Heavy Aux for The actual Super Heavy Detachments. But point still stands. This doesn't seem like it would fix the Knights who currently have to use some of their points for a loyal 32 **
The point is armies shouldn't have to spend points in another army to generate command points. Individual stratagems that are too powerful and whatnot can be dealt with individually. All this system does is fix the stupidity of requiring a loyal 32 in the first place. Every army should be able to generate it's own command points and allies should cost you command points not give them to you.
Also - knight lists will still likely include a batallion of something to screen and probably end up with about the same CP in the process.
Batallion +5
Lance +6
Battleforged +3
=14
Currently in my system a knight lance is a +0 detachment (special detachments count as batallions in the point scheme)
and an allied batallion is -2 so they start with 13 in my system.
Realistically though - they stay the same - but if you are mono custodes your CP doubles.
If you are CSM that likes to run 1 batallion your CP almost doubles.
If you are IG spamming a brigade and 2 batallions your CP goes down dramatically.
If you were including 3 allied detachments that were not battalions - you are taking a -3 per allied detachment and -2 for allied batallions.
Including a Castellan and a supreme command jetbike for IG would give you.
-3 for castellan
-3 for custodes supreme command
I do like that, I was just working up rather then backwards with penalties. I agree that CP shouldn't be tied to a faction with that method, but at the very least I like it as a second best fix to allies.
I kinda agree instead of making all psychic power 1 cast per turn. They should just limit it so psychic powers of 8 or more psychic power score can only be cast once per turn. Thus ensuring the strongest spells can only be cast once and minor psychic powers can be cast adnausem... adjust scores accordingly... the basic idea is your army is full of a certain amount of psychic energy each turn and you can only tap into so much before you drain that available energy.
I’d like to see command points restricted to the detachment that generates them rather than any specific keyword or anything. Maybe restrict it to keyword if you bring detachments with all the same key word (to encourage ‘pure’ armies) but if you bring a guard battery for your Knights, your guard should be the only one that can use their command points.
Considering how GW is drumming up interest for the Vigilus Weekender this weekend, including a banner instead of just an article on Warhammer Community and the newsletter announcing something big's going to happen, I wouldn't expect anything about Chapter Approved until the big news (as far as GW is concerned) is out. It would just draw attention away from that.
Considering how GW is drumming up interest for the Vigilus Weekender this weekend, including a banner instead of just an article on Warhammer Community and the newsletter announcing something big's going to happen, I wouldn't expect anything about Chapter Approved until the big news (as far as GW is concerned) is out. It would just draw attention away from that.
Mm yeah I saw that.
For marines they mentioned Ultramarines, space wolves and iron hands. Good to see a third chapter there that doesn't really get much love
gungo wrote: I kinda agree instead of making all psychic power 1 cast per turn. They should just limit it so psychic powers of 8 or more psychic power score can only be cast once per turn. Thus ensuring the strongest spells can only be cast once and minor psychic powers can be cast adnausem... adjust scores accordingly... the basic idea is your army is full of a certain amount of psychic energy each turn and you can only tap into so much before you drain that available energy.
No the issue is certain problem spells are way too easily cast at the moment. For example, any powers from the index were grandfathered over rather then readdressed. So powers like Miasma of pestilence and warp time are hilariously a WC 6+ power, while crappy direct damage spells like shards of light are a 7. Curse of the leper and gift of contagion are both a 7 while spells like psychic scream are a 6. Its so stupid. Yet they double down, just like marines not remembering their traits when they pilot vehicles lol, they don't fix it, they double down instead.
gungo wrote: I kinda agree instead of making all psychic power 1 cast per turn. They should just limit it so psychic powers of 8 or more psychic power score can only be cast once per turn. Thus ensuring the strongest spells can only be cast once and minor psychic powers can be cast adnausem... adjust scores accordingly... the basic idea is your army is full of a certain amount of psychic energy each turn and you can only tap into so much before you drain that available energy.
No the issue is certain problem spells are way too easily cast at the moment. For example, any powers from the index were grandfathered over rather then readdressed. So powers like Miasma of pestilence and warp time are hilariously a WC 6+ power, while crappy direct damage spells like shards of light are a 7. Curse of the leper and gift of contagion are both a 7 while spells like psychic scream are a 6. Its so stupid. Yet they double down, just like marines not remembering their traits when they pilot vehicles lol, they don't fix it, they double down instead.
Yeah, the psychic system needs some help. Plus, giving us only 6 spells so you can randomly generate, or "pick what you want" seemed backwards; why then limit it to 6 spells when everyone chooses what they want anyway? I did find it weird we can only cast a spell once, but some spells are extremely powerful especially if you could cast them multiple times (Warptime, Death Hex, etc.). I don't know what the right answer is here, other than a complete rework of the psychic phase, and making psychic powers that do MW's into shooting attacks instead like old school warhammer; instead of making them MW's maybe make it "reroll successful saves against this attack" or something
Considering how GW is drumming up interest for the Vigilus Weekender this weekend, including a banner instead of just an article on Warhammer Community and the newsletter announcing something big's going to happen, I wouldn't expect anything about Chapter Approved until the big news (as far as GW is concerned) is out. It would just draw attention away from that.
So, just a reminder - this is the topic of this thread. The discussion of psychic powers can be taken up in 40K General.
Considering how GW is drumming up interest for the Vigilus Weekender this weekend, including a banner instead of just an article on Warhammer Community and the newsletter announcing something big's going to happen, I wouldn't expect anything about Chapter Approved until the big news (as far as GW is concerned) is out. It would just draw attention away from that.
Mm yeah I saw that.
For marines they mentioned Ultramarines, space wolves and iron hands. Good to see a third chapter there that doesn't really get much love
Honestly how often do they talk about iron hands?
Considering that Iron Hands once had a supplement and an upgrade kit similar to how Imperial/Crimson Fists did (though CF had a ton more upgrade kits), I wonder if that might signal that there might be an Iron Hands Upgrade Sprue like the Imperial Fists Upgrade Sprue that is coming.
Considering how GW is drumming up interest for the Vigilus Weekender this weekend, including a banner instead of just an article on Warhammer Community and the newsletter announcing something big's going to happen, I wouldn't expect anything about Chapter Approved until the big news (as far as GW is concerned) is out. It would just draw attention away from that.
Mm yeah I saw that.
For marines they mentioned Ultramarines, space wolves and iron hands. Good to see a third chapter there that doesn't really get much love
Honestly how often do they talk about iron hands?
Considering that Iron Hands once had a supplement and an upgrade kit similar to how Imperial/Crimson Fists did (though CF had a ton more upgrade kits), I wonder if that might signal that there might be an Iron Hands Upgrade Sprue like the Imperial Fists Upgrade Sprue that is coming.
fraser1191 wrote:This might start a rumor but Iron hands are supposed to be on Vigilus and we've yet to get a Primaris Techmarine.
