Xenomancers wrote: I take powerfist all the time on intercessor sargents. Probably still will. I would sometimes take a TH on a bike captain but now it kinda like...not even an an option. BA can still use it I suppose but a 20 point increase is nothing to 1 shot knights. Other marines can't do that though so it is a bad change. Yet another bad change in this codex. Seems like they are just nerfing everything that has been good for marines when they have in fact been one of the worst armies in the game. It's pretty absurd. This isn't how you make an army better.
Wait a tick. Other marines weren't doing it before. That's why BA were the only Smashcaps. So them not doing it still isn't some great loss. Nevertheless --
2 CP - unwoundable on 1,2, or 3
Generic WL Trait - Reroll any dice on charging, +1S +1A
Mastercrafted Weapon - +1D
RG Trait - no overwatch
WS trait - +D3 attacks on charge
WS doctrine - +1D on the charge
So, WS Smash Captain can:
- Run and charge
- +1A from AoD
- +1S & +1A OR +D3A
- +1D for relic
- +1D for charging on turn 3
He can be on a bike and be given jink for a 3++. He can tank a knight with Transhuman.
This makes a potential AP4 5 damage thunderhammer at S10 with 6 attacks.
BA smash captain is str 10 +1 to wound with ignore overwatch reroll charges and 3d6 charge with 7-9 attacks. It is a lot better than anything a space marine character can do with a thunder hammer and they can do it turn 1. Sure it costs CP but the point remains. It is the BA smash that they are targeting with this nerf. They should just raise the points on the BA smash captain or fix soup issues - not raise the cost of a thunder hammer for everyone else. Furthmore if they are going to charge for weapons based on the ability of the user. Shouldn't all BA melle weapons cost most because they wound better? They aren't gonna do that. Inconsistencies like this ruin the game.
Ishagu wrote: Yeah I quite like that for dealing with flyers, especially as we can re roll all hit rolls now.
Ultramarines can auto-hit with an executioner - that's something like 11 damage with the laser if they don't have an invuln.
How to auto hit?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Can someone explain to me how shooting twice with 10 bolt rifles is equal to shooting twice with obliterators now? Can we just expland the rapid fire stratagem to be any chapter infantry?
Automatically Appended Next Post: 3CP to make 10 stalker bolt rifles sniper weapons? ARE YOU EFFING KIDDING ME? These should already be sniper weapons lol.
Its a strategem, and it only affects one shot. You still gotta roll for the other three coming out of the main gun if youre popping it on an executioner's superlaser.
Sterling191 wrote: Its a strategem, and it only affects one shot. You still gotta roll for the other three coming out of the main gun if youre popping it on an executioner's superlaser.
Xenomancers wrote: 1 autohit? Like 1 shot with a weapon or 1 total shot?
One attack roll automatically succeeds. Still has to wound. Still can be saved.
I can't imagine ever using this lol.
I've has a few games against Eldar where I needed one shot from a lascannon to take something big down...
Only slightly better than a command point reroll in that case. It's something don't get me wrong. You can still fail to wound though and they can still save. Good chance at wasting CP.
Xenomancers wrote: 1 autohit? Like 1 shot with a weapon or 1 total shot?
One attack roll automatically succeeds. Still has to wound. Still can be saved.
I can't imagine ever using this lol.
I've has a few games against Eldar where I needed one shot from a lascannon to take something big down...
Only slightly better than a command point reroll in that case. It's something don't get me wrong. You can still fail to wound though and they can still save. Good chance at wasting CP.
I guess I'd rather waste the CP on the wound roll (3+) than with the hit roll (3+1 for moving with a heavy/4+). I can be confident in the wound, just not the Hit.
The stratagem should be 1 shot automatically hits and wounds. Invune saves can be taken and you still gotta roll for damage and stuff. They can CP reroll that invo too. If thats a 5++ save it's about a 50% chance they counter you just by rerolling the save. Even if you auto hit and wound. Not that great.
Xenomancers wrote: The stratagem should be 1 shot automatically hits and wounds. Invune saves can be taken and you still gotta roll for damage and stuff. They can CP reroll that invo too. If thats a 5++ save it's about a 50% chance they counter you just by rerolling the save. Even if you auto hit and wound. Not that great.
With everything else, I am just gobsmacked that we are complaining about the litinies. They are JUST ICING on this cake....
Isn't the auto hit stratagem a counter to things like Eldar fliers and such that don't have an invuln but just stack - 1?
With the executioner firepower it can increase a lot the possibility to damage something.
Xenomancers wrote: The stratagem should be 1 shot automatically hits and wounds. Invune saves can be taken and you still gotta roll for damage and stuff. They can CP reroll that invo too. If thats a 5++ save it's about a 50% chance they counter you just by rerolling the save. Even if you auto hit and wound. Not that great.
With everything else, I am just gobsmacked that we are complaining about the litinies. They are JUST ICING on this cake....
We got plenty of nerfs too. Not complaining really - I will be using that +1 to hit most likely. Some of the others are just unusable.
If that was the intent. A current stratagem that custodes have would have been much better. Ignore to hit penalties. Like seriously. 1 autohit is garbage. It kinda reminds me of the nid stratagem that does 1 mortal to a unit you did a wound to it. Do you know how much better than is than 1 auto hit? It still hugely situational too.
I don’t see the Litany preview, just the Invictor(?) the dreadnought-lite. I guess no new info there, but really hit home how they fixed all the classic dread weaknesses...and instead of fixing dreads just made a new unit :p
If I recall correctly they are costed like 130-150? I’m unsure what wargear the preview had. Seems hard to resist at that price.
Crazyterran wrote: Other than Guilliman and the Repulsor what are those plenty of nerfs?
One could argue the chappy was nerfed in that you need to roll a 3 on a D6 to get it's impact now. by and large it's a "side upgrade" but someone somewhere had their build negitively impacted by this I suspect
I don't how to feel about the chaplain: it used to be a good aura, but it was more or less the same as a captain. Now, you have to roll, potentially using cp reroll, but some sound really good. IDK, it's just, we don't need even more random I guess.
Crazyterran wrote: Other than Guilliman and the Repulsor what are those plenty of nerfs?
Those are big nerfs.
What if you went to a tau player told them their codex got a lot of buffs but riptides and broadside got big points hikes?
or you went to an admech player and said their destroyers got +1 save but cawl lost his reroll all hits aura and dunecrawlers went up 20 points...
Seriously.
Lets also not forget increased CP cost of most good stratagems and technically a nerf to the codex. If you include allies you don't get all the benefits.
Lets also not forget increased CP cost of most good stratagems and technically a nerf to the codex. If you include allies you don't get all the benefits.
doctrines didn't exist before this codex, that's not a nerf to marine ally lists that's a buff to pure marine lists.
You guys are thinking shallow with that auto hit stratagem, I'd use it on a UM vehicle that's on its second or last bracket so it can still make its points back. Like a dread that can move into a good position but it'd be hitting on 6s
Lets also not forget increased CP cost of most good stratagems and technically a nerf to the codex. If you include allies you don't get all the benefits.
doctrines didn't exist before this codex, that's not a nerf to marine ally lists that's a buff to pure marine lists.
If a marine is worth its points with these doctrines it is not worth it without it if they take allies. It is a nerf by design. Perhaps other armies will also get this kind of structure but then it's not a buff is it? If everyone is getting it? It is the illusion of a buff. The reality is marines aren't getting much better overall compared to the feild but it really appears they are. I was initially fooled too.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
fraser1191 wrote: You guys are thinking shallow with that auto hit stratagem, I'd use it on a UM vehicle that's on its second or last bracket so it can still make its points back. Like a dread that can move into a good position but it'd be hitting on 6s
Just play ironhands dude. Don't degrade. That is free btw. No CP required.
fraser1191 wrote: You guys are thinking shallow with that auto hit stratagem, I'd use it on a UM vehicle that's on its second or last bracket so it can still make its points back. Like a dread that can move into a good position but it'd be hitting on 6s
Crazyterran wrote: Other than Guilliman and the Repulsor what are those plenty of nerfs?
Those are big nerfs.
What if you went to a tau player told them their codex got a lot of buffs but riptides and broadside got big points hikes?
or you went to an admech player and said their destroyers got +1 save but cawl lost his reroll all hits aura and dunecrawlers went up 20 points...
Seriously.
Lets also not forget increased CP cost of most good stratagems and technically a nerf to the codex. If you include allies you don't get all the benefits.
Any people accuse me of freaking out over nothing....