An Iron Hands upgrade sprue with bionics would be superb. Also would have a lot of conversion potential.
A plastic Techmarine is loooong overdue, although I'd hope it got a box with servitors rather than a character, especially with servo harness. I suspect we would get a servo arm version clampack like the Wolf Priest though.
Bharring wrote:What is 'Vigilus'?
Basically the new important narrative lynchpin planet, sort of a replacement for Cadia now it has been nuked. It is a fortress world that happens to be guarding one of the only two stable warp routes through the Cicatrix Maledictum or whatever it is called. Most recent boardgames and boxsets have been set there.
kombatwombat wrote: Christ I hope they don’t, there’s already more than enough unique Chapters crying out for some love (Black Templars...)
Three unique Characters, their own Chapter Tactics, Relics, Warlord Traits, and their own unique Troop choice. What the hell else do Templars really need? That is more than literally every other C:SM Chapter besides the Ultramarines (who DON'T have their own exclusive Troop choice).
Grimgold wrote: Maybe the vigilius reveal will be an angels of death style space marine supplement that fleshes out the giant holes in the primaris marines line up.
That has been my suspicion for a while. Other than GSC, there aren't any known releases between now and end of next year with the Sisters codex. I bet we get codex supplements for each of the codexes with alternate WL traits, more relics, possibly even Chapter tactics. Possibly more model releases. Something like this would be the ideal time to release upgrade Sprues for the SM chapters (we pretty well know Imperial/Crimson Fists are getting one, I would put money on Iron Hands getting one as well).
Grimgold wrote: Maybe the vigilius reveal will be an angels of death style space marine supplement that fleshes out the giant holes in the primaris marines line up.
That has been my suspicion for a while. Other than GSC, there aren't any known releases between now and end of next year with the Sisters codex. I bet we get codex supplements for each of the codexes with alternate WL traits, more relics, possibly even Chapter tactics. Possibly more model releases. Something like this would be the ideal time to release upgrade Sprues for the SM chapters (we pretty well know Imperial/Crimson Fists are getting one, I would put money on Iron Hands getting one as well).
The promotional e-mail sent out said:
"Something big is coming to Vigilus – and the Imperium could be in big trouble. Check out our roundup for the story so far and stay tuned for more news:"
This implies that it's a threat to the Imperium. Chaos, Xenos, something like that. I doubt it's going to be anything to do with Space Marines for once, unless they're the Chaos variety.
"Something big is coming to Vigilus – and the Imperium could be in big trouble. Check out our roundup for the story so far and stay tuned for more news:"
This implies that it's a threat to the Imperium. Chaos, Xenos, something like that. I doubt it's going to be anything to do with Space Marines for once, unless they're the Chaos variety.
They also said the imperium is striking back with new forces in their vigilius teaser a few weeks ago, so I might not rule it out yet. But given Vigilius is a hop, skip, and a jump from the EoT I'd bet on the 13th black crusade getting involved with the conflict. Maybe a new sexy plastic abaddon is inflight, but then again I'm usually wrong on these kind of things. Or maybe the genestealer cult finally got the attention of a hive fleet, whichever threat they go with it is looks spicey.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Three unique Characters, their own Chapter Tactics, Relics, Warlord Traits, and their own unique Troop choice. What the hell else do Templars really need? That is more than literally every other C:SM Chapter besides the Ultramarines (who DON'T have their own exclusive Troop choice).
A Codex?
Aside from Squats, Templars are the only faction to have their own Codex - for multiple editions, no less - and then have it taken away from them and not returned. (Sisters too arguably, but theirs is coming, and mayyyyyybe the Lost and the Damned depending on your view of the Renegades and Heretics army list.) Templars getting crushed into the main Marine Codex snuffed the light out of the faction; played as befits their fluff, they simply don’t work as an army and won’t so long as they’re a close combat army in a book balanced around shooting. It’s akin to a close combat Tau or Guard army, or a shooting Daemon army - theoretically possible, but not mechanically viable while they’re shackled to a Codex that is counter to their play style.
If, at the start of 6th Edition, GW decided to flesh out the Templars Codex the way they had the Blood Angels and Dark Angels books, they would be a playable faction. Indeed, they were the better candidate for it - they thumb their noses at the Codex Astartes, which offered GW plenty of leeway to make a faction as different from the main Codex as Space Wolves are. Instead, they took a Codex-compliant Chapter with a special berserker unit, and another Codex-compliant Chapter with a mounted Second Company, and decided that those were distinct enough from the Codex Astartes to not be included in the Astartes Codex. Whereas Templars could have grown organically into a unique faction due to their nature as non-Codex Compliant, instead GW had to contrive units for BA/DA to justify the existence of a separate Codex.
And it’s not as if Templars would struggle to sell! They’re consistently jostling with Space Wolves for position as fan favourite Chapter, despite the handicaps of not having their own book anymore and having the life sucked out of their rules.
I know it’ll never happen, but GW is leaving money on the table by not giving Black Templars their own book.
I remember when BT got rolled into C: Astartes I gave my BT-playing friend a pot of Ultramarine Blue paint as a gag gift "since your Black Templars are basically Ultramarines now, they'll be needing new paint!"
Aside from Squats, Templars are the only faction to have their own Codex - for multiple editions, no less - and then have it taken away from them and not returned.
Eldar had an army for 2 editions. Then they made up new Eldar and prevented the other Eldar from having those things again. They also removed half of the army (pirates and exodites). Pirates only have a non-functional army. Exodites have nothing. Then 2 editions later, they removed Harlquins. None of that stuff has been returned either.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Three unique Characters, their own Chapter Tactics, Relics, Warlord Traits, and their own unique Troop choice. What the hell else do Templars really need? That is more than literally every other C:SM Chapter besides the Ultramarines (who DON'T have their own exclusive Troop choice).
A Codex?
Spoiler:
Aside from Squats, Templars are the only faction to have their own Codex - for multiple editions, no less - and then have it taken away from them and not returned. (Sisters too arguably, but theirs is coming, and mayyyyyybe the Lost and the Damned depending on your view of the Renegades and Heretics army list.) Templars getting crushed into the main Marine Codex snuffed the light out of the faction; played as befits their fluff, they simply don’t work as an army and won’t so long as they’re a close combat army in a book balanced around shooting. It’s akin to a close combat Tau or Guard army, or a shooting Daemon army - theoretically possible, but not mechanically viable while they’re shackled to a Codex that is counter to their play style.
If, at the start of 6th Edition, GW decided to flesh out the Templars Codex the way they had the Blood Angels and Dark Angels books, they would be a playable faction. Indeed, they were the better candidate for it - they thumb their noses at the Codex Astartes, which offered GW plenty of leeway to make a faction as different from the main Codex as Space Wolves are. Instead, they took a Codex-compliant Chapter with a special berserker unit, and another Codex-compliant Chapter with a mounted Second Company, and decided that those were distinct enough from the Codex Astartes to not be included in the Astartes Codex. Whereas Templars could have grown organically into a unique faction due to their nature as non-Codex Compliant, instead GW had to contrive units for BA/DA to justify the existence of a separate Codex.
And it’s not as if Templars would struggle to sell! They’re consistently jostling with Space Wolves for position as fan favourite Chapter, despite the handicaps of not having their own book anymore and having the life sucked out of their rules.
I know it’ll never happen, but GW is leaving money on the table by not giving Black Templars their own book.
Ok, but what would this codex have in it that would make it any different? BA are much more than just C:SM with Death Company (several of their units function flat out differently, in addition to three special Dreadnoughts, more special characters than any other Codex, and some unique tanks), just as Dark Angels are much more than just a Company of bikers (Deathwing say hi, as do all of the special Land Speeders, flyers, etc).
casvalremdeikun wrote: Three unique Characters, their own Chapter Tactics, Relics, Warlord Traits, and their own unique Troop choice. What the hell else do Templars really need? That is more than literally every other C:SM Chapter besides the Ultramarines (who DON'T have their own exclusive Troop choice).
A Codex?
Aside from Squats, Templars are the only faction to have their own Codex - for multiple editions, no less - and then have it taken away from them and not returned. (Sisters too arguably, but theirs is coming, and mayyyyyybe the Lost and the Damned depending on your view of the Renegades and Heretics army list.) Templars getting crushed into the main Marine Codex snuffed the light out of the faction; played as befits their fluff, they simply don’t work as an army and won’t so long as they’re a close combat army in a book balanced around shooting. It’s akin to a close combat Tau or Guard army, or a shooting Daemon army - theoretically possible, but not mechanically viable while they’re shackled to a Codex that is counter to their play style.
If, at the start of 6th Edition, GW decided to flesh out the Templars Codex the way they had the Blood Angels and Dark Angels books, they would be a playable faction. Indeed, they were the better candidate for it - they thumb their noses at the Codex Astartes, which offered GW plenty of leeway to make a faction as different from the main Codex as Space Wolves are. Instead, they took a Codex-compliant Chapter with a special berserker unit, and another Codex-compliant Chapter with a mounted Second Company, and decided that those were distinct enough from the Codex Astartes to not be included in the Astartes Codex. Whereas Templars could have grown organically into a unique faction due to their nature as non-Codex Compliant, instead GW had to contrive units for BA/DA to justify the existence of a separate Codex.
And it’s not as if Templars would struggle to sell! They’re consistently jostling with Space Wolves for position as fan favourite Chapter, despite the handicaps of not having their own book anymore and having the life sucked out of their rules.
I know it’ll never happen, but GW is leaving money on the table by not giving Black Templars their own book.
While I agree that GW would make more money if they made a BT codex. To say they don't have their own codex is kind of false. The space marine codex has rules for their unique chapter tactics - stratagems - relics - and unique units (they just aren't good). It's been like that for a while. In fact I wish they would do it with all the marine books. Sure - more codex means more money but prophets of the flesh, flayed skull, and black heart don't have unique codex ether - it doesn't hurt their playability at all and it is in fact a good reason to buy the DE codex - because it comes with rules for all those armies. There is a fair chance that if BT had their own codex - every SM book they sold would just be a BT one instead. That would cost them money.
Reivers are a whole other issue. The fact they lack at least AP-1 on their blades is a sin.
Well, it would be kinda weird if mere knives had AP while a chainsword doesn't. That the Sergeant cannot take a power sword while the Intercessor sergeant can is the real travesty (neither kit comes with the bit but the sword from the upgrade sprue fits either.)
Reivers are a whole other issue. The fact they lack at least AP-1 on their blades is a sin.
Well, it would be kinda weird if mere knives had AP while a chainsword doesn't. That the Sergeant cannot take a power sword while the Intercessor sergeant can is the real travesty (neither kit comes with the bit but the sword from the upgrade sprue fits either.)
I've always envisioned them having "power combat blades" personally. Weaker than a power sword, but more useful than a bog standard knife.
Reivers are a whole other issue. The fact they lack at least AP-1 on their blades is a sin.
Well, it would be kinda weird if mere knives had AP while a chainsword doesn't. That the Sergeant cannot take a power sword while the Intercessor sergeant can is the real travesty (neither kit comes with the bit but the sword from the upgrade sprue fits either.)
I've always envisioned them having "power combat blades" personally. Weaker than a power sword, but more useful than a bog standard knife.
Well it all comes back to the extremely basic variation in rules that 8th has.
If Reivers knives had AP-1 on the charge, incoporating their sonic weapons and ambush style, they would be fine.
Or, they could have had rend.
kombatwombat wrote: Templars getting crushed into the main Marine Codex snuffed the light out of the faction; played as befits their fluff, they simply don’t work as an army and won’t so long as they’re a close combat army in a book balanced around shooting. It’s akin to a close combat Tau or Guard army, or a shooting Daemon army - theoretically possible, but not mechanically viable while they’re shackled to a Codex that is counter to their play style.
Funny you say that, I have seen multiple CC oriented Catachan armies, and they somehow work. Maybe, just maybe, it's not the book that is the problem?
Also, funny that again, I used to play BT in 4th edition. What essential unit, pray tell, was cut to make them no longer work? Because somehow, I seem to recall they not only lost nothing, they gained a lot of units with the transition. Is choice bad now?
If, at the start of 6th Edition, GW decided to flesh out the Templars Codex the way they had the Blood Angels and Dark Angels books, they would be a playable faction. Indeed, they were the better candidate for it - they thumb their noses at the Codex Astartes, which offered GW plenty of leeway to make a faction as different from the main Codex as Space Wolves are.
Funny that (again again), I read their 4th edition fluff, and I was for years puzzled from where the baseless fanon nonsense about BT was coming from (my favourite is their numbers, coming from summing every single crusade on a map, and the fact some of these crusades were hundreds if not thousands of years apart was only teeny tiny inconvenient detail that didn't stop the fanon train in the slightest). I agree with casvalremdeikun, they need literally nothing except maybe new upgrade sprue as no matter how you look, they are completely insignificant force barely larger than a single codex chapter (with the abuse of the 10th company loophole being pretty simple and elegant recent explanation for their slightly larger number), that unlike all other 'big' chapters doesn't even have a single successor, never mind dozens or hundreds of them...
kombatwombat wrote: Templars getting crushed into the main Marine Codex snuffed the light out of the faction; played as befits their fluff, they simply don’t work as an army and won’t so long as they’re a close combat army in a book balanced around shooting. It’s akin to a close combat Tau or Guard army, or a shooting Daemon army - theoretically possible, but not mechanically viable while they’re shackled to a Codex that is counter to their play style.