So, who cares? The META will adapt. It always does. How many META BREAKING changes have their been in this edition? Who cares, because here is one more. There is really nothing stopping Ultras from being super powerful this edition. The meta will change, it will survive, and it will get stronger....
fraser1191 wrote: You guys are thinking shallow with that auto hit stratagem, I'd use it on a UM vehicle that's on its second or last bracket so it can still make its points back. Like a dread that can move into a good position but it'd be hitting on 6s
Just play ironhands dude. Don't degrade. That is free btw. No CP required.
But then I miss out on Calgar and Tigarius...
I can make it - 1 to hit at the start of the round too. Honestly I'd love a Sgt chronus riding my repulsor haha
fraser1191 wrote: You guys are thinking shallow with that auto hit stratagem, I'd use it on a UM vehicle that's on its second or last bracket so it can still make its points back. Like a dread that can move into a good position but it'd be hitting on 6s
Just play ironhands dude. Don't degrade. That is free btw. No CP required.
But then I miss out on Calgar and Tigarius...
I can make it - 1 to hit at the start of the round too. Honestly I'd love a Sgt chronus riding my repulsor haha
He cant ride in that repulsor sadly. baby marines not allowed. Also that would be like a 380 point repulsor....
Xenomancers wrote: There is nothing meta breaking in this codex. Literally nothing.
There are literally 2nd tier options that other armies are using that are better than anything this army can do.
GOOD
seriously people need to stop whining everytime a new codex comes out and it's not a pile of OP broken gak. the Marine codex is good, but if it's strong but not over powering (especially as metabreaking is inevitably something that interacts with the rules in a weird way that GW clearly didn't expoect) thats good. if the Marine codex is strong without being voerpowered that is exactly what we should want
Xeno, do you understand that some people played marines without your stupid Primarch? Those builds got a lot better. And overall Ultras got much better as well, and if you weren't stuck in your monobuild mindset you'd realise this too.
Crimson wrote: Xeno, do you understand that some people played marines without your stupid Primarch? Those builds got a lot better. And overall Ultras got much better as well, and if you weren't stuck in your monobuild mindset you'd realise this too.
If your other chapters of marines do not exceed marines with gman aura power level. This codex is a complete waste of time and effort. They aren't doing that btw.
Crimson wrote: Xeno, do you understand that some people played marines without your stupid Primarch? Those builds got a lot better. And overall Ultras got much better as well, and if you weren't stuck in your monobuild mindset you'd realise this too.
If your other chapters of marines do not exceed marines with gman aura power level. This codex is a complete waste of time and effort. They aren't doing that btw.
Of course it is not waste to make more builds viable. And I predict that you're wrong about the power level of this codex.
Crimson wrote: Xeno, do you understand that some people played marines without your stupid Primarch? Those builds got a lot better. And overall Ultras got much better as well, and if you weren't stuck in your monobuild mindset you'd realise this too.
If your other chapters of marines do not exceed marines with gman aura power level. This codex is a complete waste of time and effort. They aren't doing that btw.
Yeah but we also haven't seen all of the supplements, plus I don't want to have to take Guilliman to be relevant.
I'm not sure if this codex will be tournament meta breaking powerful. Remains to be seen. I am pretty certain it will be obnoxiously powerful in casual play though.
Crimson wrote: Xeno, do you understand that some people played marines without your stupid Primarch? Those builds got a lot better. And overall Ultras got much better as well, and if you weren't stuck in your monobuild mindset you'd realise this too.
If your other chapters of marines do not exceed marines with gman aura power level. This codex is a complete waste of time and effort. They aren't doing that btw.
Yeah but we also haven't seen all of the supplements, plus I don't want to have to take Guilliman to be relevant.
Nether did I - making the army weaker overall is not the answer though. To much hate against our own players. Most marine players in this thread are just happy they are better than ultramarines now - they could care less that they still have no chance against competitive armies.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Seriosuly I think the army gets wrecked by mono custodes at this point. At lease with gman I could beat them. Now they just walk over us because we have to wound them on 5's. GG marines.
Xenomancers wrote: Nether did I - making the army weaker overall is not the answer though.
Good thing then that this didn't happen.
To much hate against our own players. Most marine players in this thread are just happy they are better than ultramarines now
That certainly is a a major victory. Not being forced to that idiotic Guilliman monobuild to be even somewhat viable is an amazing thing.
they could care less that they still have no chance against competitive armies.
I indeed could care less about that. Which means that I care about it somewhat, even though it is not my primary concern. I care more about a decent amount of different builds being viable in casual environment though.
Crimson wrote: Xeno, do you understand that some people played marines without your stupid Primarch? Those builds got a lot better. And overall Ultras got much better as well, and if you weren't stuck in your monobuild mindset you'd realise this too.
If your other chapters of marines do not exceed marines with gman aura power level. This codex is a complete waste of time and effort. They aren't doing that btw.
Yeah but we also haven't seen all of the supplements, plus I don't want to have to take Guilliman to be relevant.
Nether did I - making the army weaker overall is not the answer though. To much hate against our own players. Most marine players in this thread are just happy they are better than ultramarines now - they could care less that they still have no chance against competitive armies.
All things considered I wouldn't say my current list is weaker I'd say it's significantly stronger. Though I'll have to remake it since repulsors went up, but I already had to go down to double repulsors before even getting my Executioner. But this new vehicle... I could probably get 2 plus a unit of reivers(everybody deserves a second chance) in exchange of the repulsor or I might dabble, swap out an intercessor squad for infiltrators, try the new stealth dread etc...
I'm gonna hold out on a verdict on if the army is weaker or not after I have it in my hands and a couple games under my belt
Crimson wrote: Xeno, do you understand that some people played marines without your stupid Primarch? Those builds got a lot better. And overall Ultras got much better as well, and if you weren't stuck in your monobuild mindset you'd realise this too.
If your other chapters of marines do not exceed marines with gman aura power level. This codex is a complete waste of time and effort. They aren't doing that btw.
Yeah but we also haven't seen all of the supplements, plus I don't want to have to take Guilliman to be relevant.
Nether did I - making the army weaker overall is not the answer though. To much hate against our own players. Most marine players in this thread are just happy they are better than ultramarines now - they could care less that they still have no chance against competitive armies.
All things considered I wouldn't say my current list is weaker I'd say it's significantly stronger. Though I'll have to remake it since repulsors went up, but I already had to go down to double repulsors before even getting my Executioner. But this new vehicle... I could probably get 2 plus a unit of reivers(everybody deserves a second chance) in exchange of the repulsor or I might dabble, swap out an intercessor squad for infiltrators, try the new stealth dread etc...
I'm gonna hold out on a verdict on if the army is weaker or not after I have it in my hands and a couple games under my belt
You wernt playing gman though. The army did get better without gman (like if you were just using calgar). Playing ultras without gman though in the past I felt impotent as my army hits like a wet noodle. It's not going to get much better ether. AP doesn't mean much when you can't wound. Will be interesting to use the faith of oath ability and get free gman buff for getting close to an enemy.
Discounts across a wide range of units, a pretty consistent community request.
Chapter Tactics applied to all units, a pretty consistent community request.
If that was all it did, I don't think there would be a lot of room to complain. However, they went beyond that and provided:
Updated units, improved Marines in general.
Improved some of the more underwhelming weapons.
Added more to differentiate the chapters from one another (new strats, new chapter abilities, etc).
Then they even went beyond that:
They provided incentive not to soup without penalizing soup, a pretty consistent community request.
I mean, I don't think Xeno is wildly off-base, this doesn't instantly make Marines top tier, but it definitely gives them a puncher's chance.
Lastly, it's obvious that they listened to the community even if they didn't just write every suggestion you had into the new book verbatim. Maybe give it a ride and see how it plays given that they clearly listened and responded.
Xenomancers wrote: There is nothing meta breaking in this codex. Literally nothing.
There are literally 2nd tier options that other armies are using that are better than anything this army can do.
GOOD
seriously people need to stop whining everytime a new codex comes out and it's not a pile of OP broken gak. the Marine codex is good, but if it's strong but not over powering (especially as metabreaking is inevitably something that interacts with the rules in a weird way that GW clearly didn't expoect) thats good. if the Marine codex is strong without being voerpowered that is exactly what we should want
yeah but as I said, I'm not sure I want the codex to be "top tier" top tier codices are almost always 2 or 3 broken units tossed into a soup and spammed., I'd rather a good consistant codex where everything (or as much as possiable) is viable.