Funny you say that, I have seen multiple CC oriented Catachan armies, and they somehow work. Maybe, just maybe, it's not the book that is the problem?
Also, funny that again, I used to play BT in 4th edition. What essential unit, pray tell, was cut to make them no longer work? Because somehow, I seem to recall they not only lost nothing, they gained a lot of units with the transition. Is choice bad now?
If, at the start of 6th Edition, GW decided to flesh out the Templars Codex the way they had the Blood Angels and Dark Angels books, they would be a playable faction. Indeed, they were the better candidate for it - they thumb their noses at the Codex Astartes, which offered GW plenty of leeway to make a faction as different from the main Codex as Space Wolves are.
Funny that (again again), I read their 4th edition fluff, and I was for years puzzled from where the baseless fanon nonsense about BT was coming from (my favourite is their numbers, coming from summing every single crusade on a map, and the fact some of these crusades were hundreds if not thousands of years apart was only teeny tiny inconvenient detail that didn't stop the fanon train in the slightest). I agree with casvalremdeikun, they need literally nothing except maybe new upgrade sprue as no matter how you look, they are completely insignificant force barely larger than a single codex chapter (with the abuse of the 10th company loophole being pretty simple and elegant recent explanation for their slightly larger number), that unlike all other 'big' chapters doesn't even have a single successor, never mind dozens or hundreds of them...
kombatwombat wrote: Christ I hope they don’t, there’s already more than enough unique Chapters crying out for some love (Black Templars...)
How many of those unique chapters are all-Primaris chapters?
Remember, Primaris marines are the future of Space Marines going forward.
The thing is...You can already do an all space marine chapter and pick any chapter tactic from the codex you want. You can even make an all primaris chapter out of a blood angels, dark angels, or space wolf successor. Plus - Deathwatch codex does just fine as all primaris too. IMO - GW making rules for an all primaris chapter would not only be unneeded - It would be a slap in the face to everyone doing all primaris armies and using space marine rules for fluff purposes because the new chapter would obviously be better due to power creep.
BoomWolf wrote: Oh for the love of god. power creep cries over things that don't even exist yet, and might never.
The current rumored tactics they got is 6s to hit in CC gets 2 hits. this is BAD. this is arguably the WORST chapter tactics.
Isn't that just melee tesla? How is that bad?
I mean, its not game breaking, but I don't see how its the worst.
Well if this is an all Primaris chapter anybody genuinely interested in the chapter probably won't buy normal marines. Plus whose buying reivers for their melee prowess?
I know I bought them thinking they would be Fast attack
BoomWolf wrote: Oh for the love of god. power creep cries over things that don't even exist yet, and might never.
The current rumored tactics they got is 6s to hit in CC gets 2 hits. this is BAD. this is arguably the WORST chapter tactics.
Well - this is REALLY bad because primaris options are all shooting oriented. If it were shooting it would be the best chapter tactic bar none. I was referring to the power creep in other codex. Plus that is just a rumor - rumors often turn out wrong.
BoomWolf wrote: Oh for the love of god. power creep cries over things that don't even exist yet, and might never.
The current rumored tactics they got is 6s to hit in CC gets 2 hits. this is BAD. this is arguably the WORST chapter tactics.
Imagine over charging hellblasters getting 4ish more plasma hits because they have reroll all hits. Imagine the overwatch - with reroll all hits you'd be overwatching better than tau sept.
Isn't that just melee tesla? How is that bad?
I mean, its not game breaking, but I don't see how its the worst.
Well if this is an all Primaris chapter anybody genuinely interested in the chapter probably won't buy normal marines. Plus whose buying reivers for their melee prowess?
I know I bought them thinking they would be Fast attack
I know I gave mine carbines because it is strictly better than getting +1 melle attack. ESP for a unit that can deep strike. 24" range and deep strike is pretty powerful as it allows you to deep strike into optimum range and in cover. The problem is they cost too much points. 20 points for a deep striking reiver with 2 str 4 shooting attacks.
BoomWolf wrote: Oh for the love of god. power creep cries over things that don't even exist yet, and might never.
The current rumored tactics they got is 6s to hit in CC gets 2 hits. this is BAD. this is arguably the WORST chapter tactics.
Well - this is REALLY bad because primaris options are all shooting oriented. If it were shooting it would be the best chapter tactic bar none. I was referring to the power creep in other codex. Plus that is just a rumor - rumors often turn out wrong.
BoomWolf wrote: Oh for the love of god. power creep cries over things that don't even exist yet, and might never.
The current rumored tactics they got is 6s to hit in CC gets 2 hits. this is BAD. this is arguably the WORST chapter tactics.
Well - this is REALLY bad because primaris options are all shooting oriented. If it were shooting it would be the best chapter tactic bar none. I was referring to the power creep in other codex. Plus that is just a rumor - rumors often turn out wrong.
It's not a rumour though, it's been confirmed.
I was responding to this
"The current rumored tactics they got is 6s to hit in CC gets 2 hits. this is BAD. this is arguably the WORST chapter tactics. "
The thing is...You can already do an all space marine chapter and pick any chapter tactic from the codex you want.
Yes, but that's not an official chapter- that's a Your Headcanon chapter. GW wants an OFFICIAL all-Primaris chapter that they can market Primaris marines with and use as a posterboy, just like they've been doing with UM for all these years.
You need to understand the direction the wind is blowing. GW is (eventually) going to give us a Primaris chapter master, both a named character variant and generic, leading Primaris captains (named and generic) who belong to companies of Primaris LT's (named and generic), sergeants (named and generic) and line infantry and vehicles. And models for every single one of them, of course. They can't market that stuff, especially the named characters, without a unique and officially created All-Primaris chapter.
The thing is...You can already do an all space marine chapter and pick any chapter tactic from the codex you want.
Yes, but that's not an official chapter- that's a Your Headcanon chapter. GW wants an OFFICIAL all-Primaris chapter that they can market Primaris marines with and use as a posterboy, just like they've been doing with UM for all these years.
You need to understand the direction the wind is blowing. GW is (eventually) going to give us a Primaris chapter master, both a named character variant and generic, leading Primaris captains (named and generic) who belong to companies of Primaris LT's (named and generic), sergeants (named and generic) and line infantry and vehicles. And models for every single one of them, of course. They can't market that stuff, especially the named characters, without a unique and officially created All-Primaris chapter.
Does your entire argument fall apart if I tell you that the Emperor's Spears aren't "all Primaris"? They were created at the same time as the Celestial Lions and Star Scorpions.
BoomWolf wrote: Oh for the love of god. power creep cries over things that don't even exist yet, and might never.