I think its fair to say demons are still gonna be an issue. Maybe orks, too. The AP stuff won't help there, and except for gravis, most marines picked up zero new durability.
Every Codex for every army mainly improved the damage output (dpa? damage per turn? damage per point?) with ever more shots, more attacks, more and better re-rolls, more double-activations, better AP, more ways to ignore modifiers or silly things like range or line of sight, made cc-units get in there more reliable, etc.. yet most armies are still basically only as resilient/defensive as they were in index-days (and the few non-Horde exceptions like -1 armies are apparently getting rolled back as well).
I don’t see the overall trend towards ever more glasshammer-40K changing anytime soon.
Xenomancers wrote: There is nothing meta breaking in this codex. Literally nothing.
There are literally 2nd tier options that other armies are using that are better than anything this army can do.
GOOD
seriously people need to stop whining everytime a new codex comes out and it's not a pile of OP broken gak. the Marine codex is good, but if it's strong but not over powering (especially as metabreaking is inevitably something that interacts with the rules in a weird way that GW clearly didn't expoect) thats good. if the Marine codex is strong without being voerpowered that is exactly what we should want
Every Codex for every army mainly improved the damage output (dpa? damage per turn? damage per point?) with ever more shots, more attacks, more and better re-rolls, more double-activations, better AP, more ways to ignore modifiers or silly things like range or line of sight, made cc-units get in there more reliable, etc.. yet most armies are still basically only as resilient/defensive as they were in index-days (and the few non-Horde exceptions like -1 armies are apparently getting rolled back as well).
I don’t see the overall trend towards ever more glasshammer-40K changing anytime soon.
Fair. I will take my +1 W gravis and be very happy. I've said all along they were costed like 3W models.
Every Codex for every army mainly improved the damage output (dpa? damage per turn? damage per point?) with ever more shots, more attacks, more and better re-rolls, more double-activations, better AP, more ways to ignore modifiers or silly things like range or line of sight, made cc-units get in there more reliable, etc.. yet most armies are still basically only as resilient/defensive as they were in index-days (and the few non-Horde exceptions like -1 armies are apparently getting rolled back as well).
I don’t see the overall trend towards ever more glasshammer-40K changing anytime soon.
Fair. I will take my +1 W gravis and be very happy. I've said all along they were costed like 3W models.
It's true you did - and they were. Aggressors are certainly the most improved unit.
I don't know. I can think of a lot of uses for BA bolter inceptors now that were just not possible. Bolter inceptors are particuarly good with upon wings of fire in ITC, because I can eliminate units off objectives without having to roll a charge, and they can shoot past some screens. Particularly a 9+4 screen.
yeah neither am I. it's a shame as they where so popular with so many players. with any luck in the future we'll get primaris hover bikes and a primaris bike captain.
Martel732 wrote: I don't know. I can think of a lot of uses for BA bolter inceptors now that were just not possible. Bolter inceptors are particuarly good with upon wings of fire in ITC, because I can eliminate units off objectives without having to roll a charge, and they can shoot past some screens. Particularly a 9+4 screen.
yeah neither am I. it's a shame as they where so popular with so many players. with any luck in the future we'll get primaris hover bikes and a primaris bike captain.
BA for a while. DA right now. No joke. GK are ahead of DA in win rate and were ahead of BA until those two guys went on a tear. Without this update, BA would have sunk back down, imo.
Martel732 wrote: BA for a while. DA right now. No joke. GK are ahead of DA in win rate and were ahead of BA until those two guys went on a tear. Without this update, BA would have sunk back down, imo.
Dude, you have FW crap. You have leviathans, and all that. You have Smash Captains. You have Hellblasters, and half way decent rules. Don't be daft. GK have troops that are worse than most, cost slightly less than Custodes, their entire Psykic line got the nerf bat in the first few months, and their only purpose, to defeat daemons, got nerfed when the daemon codex came out.
I'm not debating that. I'm just stating the outcomes. My hypothesis is that mortal wound generation might be a big factor. Also, paladins are amazing as they have the magical 3W. Plus those insane charcters with the price drops.
Turns out it is close, and in the GK favor vis a vis DA currently and BA too for most of 2019.
Dude, you have FW crap. You have leviathans, and all that. You have Smash Captains. You have Hellblasters, and half way decent rules. Don't be daft. GK have troops that are worse than most, cost slightly less than Custodes, their entire Psykic line got the nerf bat in the first few months, and their only purpose, to defeat daemons, got nerfed when the daemon codex came out.
NOT. EVEN. CLOSE.
Strikes are 21 points apiece. Custodians clock in at 52+. Chill out.
Martel732 wrote: BA for a while. DA right now. No joke. GK are ahead of DA in win rate and were ahead of BA until those two guys went on a tear. Without this update, BA would have sunk back down, imo.
Dude, you have FW crap. You have leviathans, and all that. You have Smash Captains. You have Hellblasters, and half way decent rules. Don't be daft. GK have troops that are worse than most, cost slightly less than Custodes, their entire Psykic line got the nerf bat in the first few months, and their only purpose, to defeat daemons, got nerfed when the daemon codex came out.
NOT. EVEN. CLOSE.
Leviathans suck as Blood Angels because the moment you take one gun you lose an attack.
The melee weapons on strike guys are really good, they just usually get zorfed before they can use them. They're usually my first target vs GKs. Usually.
Well, they have stats for mono GK, and for primary detachment. So that's probably not quite right, you need 1001 pts of GK to be primary detachment I think.
Discounts across a wide range of units, a pretty consistent community request.
Chapter Tactics applied to all units, a pretty consistent community request.
If that was all it did, I don't think there would be a lot of room to complain. However, they went beyond that and provided:
Updated units, improved Marines in general.
Improved some of the more underwhelming weapons.
Added more to differentiate the chapters from one another (new strats, new chapter abilities, etc).
Then they even went beyond that:
They provided incentive not to soup without penalizing soup, a pretty consistent community request.
I mean, I don't think Xeno is wildly off-base, this doesn't instantly make Marines top tier, but it definitely gives them a puncher's chance.
Lastly, it's obvious that they listened to the community even if they didn't just write every suggestion you had into the new book verbatim. Maybe give it a ride and see how it plays given that they clearly listened and responded.
The discounts are minimal. -1 per tac marine is nice. Cheaper suppressors - not even sure why cause they were already good. Bonus wounds to gravis (only seems fair). Stalkers got a little better but bolt rifle is still better. Eliminators are just good all around.
Nerfs to gman/ repuslors/ lots of stratagems more expensive for the same effect.
Bonus AP and special doctrine if you don't take allies.
Honestly - you seem to be approaching this with a level head. There is nothing in here IMO that will take a 40% WR army and make it 50%.
Discounts across a wide range of units, a pretty consistent community request.
Chapter Tactics applied to all units, a pretty consistent community request.
If that was all it did, I don't think there would be a lot of room to complain. However, they went beyond that and provided:
Updated units, improved Marines in general.
Improved some of the more underwhelming weapons.
Added more to differentiate the chapters from one another (new strats, new chapter abilities, etc).
Then they even went beyond that:
They provided incentive not to soup without penalizing soup, a pretty consistent community request.
I mean, I don't think Xeno is wildly off-base, this doesn't instantly make Marines top tier, but it definitely gives them a puncher's chance.
Lastly, it's obvious that they listened to the community even if they didn't just write every suggestion you had into the new book verbatim. Maybe give it a ride and see how it plays given that they clearly listened and responded.
The discounts are minimal. -1 per tac marine is nice. Cheaper suppressors - not even sure why cause they were already good. Bonus wounds to gravis (only seems fair). Stalkers got a little better but bolt rifle is still better. Eliminators are just good all around.
Nerfs to gman/ repuslors/ lots of stratagems more expensive for the same effect.
Bonus AP and special doctrine if you don't take allies.
Honestly - you seem to be approaching this with a level head. There is nothing in here IMO that will take a 40% WR army and make it 50%.
I do. And that's for BA. Gravis buff, spell buff, new ways to pressure, equipment recosting, etc. Maybe BA fall short of 50%, but I don't think IH or Sallies do.
This is unbelievable! Martel is being optimistic about Space Marines! Xeno, being more pessimistic than Martel should be a clear sign that you're being completely unreasonably negative.
Discounts across a wide range of units, a pretty consistent community request.
Chapter Tactics applied to all units, a pretty consistent community request.
If that was all it did, I don't think there would be a lot of room to complain. However, they went beyond that and provided:
Updated units, improved Marines in general.