The current rumored tactics they got is 6s to hit in CC gets 2 hits. this is BAD. this is arguably the WORST chapter tactics.
Well - this is REALLY bad because primaris options are all shooting oriented. If it were shooting it would be the best chapter tactic bar none. I was referring to the power creep in other codex. Plus that is just a rumor - rumors often turn out wrong.
It's not a rumour though, it's been confirmed.
Has it?
Because to the best of my knowledge, not a single readable picture of the card was posted anywhere.
The thing is...You can already do an all space marine chapter and pick any chapter tactic from the codex you want.
Yes, but that's not an official chapter- that's a Your Headcanon chapter. GW wants an OFFICIAL all-Primaris chapter that they can market Primaris marines with and use as a posterboy, just like they've been doing with UM for all these years.
You need to understand the direction the wind is blowing. GW is (eventually) going to give us a Primaris chapter master, both a named character variant and generic, leading Primaris captains (named and generic) who belong to companies of Primaris LT's (named and generic), sergeants (named and generic) and line infantry and vehicles. And models for every single one of them, of course. They can't market that stuff, especially the named characters, without a unique and officially created All-Primaris chapter.
Does your entire argument fall apart if I tell you that the Emperor's Spears aren't "all Primaris"? They were created at the same time as the Celestial Lions and Star Scorpions.
No, because the Emperor's Spears aren't on Vigilus.
The ADB book and the rumours surrounding the all Primaris chapter are unrelated.
The thing is...You can already do an all space marine chapter and pick any chapter tactic from the codex you want.
Yes, but that's not an official chapter- that's a Your Headcanon chapter. GW wants an OFFICIAL all-Primaris chapter that they can market Primaris marines with and use as a posterboy, just like they've been doing with UM for all these years.
You need to understand the direction the wind is blowing. GW is (eventually) going to give us a Primaris chapter master, both a named character variant and generic, leading Primaris captains (named and generic) who belong to companies of Primaris LT's (named and generic), sergeants (named and generic) and line infantry and vehicles. And models for every single one of them, of course. They can't market that stuff, especially the named characters, without a unique and officially created All-Primaris chapter.
They've managed to market it all so far without one.
i'm not clear why Primaris purity would be required (or even useful)
The thing is...You can already do an all space marine chapter and pick any chapter tactic from the codex you want.
Yes, but that's not an official chapter- that's a Your Headcanon chapter. GW wants an OFFICIAL all-Primaris chapter that they can market Primaris marines with and use as a posterboy, just like they've been doing with UM for all these years.
You need to understand the direction the wind is blowing. GW is (eventually) going to give us a Primaris chapter master, both a named character variant and generic, leading Primaris captains (named and generic) who belong to companies of Primaris LT's (named and generic), sergeants (named and generic) and line infantry and vehicles. And models for every single one of them, of course. They can't market that stuff, especially the named characters, without a unique and officially created All-Primaris chapter.
Does your entire argument fall apart if I tell you that the Emperor's Spears aren't "all Primaris"? They were created at the same time as the Celestial Lions and Star Scorpions.
No, because the Emperor's Spears aren't on Vigilus.
The ADB book and the rumours surrounding the all Primaris chapter are unrelated.
The facts of a new chapter getting chapter tactics are directly related to the ADB book. The "rumors" of GW pushing a primaris chapter as the new of the Space Marines is salt and speculation.
The thing is...You can already do an all space marine chapter and pick any chapter tactic from the codex you want.
Yes, but that's not an official chapter- that's a Your Headcanon chapter. GW wants an OFFICIAL all-Primaris chapter that they can market Primaris marines with and use as a posterboy, just like they've been doing with UM for all these years.
You need to understand the direction the wind is blowing. GW is (eventually) going to give us a Primaris chapter master, both a named character variant and generic, leading Primaris captains (named and generic) who belong to companies of Primaris LT's (named and generic), sergeants (named and generic) and line infantry and vehicles. And models for every single one of them, of course. They can't market that stuff, especially the named characters, without a unique and officially created All-Primaris chapter.
They've managed to market it all so far without one.
i'm not clear why Primaris purity would be required (or even useful)
It's not whether it's required, it's that this is the expected next step given the rumours regarding Vigilus - an Ultimate founding Chapter gets to take the narrative spotlight for a bit, introducing new characters, a new chapter, and we suspect new units.
While nothing in this universe is necessary (the whole thing is based on excess after all), it is particularly interesting because we'll see more about how Ultima founding chapters organize.
The facts of a new chapter getting chapter tactics are directly related to the ADB book. The "rumors" of GW pushing a primaris chapter as the new of the Space Marines is salt and speculation.
That's all rumours are, man. No need to be upset about them being unrelated...
The new chapter on Vigilus is the Brazen Claws, which is a second founding chapter. If there was a rumor that the next marquee Vigilus chapter would be Ultima founding then that's already been proven false by the art posted on facebook.
There's a distinct difference between discussing rumors and spreading false information for little reason other than pessimism.
The thing is...You can already do an all space marine chapter and pick any chapter tactic from the codex you want.
Yes, but that's not an official chapter- that's a Your Headcanon chapter. GW wants an OFFICIAL all-Primaris chapter that they can market Primaris marines with and use as a posterboy, just like they've been doing with UM for all these years.
You need to understand the direction the wind is blowing. GW is (eventually) going to give us a Primaris chapter master, both a named character variant and generic, leading Primaris captains (named and generic) who belong to companies of Primaris LT's (named and generic), sergeants (named and generic) and line infantry and vehicles. And models for every single one of them, of course. They can't market that stuff, especially the named characters, without a unique and officially created All-Primaris chapter.
They've managed to market it all so far without one.
i'm not clear why Primaris purity would be required (or even useful)
It's not whether it's required, it's that this is the expected next step given the rumours regarding Vigilus - an Ultimate founding Chapter gets to take the narrative spotlight for a bit, introducing new characters, a new chapter, and we suspect new units.
While nothing in this universe is necessary (the whole thing is based on excess after all), it is particularly interesting because we'll see more about how Ultima founding chapters organize.
Read the post I was responding to again. I've helpfully bolded and underlined the relevant bits. It isn't about whether or not a Primaris chapter would be interesting (it very well could be); the claim is Primaris can't be sold or marketed without a super special all Primaris chapter, despite all the Primaris stuff to date happening without one.
The thing is...You can already do an all space marine chapter and pick any chapter tactic from the codex you want.
Yes, but that's not an official chapter- that's a Your Headcanon chapter. GW wants an OFFICIAL all-Primaris chapter that they can market Primaris marines with and use as a posterboy, just like they've been doing with UM for all these years.
You need to understand the direction the wind is blowing. GW is (eventually) going to give us a Primaris chapter master, both a named character variant and generic, leading Primaris captains (named and generic) who belong to companies of Primaris LT's (named and generic), sergeants (named and generic) and line infantry and vehicles. And models for every single one of them, of course. They can't market that stuff, especially the named characters, without a unique and officially created All-Primaris chapter.