Improved some of the more underwhelming weapons.
Added more to differentiate the chapters from one another (new strats, new chapter abilities, etc).
Then they even went beyond that:
They provided incentive not to soup without penalizing soup, a pretty consistent community request.
I mean, I don't think Xeno is wildly off-base, this doesn't instantly make Marines top tier, but it definitely gives them a puncher's chance.
Lastly, it's obvious that they listened to the community even if they didn't just write every suggestion you had into the new book verbatim. Maybe give it a ride and see how it plays given that they clearly listened and responded.
The discounts are minimal. -1 per tac marine is nice. Cheaper suppressors - not even sure why cause they were already good. Bonus wounds to gravis (only seems fair). Stalkers got a little better but bolt rifle is still better. Eliminators are just good all around.
Nerfs to gman/ repuslors/ lots of stratagems more expensive for the same effect.
Bonus AP and special doctrine if you don't take allies.
Honestly - you seem to be approaching this with a level head. There is nothing in here IMO that will take a 40% WR army and make it 50%.
But the other 95%+ of the player base that aren't running hardcore tourney lists seem to be happy with the changes. This happens a lot in pc games, something that's crap in the hands of the pros can be amazing to other people if their opponents aren't at top tier play style.
Random example, heroes of the storm has a mage kael'thas who has a huge ban/win rate in bottom end play and dominates games, but by the time you hit pros he's barely picked because people know how to handle him.
Nerf for the masses or buff for the 2% of the player base and make casual games hell?
Crimson wrote: This is unbelievable! Martel is being optimistic about Space Marines! Xeno, being more pessimistic than Martel should be a clear sign that you're being completely unreasonably negative.
Realistically BA are being buffed really hard. They are a melle army getting +1 attack across the board. If they get doctrines (which they will) they will have the same shooting potential as all other marines to go along with a 5+ FNP bubble. For a blood angels player you gotta be feeling pretty good right now. Nothing wrong with that. His army deserves to get buffed. Mine didn't deserve to get nerfed though.
Discounts across a wide range of units, a pretty consistent community request.
Chapter Tactics applied to all units, a pretty consistent community request.
If that was all it did, I don't think there would be a lot of room to complain. However, they went beyond that and provided:
Updated units, improved Marines in general.
Improved some of the more underwhelming weapons.
Added more to differentiate the chapters from one another (new strats, new chapter abilities, etc).
Then they even went beyond that:
They provided incentive not to soup without penalizing soup, a pretty consistent community request.
I mean, I don't think Xeno is wildly off-base, this doesn't instantly make Marines top tier, but it definitely gives them a puncher's chance.
Lastly, it's obvious that they listened to the community even if they didn't just write every suggestion you had into the new book verbatim. Maybe give it a ride and see how it plays given that they clearly listened and responded.
The discounts are minimal. -1 per tac marine is nice. Cheaper suppressors - not even sure why cause they were already good. Bonus wounds to gravis (only seems fair). Stalkers got a little better but bolt rifle is still better. Eliminators are just good all around.
Nerfs to gman/ repuslors/ lots of stratagems more expensive for the same effect.
Bonus AP and special doctrine if you don't take allies.
Honestly - you seem to be approaching this with a level head. There is nothing in here IMO that will take a 40% WR army and make it 50%.
But the other 95%+ of the player base that aren't running hardcore tourney lists seem to be happy with the changes. This happens a lot in pc games, something that's crap in the hands of the pros can be amazing to other people if their opponents aren't at top tier play style.
Random example, heroes of the storm has a mage kael'thas who has a huge ban/win rate in bottom end play and dominates games, but by the time you hit pros he's barely picked because people know how to handle him.
Nerf for the masses or buff for the 2% of the player base and make casual games hell?
That is a load of crap. Anyone who is invested in this game and keeps playing it plays at least semi competitive lists. Or at least are trying out combos they think will be powerful. No one is taking units because they think they'll perform worse and no one is trying to lose. What you are talking about is skill floor and skill ceiling - 40k the skill floor and skill ceiling is very narrow. Plus it's almost the opposite of what you can expect with these marine changes. These changes are much more likely to stomp casual lists hard than they are to make a dent in the competitive meta.
On the topic of Grey Knights, I wouldn't be surprised if they got a new codex. They might get some stat line changes and significant point adjustments.
Xenomancers wrote: Honestly - you seem to be approaching this with a level head. There is nothing in here IMO that will take a 40% WR army and make it 50%.
I want to be outraged, I'm just not.
As far as WR, we'll see, mono-Marines will probably still lose to optimized soup. So in that regard you may be correct. I've been playing all-Marine CSM lists for the last few months with my regular group and have been pleasantly surprised at how well it's done (I started doing it to prove a point that I failed to prove), so that's probably coloring my opinion on things a bit.
Ishagu wrote: I've seen some attacks against Xeno here.
Lets all agree that the Guilliman nerf was overall for the best in terms of the whole codex.
Let's also agree that the Repulsor nerf was ridiculous and unnecessary, and it hurts themed armies most of all.
I agree that the Repulsor price hike is kinda drastic and perplexing.
A 6+ FnP 5+ overwatch with -2 to charge distance
Neesing to loose 13 wounds to move to it's second damage tier
With already having Fly and PoTMS it's not exactly trash tier either.
It's GW costing it on it's most efficient way to be run.
We also still haven't seen the Iron hands specific buff yet.
A 6+ FnP 5+ overwatch with -2 to charge distance
Neesing to loose 13 wounds to move to it's second damage tier
With already having Fly and PoTMS it's not exactly trash tier either.
It's GW costing it on it's most efficient way to be run.
We also still haven't seen the Iron hands specific buff yet.
It just is a tad unfortunate for all non IH players...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ishagu wrote: That isn't it, because other vehicles that benefit equally received point drops.
Ishagu wrote: That isn't it, because other vehicles that benefit equally received point drops.
Which other vehicles already had fly &PoTMS in the marines codex and gain from the overwatch buff and the damage reduction.
Landraiders Nope
Predators Nope
All rhino chassis Nope
Dreadnaughts Nope
Maybe a stormraven not sure how it's points changed
Maybe a stormtalon again not sure how it's points changed
But no-ones talking around at them having changed points.
Discounts across a wide range of units, a pretty consistent community request.
Chapter Tactics applied to all units, a pretty consistent community request.
If that was all it did, I don't think there would be a lot of room to complain. However, they went beyond that and provided:
Updated units, improved Marines in general.
Improved some of the more underwhelming weapons.
Added more to differentiate the chapters from one another (new strats, new chapter abilities, etc).
Then they even went beyond that:
They provided incentive not to soup without penalizing soup, a pretty consistent community request.
I mean, I don't think Xeno is wildly off-base, this doesn't instantly make Marines top tier, but it definitely gives them a puncher's chance.
Lastly, it's obvious that they listened to the community even if they didn't just write every suggestion you had into the new book verbatim. Maybe give it a ride and see how it plays given that they clearly listened and responded.
The discounts are minimal. -1 per tac marine is nice. Cheaper suppressors - not even sure why cause they were already good. Bonus wounds to gravis (only seems fair). Stalkers got a little better but bolt rifle is still better. Eliminators are just good all around.
Nerfs to gman/ repuslors/ lots of stratagems more expensive for the same effect.
Bonus AP and special doctrine if you don't take allies.
Honestly - you seem to be approaching this with a level head. There is nothing in here IMO that will take a 40% WR army and make it 50%.
But the other 95%+ of the player base that aren't running hardcore tourney lists seem to be happy with the changes. This happens a lot in pc games, something that's crap in the hands of the pros can be amazing to other people if their opponents aren't at top tier play style.
Random example, heroes of the storm has a mage kael'thas who has a huge ban/win rate in bottom end play and dominates games, but by the time you hit pros he's barely picked because people know how to handle him.
Nerf for the masses or buff for the 2% of the player base and make casual games hell?
That is a load of crap. Anyone who is invested in this game and keeps playing it plays at least semi competitive lists. Or at least are trying out combos they think will be powerful.
I, for one, am invested and still play. I don't play even semi competitively. I play the units/armies I want. The meta seems to treat that just fine - whether I'm playing CWE, Harlies, T'au or UM.
So there are such people. You don't have to be one - that's fine. But don't pretend we don't exist - or matter.
No one is taking units because they think they'll perform worse and no one is trying to lose.
Taking units because they perform worse is not the inverse of taking units because they'll perform better. Believe it or not, some players use reasons other than "What will it do to my WR" when deciding what they want to play with.