They've managed to market it all so far without one.
i'm not clear why Primaris purity would be required (or even useful)
It's not whether it's required, it's that this is the expected next step given the rumours regarding Vigilus - an Ultimate founding Chapter gets to take the narrative spotlight for a bit, introducing new characters, a new chapter, and we suspect new units.
While nothing in this universe is necessary (the whole thing is based on excess after all), it is particularly interesting because we'll see more about how Ultima founding chapters organize.
Read the post I was responding to again. I've helpfully bolded and underlined the relevant bits. It isn't about whether or not a Primaris chapter would be interesting (it very well could be); the claim is Primaris can't be sold or marketed without a super special all Primaris chapter, despite all the Primaris stuff to date happening without one.
No? Given that GW has been selling Primaris for over a year, the idea that a pure primaris chapter is -required- to sell Primaris is obviously wrong.
And given the state of the game, from a balance perspective it would be terrible and weak. And the CA rumours look like they still don't really have any idea how to address primaris marines from a gameplay perspective, so going whole hog on a primaris-only chapter just seems like a loss for GW. They're debatably functional in really specific roles in a mixed chapter, as a pure force, they completely lack basic tools to deal with common types of enemies.
So... sorry, absolutely can't see where he's coming from.
The Emperor's Spears have cooler heraldry than the the Ultras do. If they wanted to sell them as new posters boys that's frankly all I would need to be on board.
No? Given that GW has been selling Primaris for over a year, the idea that a pure primaris chapter is -required- to sell Primaris is obviously wrong.
And given the state of the game, from a balance perspective it would be terrible and weak. And the CA rumours look like they still don't really have any idea how to address primaris marines from a gameplay perspective, so going whole hog on a primaris-only chapter just seems like a loss for GW. They're debatably functional in really specific roles in a mixed chapter, as a pure force, they completely lack basic tools to deal with common types of enemies.
So... sorry, absolutely can't see where he's coming from.
TBF,GW doesn't really know how to address old marines from a gameplay perspective. Also space marines in general lack basic tools to deal with common types of enemies, not because those units don't exist but because they're god awful. Going whole hog on a primaris only chapter isn't any more risky than going whole hog on ANY space marine chapter so long as most space marine units are garbage tier.
Assuming Marines do go all-Primaris (it IS an assumption after all, justified or no) I find it difficult to imagine that happening within the next two years, maybe four-five years if they do it quickly. There are a ton of vanilla marine kits out there which would need to be phased out & replaced, which is before even thinking about the amount of marine armies people would still be playing. I would honestly be surprised if 40k did not still have at least rules support for vanilla marines 10 years from now.
To put simply, to say vanilla marines are dead is inaccurate even assuming they never get another kit.
Just make a new inceptor type unit with melee to replace vanguard vets and we might be fine.
Give them all powerswords and heavy bolt pistols, start the unit at 3, let them take up to 9. Options include searg taking the flamer/powerfist thing and 2 meltabombs.
Eihnlazer wrote: Just make a new inceptor type unit with melee to replace vanguard vets and we might be fine.
Give them all powerswords and heavy bolt pistols, start the unit at 3, let them take up to 9. Options include searg taking the flamer/powerfist thing and 2 meltabombs.
leadership shenanigans and bullying infantry. Have you ever seen reivers charge a cultist blob or hell even orc boys? They do quite good even if they aren't getting their points back right away.
This tends to scare their opponent into overcommitting againgst them or underestimating them and loosing half their army.
The inceptor melee squad would fill the role that reivers don't, which is to fight in melee againgst heavy armored opponents.
Old marines have a vast (actually in some cases bloated) range covering all aspects that anyone could possibily want. It is to be hoped they will now continue the recent theme of producing all the stuff for eveyone else that they negletced for decades.
Moving away from marines - for once..
Was waiting for some rumours on the new Sisters rules!
Of course, Codex: Adepta Sororitas is one of the most exciting things about Chapter Approved this year, and we’ve had a chance to get an even better look at the rules. We’ll be previewing these in depth soon, but in the meantime, here’s another awesome Stratagem to tide you over:
Ahh he we go - so thats complicated!
also:
Chapter Approved 2018 features a new character creation system for open play where you can build your very own legendary heroes. If you’re feeling creative, this year’s edition is going to be great for you.
One of the takeaways from the narrative play section was Battle Honours – a system that lets your units level up and develop new skills throughout campaigns.
Matched play fans have been scrutinising the new points from the book, and it’s clear at this point that one massive winner is the Grey Knights, who have seen sweeping points reductions across a swathe of units.
I'm slightly annoyed for some reason. I don't normally get annoyed at this hobby, it's just plastic figures. But man, that's his third model compared to most of the others still stuck with a second edition derp model.
Also, they're sending him alone? What is it with Ultramarine Mary Sues?
Ah well. At least those Genestealer Cult bikes are awesome.
An Actual Englishman wrote: Isn't this thread for chapter approved rumours? Why is everyone discussing marines, Vigilus and new models?
Take that stuff to the appropriate thread please.
Already did post the CA rumours but to reset the thread
Moving away from marines - for once..
Was waiting for some rumours on the new Sisters rules!
Of course, Codex: Adepta Sororitas is one of the most exciting things about Chapter Approved this year, and we’ve had a chance to get an even better look at the rules. We’ll be previewing these in depth soon, but in the meantime, here’s another awesome Stratagem to tide you over:
Ahh he we go - so thats complicated!
also:
Chapter Approved 2018 features a new character creation system for open play where you can build your very own legendary heroes. If you’re feeling creative, this year’s edition is going to be great for you.
One of the takeaways from the narrative play section was Battle Honours – a system that lets your units level up and develop new skills throughout campaigns.
Matched play fans have been scrutinising the new points from the book, and it’s clear at this point that one massive winner is the Grey Knights, who have seen sweeping points reductions across a swathe of units.
Well, hopefully Grey Knights players will be happy. Otherwise they haven't really announced anything that is all that interesting to me. Hopefully they show us the new model that is supposed to be coming out with it.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, hopefully Grey Knights players will be happy. Otherwise they haven't really announced anything that is all that interesting to me. Hopefully they show us the new model that is supposed to be coming out with it.
There's an unholy trinity to Grey Knights complaints: unit cost, special weapons and psychic powers / Strategems. This addresses one of them.
Expect the complaints to continue until we hear more about the other two.