Ishagu wrote: I've seen some attacks against Xeno here.
Lets all agree that the Guilliman nerf was overall for the best in terms of the whole codex.
Let's also agree that the Repulsor nerf was ridiculous and unnecessary, and it hurts themed armies most of all.
I mean, it means Ultramarines are strictly worse than most other, maybe all other, chapters now. So that makes me, as an Ultramarines player, sad. But I prefer apoc now in any case.
I mean, it means Ultramarines are strictly worse than most other, maybe all other, chapters now. So that makes me, as an Ultramarines player, sad. But I prefer apoc now in any case.
Ultramarine doctrine benefit is really amazing. Of course we will not know what other supplements will bring, so we cannot adequately compare. Also, loads of special characters. Both Calgar and Tigurius are pretty damn good.
I mean, it means Ultramarines are strictly worse than most other, maybe all other, chapters now. So that makes me, as an Ultramarines player, sad. But I prefer apoc now in any case.
Ultramarine doctrine benefit is really amazing. Of course we will not know what other supplements will bring, so we cannot adequately compare. Also, loads of special characters. Both Calgar and Tigurius are pretty damn good.
The ultramarine doctrine benefit is.... super meh compared to... literally everyone but maybe the raven guard now. It flat didn't change. Tigerius also barely changed. He does what tigerius always did, which is.... just alright. It's not great. Finally Calgar is... just better than guilliman now sure, but not so much better that he is better than guilliman was. He's still just a chapter master and that's it. Any chapter master fits in what calgar does.
Ultramarines will just be basically "good" with what space marines get, but worse than every single other chapter at using it. Which is a bummer.
The ultramarine doctrine benefit is.... super meh compared to... literally everyone but maybe the raven guard now. It flat didn't change. Tigerius also barely changed. He does what tigerius always did, which is.... just alright. It's not great. Finally Calgar is... just better than guilliman now sure, but not so much better that he is better than guilliman was. He's still just a chapter master and that's it. Any chapter master fits in what calgar does.
Ultramarines will just be basically "good" with what space marines get, but worse than every single other chapter at using it. Which is a bummer.
Being able to move and then shoot like you hadn't is a great benefit. And having a chapter master that gives you two command points rather than cost you them is great. Especially now as souping a CP battery really isn't an option and there are plenty of stratagems worth using four CPs more is a lot. Oh, and then one more per turn from an Ultra warlord trait.
No, you don't understand! Getting a bunch of benefits to shooting units in a Codex where the shooting units are much better than the melee ones is CLEARLY worse than rerolling charge distances!
No, I'm not annoyed at all the poor, martyred Ultramarine players at all...
The ultramarine doctrine benefit is.... super meh compared to... literally everyone but maybe the raven guard now. It flat didn't change. Tigerius also barely changed. He does what tigerius always did, which is.... just alright. It's not great. Finally Calgar is... just better than guilliman now sure, but not so much better that he is better than guilliman was. He's still just a chapter master and that's it. Any chapter master fits in what calgar does.
Ultramarines will just be basically "good" with what space marines get, but worse than every single other chapter at using it. Which is a bummer.
Being able to move and then shoot like you hadn't is a great benefit. And having a chapter master that gives you two command points rather than cost you them is great. Especially now as souping a CP battery really isn't an option and there are plenty of stratagems worth using four CPs more is a lot. Oh, and then one more per turn from an Ultra warlord trait.
I've never felt the need to soup. My local meta just isn't good enough and the really tourney players pretty much just play themselves. I'd have to ambush him in an alley to get a game from someone like tony these days.
Doesn't mean I can rock in with just any old list and win a game. I tried with vigilus detachments.
It's cheaper. Did it go down enough such that we'd start seeing drop pod armies?
How much cheaper?
With 1st Turn Drop, reduced Marine costs, reduced Grav Cannon costs, Devastator/Tactical Doctrine and a Grav-centric Stratagem I'm already going to be putting them back in my lists.
It's cheaper. Did it go down enough such that we'd start seeing drop pod armies?
How much cheaper?
With 1st Turn Drop, reduced Marine costs, reduced Grav Cannon costs, Devastator/Tactical Doctrine and a Grav-centric Stratagem I'm already going to be putting them back in my lists.
63 +2 for storm bolter, so they're 65 now. I don't know what they were before lol
It's cheaper. Did it go down enough such that we'd start seeing drop pod armies?
How much cheaper?
With 1st Turn Drop, reduced Marine costs, reduced Grav Cannon costs, Devastator/Tactical Doctrine and a Grav-centric Stratagem I'm already going to be putting them back in my lists.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: No, you don't understand! Getting a bunch of benefits to shooting units in a Codex where the shooting units are much better than the melee ones is CLEARLY worse than rerolling charge distances!
No, I'm not annoyed at all the poor, martyred Ultramarine players at all...
They have been sub optimal for literally every edition in the game except for what we might as well call the first stage of 8th edition. Where they got a codex first and had a way around chapter tactics not applying to vehicles. By taking units that got a better version of their chapter tactic (fly repuslors) and using the best damage ramp in the game. Realistically - the list struggled mightily against any competitive army that wasn't spamming infantry. Yet - it has received a nerf on the level of ynnari that is extremely unjustified based on the performance of said armies. The core weakness of marines is poor defense (easily ignored defenses) so getting your damage in while you are still standing is extremely important. On the whole defense hasn't been increased at all except through tiny point drops and added wounds to a few units which were severely underperforming defensively.
On the topic of BT chapter tactic. It is still kinda meh. 5+ against mortal wounds is pretty situational but it's not like they don't take equal benefit to shooting as other chapters from bonus AP and reroll all hits auras.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: No, you don't understand! Getting a bunch of benefits to shooting units in a Codex where the shooting units are much better than the melee ones is CLEARLY worse than rerolling charge distances!
No, I'm not annoyed at all the poor, martyred Ultramarine players at all...
They have been sub optimal for literally every edition in the game except for what we might as well call the first stage of 8th edition. Where they got a codex first and had a way around chapter tactics not applying to vehicles. By taking units that got a better version of their chapter tactic (fly repuslors) and using the best damage ramp in the game. Realistically - the list struggled mightily against any competitive army that wasn't spamming infantry. Yet - it has received a nerf on the level of ynnari that is extremely unjustified based on the performance of said armies. The core weakness of marines is poor defense (easily ignored defenses) so getting your damage in while you are still standing is extremely important. On the whole defense hasn't been increased at all except through tiny point drops and added wounds to a few units which were severely underperforming defensively.
And your army is still stronger than mine and you're acting like the world has ended.
It's cheaper. Did it go down enough such that we'd start seeing drop pod armies?
The problem with the drop pod is the model: The footprint is too big IF you don't pod in on the first turn.
Maybe you can make one or two work but podding an entire army...I don't know...
Paying 65 points for a drop pod when other armies can Deep strike turn 1 for a psychic power and for 1 cp on turn 2...it is just not good enough. It's like playing a game with a handicap. Drop pods need to do more or cost less. The size of the model isn't really an issue.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: No, you don't understand! Getting a bunch of benefits to shooting units in a Codex where the shooting units are much better than the melee ones is CLEARLY worse than rerolling charge distances!
No, I'm not annoyed at all the poor, martyred Ultramarine players at all...
They have been sub optimal for literally every edition in the game except for what we might as well call the first stage of 8th edition. Where they got a codex first and had a way around chapter tactics not applying to vehicles. By taking units that got a better version of their chapter tactic (fly repuslors) and using the best damage ramp in the game. Realistically - the list struggled mightily against any competitive army that wasn't spamming infantry. Yet - it has received a nerf on the level of ynnari that is extremely unjustified based on the performance of said armies. The core weakness of marines is poor defense (easily ignored defenses) so getting your damage in while you are still standing is extremely important. On the whole defense hasn't been increased at all except through tiny point drops and added wounds to a few units which were severely underperforming defensively.
And your army is still stronger than mine and you're acting like the world has ended.
Zero sympathy mate.
That remains to be seen. It's a better tactic than ultra marines and if your super doctrine is decent BT could very well be better than ultra marines.
Luke_Prowler wrote: So drop pods dropped a whole 20 points and now ignores tactical reserves
That's a pretty significant buff
How about dark matter crystalis and veil of darkness and da jump...they all also ignore the tactical reserves and have a cost of 0 cp (free relic) or 1 cp(additional relic) or the cost of a psyker who has tremendous ultity during the game. It is not even close. The drop pod should be between 30-40 points or just cost CP and work out some special rules for the drop pod (can't hold obejctives and doesn't do anything but get in the way and shoot a storm bolter.) There are also abilities like quicken and warp time which have a similar effect to deep strike (and better in a lot of cases). Maybe if it could deploy within 6" instead of 9" along with the occupants it would be worth those points.
Yeah the buff is significant but drop pods were actually...THAT BAD - that they can be significantly buffed and still not be very good. I find it hard to believe that the people making the rules can't see this. Is there an error in my logic somewhere that I am missing?
Then you're paying 35 extra points for these things:
++ Blocks stratagems targeting deepstrikers
++ The units that go in can change from game to game
++ Turn 1 deepstrike
It's cheaper. Did it go down enough such that we'd start seeing drop pod armies?
How much cheaper?
With 1st Turn Drop, reduced Marine costs, reduced Grav Cannon costs, Devastator/Tactical Doctrine and a Grav-centric Stratagem I'm already going to be putting them back in my lists.
63 +2 for storm bolter, so they're 65 now. I don't know what they were before lol
You know, I felt jealous for marines at first, now I just am tired of the emotional roller coaster. For all intents it feels like marines got better, which is good right ? Some units, got worse. Gman has been an issue for a bit, not surprised he's nerfed.
The biggest WTF for me is the Repulsor and Executioner pts rises, it's like GW secretly dislikes their own models.
They go out of their way to not put thought into how to include the new stuff for Death watch, I don't get this at all. Surely some extra points would be fine to take them, just say their SIA doesn't count for the snipers as they have their own, there it's all good.
Still don't think they get access to the transport but its ok as I wanted a rhino type transport and not a razorback type transport. Why GW can't we just get a cheap priamris shaggin wagon to carry bigger squads and/or gravis and be cheap. Is that really too much to ask for ?
GW delayed the old priamris stuff from death watch too until they could incroperate them properly. if I was gonna make a guess a new death watch codex is imminant.
I kind of hope so and yet don't want to pay for a new one as well. I'm vexed on that topic but yeah I can't see them keeping them out forever as they want to sell these models to all the marines, including Deathwatch. I guess I'll just focus on the upgrades I do have access to and buff out some troops and just cross my fingers and toes for the new hotness, eventually.
I just don't know why they couldn't address it as a stop gap in the FAQ and just amend the points and such if needed later.
Though maybe they want to use the vanguard units as part of another Kill team type set up eventually.
Luke_Prowler wrote: So drop pods dropped a whole 20 points and now ignores tactical reserves
That's a pretty significant buff
How about dark matter crystalis and veil of darkness and da jump...they all also ignore the tactical reserves and have a cost of 0 cp (free relic) or 1 cp(additional relic) or the cost of a psyker who has tremendous ultity during the game. It is not even close. The drop pod should be between 30-40 points or just cost CP and work out some special rules for the drop pod (can't hold obejctives and doesn't do anything but get in the way and shoot a storm bolter.) There are also abilities like quicken and warp time which have a similar effect to deep strike (and better in a lot of cases). Maybe if it could deploy within 6" instead of 9" along with the occupants it would be worth those points.
Yeah the buff is significant but drop pods were actually...THAT BAD - that they can be significantly buffed and still not be very good. I find it hard to believe that the people making the rules can't see this. Is there an error in my logic somewhere that I am missing?
Ohh mother have mercy.. Are you really flogging this dead horse again xeno? Having your units hiding in True T1 DS and being bale to fling a unit across the board is not the same thing... Weird boy doesn't have much utility once he casts da jump does he? He's going to be way in the backfield or out of LOS in order to survive snipers(which you can now ignore with eliminators...?) so smiting doesn't do much not to mention da jump is reliant on a dice roll and is a once per turn gimmick. Besides with omni scramblers/pods, infiltrate dreads you can screen your board so well those things don't really matter anyway.
BrianDavion wrote: GW delayed the old priamris stuff from death watch too until they could incroperate them properly. if I was gonna make a guess a new death watch codex is imminant.
I'm still not sure what chapter my primaris are going to be. I've done some paint runs for templars, iron hands and salamanders. Pragmatism tells me that Sallies will likely be the best, but on the 1 in 40,000 chance that in the Imperial Fists/Sons of Dorn supplement templars get primaris crusader squads and something to make them actually decent in combat other than their meme of a chapter tactic they'll likely be my pick. My hope for the Righteous Crusaders doctrine bonus would be "To Wound rolls of an unmodified 6 deal an additional wound". Never going to happen but a man can dream.
Then you're paying 35 extra points for these things:
++ Blocks stratagems targeting deepstrikers
++ The units that go in can change from game to game
++ Turn 1 deepstrike
Seems reasonable to me.
Jump packs also give you bonus movement. Look at revivers. 20 points to deep strike a 10 man. Your paying 45 points for BS. It is not worth it.
Luke_Prowler wrote: So drop pods dropped a whole 20 points and now ignores tactical reserves
That's a pretty significant buff
How about dark matter crystalis and veil of darkness and da jump...they all also ignore the tactical reserves and have a cost of 0 cp (free relic) or 1 cp(additional relic) or the cost of a psyker who has tremendous ultity during the game. It is not even close. The drop pod should be between 30-40 points or just cost CP and work out some special rules for the drop pod (can't hold obejctives and doesn't do anything but get in the way and shoot a storm bolter.) There are also abilities like quicken and warp time which have a similar effect to deep strike (and better in a lot of cases). Maybe if it could deploy within 6" instead of 9" along with the occupants it would be worth those points.
Yeah the buff is significant but drop pods were actually...THAT BAD - that they can be significantly buffed and still not be very good. I find it hard to believe that the people making the rules can't see this. Is there an error in my logic somewhere that I am missing?
Ohh mother have mercy.. Are you really flogging this dead horse again xeno? Having your units hiding in True T1 DS and being bale to fling a unit across the board is not the same thing... Weird boy doesn't have much utility once he casts da jump does he? He's going to be way in the backfield or out of LOS in order to survive snipers(which you can now ignore with eliminators...?) so smiting doesn't do much not to mention da jump is reliant on a dice roll and is a once per turn gimmick. Besides with omni scramblers/pods, infiltrate dreads you can screen your board so well those things don't really matter anyway.
You can literally cast da jump every turn and it is almost automatic to go off with +3 to cast. Not to mention can be used on 30 man units. Much like DMC on 20 mans. Casting smite with a +3 later in the game is what I would call utility.
Then you're paying 35 extra points for these things:
++ Blocks stratagems targeting deepstrikers
++ The units that go in can change from game to game
++ Turn 1 deepstrike
Seems reasonable to me.
Jump packs also give you bonus movement. Look at revivers. 20 points to deep strike a 10 man. Your paying 45 points for BS. It is not worth it.
Luke_Prowler wrote: So drop pods dropped a whole 20 points and now ignores tactical reserves
That's a pretty significant buff
How about dark matter crystalis and veil of darkness and da jump...they all also ignore the tactical reserves and have a cost of 0 cp (free relic) or 1 cp(additional relic) or the cost of a psyker who has tremendous ultity during the game. It is not even close. The drop pod should be between 30-40 points or just cost CP and work out some special rules for the drop pod (can't hold obejctives and doesn't do anything but get in the way and shoot a storm bolter.) There are also abilities like quicken and warp time which have a similar effect to deep strike (and better in a lot of cases). Maybe if it could deploy within 6" instead of 9" along with the occupants it would be worth those points.
Yeah the buff is significant but drop pods were actually...THAT BAD - that they can be significantly buffed and still not be very good. I find it hard to believe that the people making the rules can't see this. Is there an error in my logic somewhere that I am missing?
Ohh mother have mercy.. Are you really flogging this dead horse again xeno? Having your units hiding in True T1 DS and being bale to fling a unit across the board is not the same thing... Weird boy doesn't have much utility once he casts da jump does he? He's going to be way in the backfield or out of LOS in order to survive snipers(which you can now ignore with eliminators...?) so smiting doesn't do much not to mention da jump is reliant on a dice roll and is a once per turn gimmick. Besides with omni scramblers/pods, infiltrate dreads you can screen your board so well those things don't really matter anyway.
You can literally cast da jump every turn and it is almost automatic to go off with +3 to cast. Not to mention can be used on 30 man units. Much like DMC on 20 mans. Casting smite with a +3 later in the game is what I would call utility.