Has there been any information on Corsairs HQ's? Even just one? Really don't want my corsair battlion giving 0 command points just because we dont have an HQ. Plus I feel they would be really cool conversion projects.
casvalremdeikun wrote:Well, hopefully Grey Knights players will be happy. Otherwise they haven't really announced anything that is all that interesting to me. Hopefully they show us the new model that is supposed to be coming out with it.
not really. a point reduction for gk without other changes means only keep on loose but with more models on the field.
techsoldaten wrote:
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, hopefully Grey Knights players will be happy. Otherwise they haven't really announced anything that is all that interesting to me. Hopefully they show us the new model that is supposed to be coming out with it.
There's an unholy trinity to Grey Knights complaints: unit cost, special weapons and psychic powers / Strategems. This addresses one of them.
Expect the complaints to continue until we hear more about the other two.
exactly.
but the point drop will allow me to sell GK easily since normomarines are definitely dead after the primarization of Calgar
casvalremdeikun wrote:Well, hopefully Grey Knights players will be happy. Otherwise they haven't really announced anything that is all that interesting to me. Hopefully they show us the new model that is supposed to be coming out with it.
not really. a point reduction for gk without other changes means only keep on loose but with more models on the field.
techsoldaten wrote:
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, hopefully Grey Knights players will be happy. Otherwise they haven't really announced anything that is all that interesting to me. Hopefully they show us the new model that is supposed to be coming out with it.
There's an unholy trinity to Grey Knights complaints: unit cost, special weapons and psychic powers / Strategems. This addresses one of them.
Expect the complaints to continue until we hear more about the other two.
exactly.
but the point drop will allow me to sell GK easily since normomarines are definitely dead after the primarization of Calgar
...You know, I didn't think of it like that.
If Grey Knights remain gak after this CA, lots of people wouldn't know anything besides them just getting buffed. It really might be a good time to ditch the army entirely if things don't pan out...
lolman1c wrote: Hahahahaaaa! Everyone saying above just got their words handed to them when gw makes the head ultramarine into a primaris! Lololololol!
I explained why it is inaccurate to say vanilla marines are dead even when assuming they will be phased out and never get another kit. Can you explain how my words were just handed to me?
Anyways, glad to hear Grey Knights getting some love. I still have a soft spot for them because of my silly Draigo + Paladins army back in the day. Sisters stuff is obviously exciting, and that stratagem is cool.
Well I didn't know normal marines could become Primaris marines after they were finished.
Edit. I wonder if calgar will have a helmet option this time?
I believe he does and I believe he will be wearing a helmet for me now. Pappa Pimp in da house!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Eihnlazer wrote: So calgar is a primaris and gains +1 W, +1 T (gravis armor), and the ability to buff primaris marines now as well?
Looks like he keeps his same gauntlets of ultramar. If they don't spike his points cost too much he might be useable.
Is it confirmed he is getting new rules? Calgar is already W7 with -1 to damage rolls. He is actually amazing already - maybe a tad too pricey but not bad. If he goes to W8 and T5 - Holy crap. The Pimp slapping will be epic. Also - Primaris marines are currently able to be buffed by all space marine HQ's - the only really drawback to being primaris is you can't ride in any transports other than a Repulsor (decent - but too expensive).
Well I didn't know normal marines could become Primaris marines after they were finished.
Edit. I wonder if calgar will have a helmet option this time?
I believe he does and I believe he will be wearing a helmet for me now. Pappa Pimp in da house!
Eihnlazer wrote: So calgar is a primaris and gains +1 W, +1 T (gravis armor), and the ability to buff primaris marines now as well?
Looks like he keeps his same gauntlets of ultramar. If they don't spike his points cost too much he might be useable.
Is it confirmed he is getting new rules? Calgar is already W7 with -1 to damage rolls. He is actually amazing already - maybe a tad too pricey but not bad. If he goes to W8 and T5 - Holy crap. The Pimp slapping will be epic.
This has nothng to do with Chapter Approved -there is a whole other thread about Vigalis models
Grimgold wrote: so since people are getting some face time with ca 2018, I'm hoping to hear what changes are in store for Necrons.
Points hike for T Vault. Probably a pts hike on Destroyers too just because GW hate us.
They don't hate us, we just aren't a priority for them. I'm less interested in points, because you can't discount your way out of bad rules, I'm more interested to see if they changed any weapon profiles, or stratagems.
Well I didn't know normal marines could become Primaris marines after they were finished.
Edit. I wonder if calgar will have a helmet option this time?
I believe he does and I believe he will be wearing a helmet for me now. Pappa Pimp in da house!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Eihnlazer wrote: So calgar is a primaris and gains +1 W, +1 T (gravis armor), and the ability to buff primaris marines now as well?
Looks like he keeps his same gauntlets of ultramar. If they don't spike his points cost too much he might be useable.
Is it confirmed he is getting new rules? Calgar is already W7 with -1 to damage rolls. He is actually amazing already - maybe a tad too pricey but not bad. If he goes to W8 and T5 - Holy crap. The Pimp slapping will be epic. Also - Primaris marines are currently able to be buffed by all space marine HQ's - the only really drawback to being primaris is you can't ride in any transports other than a Repulsor (decent - but too expensive).
He'll likely not gain a wound as I imagine that came from his Terminator armor. Still, T5 is good for an HQ that might get hit by anything S8-9 in melee.
Well I didn't know normal marines could become Primaris marines after they were finished.
Edit. I wonder if calgar will have a helmet option this time?
I believe he does and I believe he will be wearing a helmet for me now. Pappa Pimp in da house!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Eihnlazer wrote: So calgar is a primaris and gains +1 W, +1 T (gravis armor), and the ability to buff primaris marines now as well?
Looks like he keeps his same gauntlets of ultramar. If they don't spike his points cost too much he might be useable.
Is it confirmed he is getting new rules? Calgar is already W7 with -1 to damage rolls. He is actually amazing already - maybe a tad too pricey but not bad. If he goes to W8 and T5 - Holy crap. The Pimp slapping will be epic. Also - Primaris marines are currently able to be buffed by all space marine HQ's - the only really drawback to being primaris is you can't ride in any transports other than a Repulsor (decent - but too expensive).
He'll likely not gain a wound as I imagine that came from his Terminator armor. Still, T5 is good for an HQ that might get hit by anything S8-9 in melee.
Rules for Marneus Calgar – and more – can found in Vigilus Defiant, a new campaign book that puts you at the heart of the latest epic conflict:
Grimgold wrote: so since people are getting some face time with ca 2018, I'm hoping to hear what changes are in store for Necrons.
Points hike for T Vault. Probably a pts hike on Destroyers too just because GW hate us.
They don't hate us, we just aren't a priority for them. I'm less interested in points, because you can't discount your way out of bad rules, I'm more interested to see if they changed any weapon profiles, or stratagems.
I heard they are going to add a 3cp stratagem that lets you bring back a unit that has been wiped out, but only once per game and it shuts off RP for that unit.