Have you ever rolled a 1 and a 1 followed by a 2 or a 1...? And also that 30 man unit will not be a 30 man unit if they don't get first turn will they? that +3 becomes a +1/+2 and so on... So you have to invest in a second weird boy to double up on da jump in case of miscast ergo points investment etc. And saying your pod has no utility is just ridiculous... I suppose protecting units T1, giving damn big foot print (to prevent those da jumps you are on about), blocking movement, plus a cheeky bit of dakka on top is not utility. You haven't even played a single game nor have the new codex and yet you are already whinging its garbage because you cant auto win with repulsons.
Jump packs also give you bonus movement. Look at revivers. 20 points to deep strike a 10 man. Your paying 45 points for BS. It is not worth it.
The goal is to alpha strike hard and control the board. Just the existence of a unit that is threatening in a pod will alter deployment.
*Sight* I know man.. How people cant see value in so much board control is baffling. Infiltrating dreads, scrambler bubbles, pods on T1... I mean for real!
Nope not good enough, apparently if it costs points and doesn't one shot a knight its hot garbage..
Yeah, if it can't smack a knight back to narnia, get it outta here, it ain't worth it. I'm going to use my old grumblers special rule now " Back in my day, every unit could one shot a knight, dern kids and their weak marine books these days ! "
Have to agree with Xenomancers here, now that I think about it.
Initially I thought all the new stratagems and doctrines and vehicles getting CT were great until I realized they do absolutely nothing to patch up any of the previous Codex:SM's weaknesses, while simultaneously nerfing the only competitive SM build.
IMO there were a few things that made SM not viable in competitive play: range, mobility, and durability. Made matchups like Tau triptide lists literally unwinnable. Guilliman and repulsors at least compensated somewhat for the mobility and range.
But now looking at this new codex, what do we have? In terms of nerfs, Guilliman and Repulsors are straight up a losing list. I get it, even though they weren't even close to top-tier, it's kind of a dumb way to play and build. And if GW + playtesters want SM to play differently, that's fine. But that would also mean that the new codex would have to 1) actually promote a different playstyle, and 2) actually have to be MORE POWERFUL than the previous codex's Guilliman + Repulsors.
So what do we have in terms of buffs/different playstyles?
1) Doctrines. This is a buff to monocodex space marines. But that's not saying much, since monocodex marines were probably on par with grey knights in terms of power and utility (at least, without Guilliman and BA stratagems). But, this means you can't soup. So no knights/cheap guard battalion. This is significant.
2) Stratagems. We have vigilus ported over, and these are now less up front cost for rapid fire and boltstorm, but more costly if you want to continue using them throughout the game. Target sighted was straight up an increase in cost, but understandable since stalker bolt rifles got buffed. But without access to cheap guard/admech battalions that means you're gonna need to start taking double battalion. Which also sucks since marine HQs aren't the most ideal/optimal to take duplicates of, at all really. Transhuman phys is also great, but costs 2 CP and can get played around pretty easily.
3) People keep talking about drop pods, except whatever you can take in drop pods kinda suck. Tactical marines suck, devastator marines suck, veterans suck. Sure, you can alpha strike and maybe clear a screen worth ~33% or less than your points investment, but then next turn they get blown to dust by proportionately cheaper firepower. Imo drop pods only make the SM mirror more cancerous now, since SM screens are trash and expensive (and remember, we can't ally with cheap screens if we want doctrines).
4) Vehicles get CTs, and CTs get buffed overall (mostly). Cool, this should have been how it's been since day 1.
Really the only great buffs imo are that eliminators can be used as anti-tank (but cannot be spammed), auto bolt rifles going to assault 3, and gravis getting buffed by 1 wound. This makes inceptors a lot better (esp since they got slightly cheaper), but not really aggressors, since as Xeno pointed out already Impulsors can't take grav, and repulsors got nerfed. Tbh they could have let aggressors get transported via Impulsors, but just get rid of the fire-twice ability so as to not make UM aggressor bombs problematic. That and maybe reduce the cost of aggressors by a few points/model. And they really missed the mark by not letting Suppressors be taken in squads of 6. That really could have been SM's ticket out of D tier and into B+ tier, and I don't think anyone would have found them problematic.
So taking this all together, what do we have?
An army that still promotes blobbing up with HQ auras to be efficient in killing power, that has gotten their alpha strike buffed, but in order to take advantage of all the buffs cannot take allies, and still has little to no durability/defense. Stratagems are generally more useful, but are also costly, esp when you can't get cheap CP.
TBH, from what we've seen, I predict that the SM playstyle remains the same, just with different units. Key characters for aura abilities, clump up, pray to God you have first turn and don't get matched vs Tau. The question is, will all of this be better than previous Codex's Guilliman + Tanks? I guess according to Xeno probably not, who I think brings up very good points. I guess we will have to wait until IH or IF supplement, since Reecius from FLG says they will be the best chapters.
I keep needing to read these issues with the new marine book. Am I to understand that unless a new codex will drop and instantly sky rocket to top tier it sucks ? I'd say the books that OP they drop and become that are more the problem than the new marine dex.
As well, we've just started to see phase 2 of codex release. I can't imagine that marines will get things nerfed without that happening to the problem units in other books when their phase 2 drops. It does feel like they want to promote mono dex lists again, and if that keeps going that will only be a net gain for the game. The soup lovers will cry, but the armies abused for their units will be able to avoid needless nerfs because they are taken with everything.
Marines are not auto lose, they just aren't top tier perhaps but then they may be a good contender once books make efforts to make things mono dex.
I guess most of the books in the game are absolute trash as they aren't top tier or even were when the dropped, this game has to be awful sad and upsetting if that is all that will please someone.
I did say I didn't think this book was the OMFG OP !!! that people claimed off the bat, and I don't think its the absolute weak sauce people are saying now either.
Here is an idea, how about we actually see how it does once its out ? Come on people, I haven't been on an emotional roller coaster this steep since the the last season of game of thrones ended, how about we relax, use, then judge.
BrianDavion wrote: So according to BOLS non-white scars marines have lost bike captains
That stinks, but I'm also not shocked.
Wouldn't they still be an option via the index even if the main codex dropped it? Has GW clarified how the new codex interacts with the index?
I am looking right at the datasheet for the Captain on Bike in the new codex right now. I can tell you that, like usual, BOLS is full of more gak than a clogged toilet at a Taco Bell.
BrianDavion wrote: So according to BOLS non-white scars marines have lost bike captains
That stinks, but I'm also not shocked.
Wouldn't they still be an option via the index even if the main codex dropped it? Has GW clarified how the new codex interacts with the index?
I am looking right at the datasheet for the Captain on Bike in the new codex right now. I can tell you that, like usual, BOLS is full of more gak than a clogged toilet at a Taco Bell.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: No, you don't understand! Getting a bunch of benefits to shooting units in a Codex where the shooting units are much better than the melee ones is CLEARLY worse than rerolling charge distances!
No, I'm not annoyed at all the poor, martyred Ultramarine players at all...
They have been sub optimal for literally every edition in the game except for what we might as well call the first stage of 8th edition. Where they got a codex first and had a way around chapter tactics not applying to vehicles. By taking units that got a better version of their chapter tactic (fly repuslors) [and using the best damage ramp in the game.
I didn't realize Razorbacks had Fly. Or Tac Squads.
Realistically - the list struggled mightily against any competitive army that wasn't spamming infantry.
Which was, at the time... maybe morty/maggy lists? Other Chaos, IG, and CWE lists were infantry lists.
I realize not all the Codexes were out. So it was only on an even playingfield with such lackluster codexes as *IG* and *CWE*... And this was before a large number of CWE nerfs.
Yet - it has received a nerf on the level of ynnari that is extremely unjustified based on the performance of said armies.
Ynnari nerfs:
-Not really an army anymore
-Can only move/shoot/fight twice once a turn
-Can't move/shoot/fight twice anymore
-Lost Doom use
-Lost other-subfaction keyword
-Character costs more
-Powers went up in points
The Gman nerf is nowhere near as strong as any one of the *three* biggest nerfs Ynnari have had (and deserved).
The core weakness of marines is poor defense (easily ignored defenses) so getting your damage in while you are still standing is extremely important. On the whole defense hasn't been increased at all except through tiny point drops and added wounds to a few units which were severely underperforming defensively.
IH repulsor/other vehicle spam just went up 16%, and halved their degredation on top. That's neither a tiny points drop nor simply adding wounds.
You can pod in Turn 1, for less than previously (albeit for likely too high a cost). That's something else.