(JK I made that up, but it sounded true didn't it? )
I heard they are going to add a 3cp stratagem that lets you bring back a unit that has been wiped out, but only once per game and it shuts off RP for that unit.
...
(JK I made that up, but it sounded true didn't it? )
Meh, that's not what we need, what we need is reliable anti-vehicle ability on durable platforms. If the tesla destructor wasn't a complete waste of ink (eg had an ap value and did more than 1 damage a shot) we'd have some tools to take on the current meta, it wouldn't make us a top army but certainly less of a dumpster fire. Too many necron players got hooked on the idea of us being an unkillable army in 7th ed, but that was an aberration, and even at the time most of us necron players knew it was kind of bunk and bad for the game. Instead of trying to relive past glories, they need to make the necron tool set relevant in 8th ed, something which GW has failed at in a spectacular fashion. The fact no one is talking about rules changes for necrons despite some people having had hands on time with CA 2018, pretty much shows GW ignored us again, tossed a token points reduction, and kicked the can down the road. The most frustrating part is GW doesn't seem to understand how they screwed up, and being outside of the current narrative focus, won't take the time to understand the problem much less fix it.
The new Sisters stratagem seems oddly niche, doesn't it? You have to build your squads in a very specific and kinda counter-intuitive way, and as a reward you get the same benefit as the far more flexible Veterans of the Long War. I get what they were going for but I think you'd need more incentive to include an anti-infantry and anti-vehicle special weapon in the same unit.
I heard they are going to add a 3cp stratagem that lets you bring back a unit that has been wiped out, but only once per game and it shuts off RP for that unit.
...
(JK I made that up, but it sounded true didn't it? )
Meh, that's not what we need, what we need is reliable anti-vehicle ability on durable platforms. If the tesla destructor wasn't a complete waste of ink (eg had an ap value and did more than 1 damage a shot) we'd have some tools to take on the current meta, it wouldn't make us a top army but certainly less of a dumpster fire. Too many necron players got hooked on the idea of us being an unkillable army in 7th ed, but that was an aberration, and even at the time most of us necron players knew it was kind of bunk and bad for the game. Instead of trying to relive past glories, they need to make the necron tool set relevant in 8th ed, something which GW has failed at in a spectacular fashion. The fact no one is talking about rules changes for necrons despite some people having had hands on time with CA 2018, pretty much shows GW ignored us again, tossed a token points reduction, and kicked the can down the road. The most frustrating part is GW doesn't seem to understand how they screwed up, and being outside of the current narrative focus, won't take the time to understand the problem much less fix it.
I know; it was supposed to be a laughably ineffective 'fix' that did not actually address anything. Considering your assessment I think I got that spot on
Arachnofiend wrote: The new Sisters stratagem seems oddly niche, doesn't it? You have to build your squads in a very specific and kinda counter-intuitive way, and as a reward you get the same benefit as the far more flexible Veterans of the Long War. I get what they were going for but I think you'd need more incentive to include an anti-infantry and anti-vehicle special weapon in the same unit.
If by niche you mean essentially both unusable and not worth a CP, then yes. Sisters Strats not looking good so far.
Arachnofiend wrote: The new Sisters stratagem seems oddly niche, doesn't it? You have to build your squads in a very specific and kinda counter-intuitive way, and as a reward you get the same benefit as the far more flexible Veterans of the Long War. I get what they were going for but I think you'd need more incentive to include an anti-infantry and anti-vehicle special weapon in the same unit.
If by niche you mean essentially both unusable and not worth a CP, then yes. Sisters Strats not looking good so far.
Yes, that is essentially what I meant. I like the idea of a strat that asks you to use the holy trinity, but obviously the benefit needs to be much stronger than a similar strat of the same cost with no restrictions.
From what I've heard from Games Workshop and a couple of the playtesters that they use for testing changes, they feel that Necrons are already in a decent spot. I wouldn't expect any particularly substantial changes in Chapter Approved. Certainly not a change in rules or mechanics.
Darsath wrote: From what I've heard from Games Workshop and a couple of the playtesters that they use for testing changes, they feel that Necrons are already in a decent spot. I wouldn't expect any particularly substantial changes in Chapter Approved. Certainly not a change in rules or mechanics.
That is actually extremely embarrassing. We're the worst major faction in the game by a long shot, our performance is comparable to the Grey Knights they felt they needed to specifically call out as getting buffed in Chapter Approved.
I wonder how that stratagem for sisters made it through "play testing". Did they say "Yup, +1 to wound within 8" seems useful" and sent it to the printers? It's mind bogglingly bad and unusable.
Darsath wrote: From what I've heard from Games Workshop and a couple of the playtesters that they use for testing changes, they feel that Necrons are already in a decent spot. I wouldn't expect any particularly substantial changes in Chapter Approved. Certainly not a change in rules or mechanics.
Hmmm...I dont know...they are a dead faction (no pun here) right now I dont know how they can have such an opinion if its true...
Darsath wrote: From what I've heard from Games Workshop and a couple of the playtesters that they use for testing changes, they feel that Necrons are already in a decent spot. I wouldn't expect any particularly substantial changes in Chapter Approved. Certainly not a change in rules or mechanics.
Any source on that? Did you chat with GW reps at the event, because I'd be concerned if they were actually that out of touch with the game.
Kirasu wrote: I wonder how that stratagem for sisters made it through "play testing". Did they say "Yup, +1 to wound within 8" seems useful" and sent it to the printers? It's mind bogglingly bad and unusable.
it is so unbelievably convoluted lol. at least it is a beta!
Kirasu wrote: I wonder how that stratagem for sisters made it through "play testing". Did they say "Yup, +1 to wound within 8" seems useful" and sent it to the printers? It's mind bogglingly bad and unusable.
You're assuming Sisters won't be land locked into a VERY specific load out. And judging by the new war gear load out on minis and codex options, Sisters might just have to take bolter flamer melta whether they like it or not.
Darsath wrote: From what I've heard from Games Workshop and a couple of the playtesters that they use for testing changes, they feel that Necrons are already in a decent spot. I wouldn't expect any particularly substantial changes in Chapter Approved. Certainly not a change in rules or mechanics.
That is actually extremely embarrassing. We're the worst major faction in the game by a long shot, our performance is comparable to the Grey Knights they felt they needed to specifically call out as getting buffed in Chapter Approved.
I thought pure Admech were the worst.
I honestly don't follow rankings much lately, but I thought they were having almost no showing in tournaments.
If GW really cared about their game, they would simply do monthly/bi-monthy updates in PDF form for points for free. Much like PC games. No reason why balancing should take an eternity in the modern age.
The Sisters' kit vis a vi weapons is already limited in a very restricted fashion. It is no shock that a strategem in the nature of the Holy Trinity exists. It just needs a bump in effectiveness. +1 to wound is fine. What else would it need? +1 to hit? +1 to wound, re-rolling wounds?