Basic Marines went down 1ppm, and Grav went down up to 8ppm. 1ppm on a 14ppm unit is ~7%. That's not tiny. And 20pt Grav Cannons is a meaningful points drop.
A number of Primaris went from 2W to 3W. That's a big change.
I don't think Marines are a ton more durable than they were, but they did get some real improvements in that category.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (I should again clarify my stance, because it seems certain people always strawman me:
-Marines were improved, notably, overall.
-It's not clear yet to me (nobody has convinced me and reading the rules hasn't made it obvious to me) if the new rules will make Marines a contender again. It's certainly been a while since they were top-tier.
)
The GMan nerf is the absolute best thing to happen to the codex. It will encourage players to look at other options, playstyles etc and if these don't match up competitively (which no one is in a position to say currently) then they can be adjusted with FAQ/CA since there isn't the GMan crutch to skew the results. Huge thumbs up from me with the direction of this codex.
What's absolute crazy talk is that the SM line hasn't been given a massive boost. For them to be still non-competitive after this it would mean that they would have to had been absolute bottom tier, even way lower than GKs and that's just not true.
And technically, soup is not completely out of the question, you will just be souping different Astartes which to maximize the playstyle of each.
If the point cost on the whirlwind is correct it will look like quite a good unit.
80pts for 2d6str 6 ap-1 shots that can shoot twice from out of LOS. Even less need for souping in guard and their artillery if this is the case.
If BA also get this I will go and get 2 missile turrets for my rhinos asap so I can play 3 and have ~28 str 6 ap-1 shots for just 240pts to help clear enemy screens. Guard is still a cheaper battalion but I would rather play mono than soup
If BA get the point costs, shock attack and base doctrines I will be happy. If we also get the updated stratagems and reroll wording then it will be amazing.
Just need to find someone to off load my apocalypse guard box, loyal 32, wyvern and mortar squads too if that happens
3) People keep talking about drop pods, except whatever you can take in drop pods kinda suck.
The same can be said of DE open-topped vehicles. It doesn't stop people bleating endlessly about them.
I really want to be nice today. This is straight up nonsense. I play DE. I feel like I am molesting my opponent when I bring 6 venoms with khabs inside as flayed skull. The army is so strong I only bring it against people I really don't like very much.
[...] Anyone who is invested in this game and keeps playing it plays at least semi competitive lists. Or at least are trying out combos they think will be powerful. No one is taking units because they think they'll perform worse and no one is trying to lose.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: No, you don't understand! Getting a bunch of benefits to shooting units in a Codex where the shooting units are much better than the melee ones is CLEARLY worse than rerolling charge distances!
No, I'm not annoyed at all the poor, martyred Ultramarine players at all...
They have been sub optimal for literally every edition in the game except for what we might as well call the first stage of 8th edition. Where they got a codex first and had a way around chapter tactics not applying to vehicles. By taking units that got a better version of their chapter tactic (fly repuslors) [and using the best damage ramp in the game.
I didn't realize Razorbacks had Fly. Or Tac Squads.
Realistically - the list struggled mightily against any competitive army that wasn't spamming infantry.
Which was, at the time... maybe morty/maggy lists? Other Chaos, IG, and CWE lists were infantry lists.
I realize not all the Codexes were out. So it was only on an even playingfield with such lackluster codexes as *IG* and *CWE*... And this was before a large number of CWE nerfs.
Yet - it has received a nerf on the level of ynnari that is extremely unjustified based on the performance of said armies.
Ynnari nerfs:
-Not really an army anymore
-Can only move/shoot/fight twice once a turn
-Can't move/shoot/fight twice anymore
-Lost Doom use
-Lost other-subfaction keyword
-Character costs more
-Powers went up in points
The Gman nerf is nowhere near as strong as any one of the *three* biggest nerfs Ynnari have had (and deserved).
The core weakness of marines is poor defense (easily ignored defenses) so getting your damage in while you are still standing is extremely important. On the whole defense hasn't been increased at all except through tiny point drops and added wounds to a few units which were severely underperforming defensively.
IH repulsor/other vehicle spam just went up 16%, and halved their degredation on top. That's neither a tiny points drop nor simply adding wounds.
You can pod in Turn 1, for less than previously (albeit for likely too high a cost). That's something else.
Basic Marines went down 1ppm, and Grav went down up to 8ppm. 1ppm on a 14ppm unit is ~7%. That's not tiny. And 20pt Grav Cannons is a meaningful points drop.
A number of Primaris went from 2W to 3W. That's a big change.
I don't think Marines are a ton more durable than they were, but they did get some real improvements in that category.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (I should again clarify my stance, because it seems certain people always strawman me:
-Marines were improved, notably, overall.
-It's not clear yet to me (nobody has convinced me and reading the rules hasn't made it obvious to me) if the new rules will make Marines a contender again. It's certainly been a while since they were top-tier.
)
All I can say is you are flat out wrong about all of this. Gman has been the best marine army for the entire eddition of 2 years. Aint no one played a razorback since around the time of the index before EVERY codex power level went WELL ABOVE marine power level. Repuslors went up in price 15% - it is a net nerf. It's basic math.
[...] Anyone who is invested in this game and keeps playing it plays at least semi competitive lists. Or at least are trying out combos they think will be powerful. No one is taking units because they think they'll perform worse and no one is trying to lose.
[...] The army is so strong I only bring it against people I really don't like very much.
So nobody plays units that will perform worse.
But you do when play lists weaker than yours, you do. Because, otherwise, you'd be a "freaking donkey cave".
But when playing someone you dislike, you don't.
Forgetting whether that makes you a "freaking donkey cave", isn't that a *triple* standard?
This game is an agreement. If you are agreeing to use weak units on both sides it's obviously a different situation. You are being intentionally obtuse. Everyone can see it to. Try harder to mask it.
Xenomancers wrote: I feel like I am molesting my opponent when I bring 6 venoms with khabs inside as flayed skull.
I feel like I'm bringing a transport armed with water pistols and with a crew who are also armed with water pistols.
What's more, you claim that you were using 6 Venoms . . and yet every single one of them had Kabalites in. No Mandrakes? No Incubi? No Wracks? No Wyches? No Lhamaeans? No Medusae? No Ur-Ghuls? etc.
Could it just be that a rule that only helps shooty units isn't actually much use when you've only got maybe 1-2 units in the entire army that can meaningfully benefit from it?
Xenomancers wrote: The army is so strong I only bring it against people I really don't like very much.
Feel free to regale me with tales of how your army of poison and more poison took down Imperial Knights or other spammed vehicles.
bullyboy wrote: The GMan nerf is the absolute best thing to happen to the codex. It will encourage players to look at other options, playstyles etc and if these don't match up competitively (which no one is in a position to say currently) then they can be adjusted with FAQ/CA since there isn't the GMan crutch to skew the results. Huge thumbs up from me with the direction of this codex.
What's absolute crazy talk is that the SM line hasn't been given a massive boost. For them to be still non-competitive after this it would mean that they would have to had been absolute bottom tier, even way lower than GKs and that's just not true.
And technically, soup is not completely out of the question, you will just be souping different Astartes which to maximize the playstyle of each.
Gman nerf is good for the book.
Repulsor nerf is not. Some of the stuff is weird - costed too high in points or cp.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: No, you don't understand! Getting a bunch of benefits to shooting units in a Codex where the shooting units are much better than the melee ones is CLEARLY worse than rerolling charge distances!
No, I'm not annoyed at all the poor, martyred Ultramarine players at all...
They have been sub optimal for literally every edition in the game except for what we might as well call the first stage of 8th edition. Where they got a codex first and had a way around chapter tactics not applying to vehicles. By taking units that got a better version of their chapter tactic (fly repuslors) [and using the best damage ramp in the game.
I didn't realize Razorbacks had Fly. Or Tac Squads.
Realistically - the list struggled mightily against any competitive army that wasn't spamming infantry.
Which was, at the time... maybe morty/maggy lists? Other Chaos, IG, and CWE lists were infantry lists.
I realize not all the Codexes were out. So it was only on an even playingfield with such lackluster codexes as *IG* and *CWE*... And this was before a large number of CWE nerfs.
Yet - it has received a nerf on the level of ynnari that is extremely unjustified based on the performance of said armies.
Ynnari nerfs:
-Not really an army anymore
-Can only move/shoot/fight twice once a turn
-Can't move/shoot/fight twice anymore
-Lost Doom use
-Lost other-subfaction keyword
-Character costs more
-Powers went up in points
The Gman nerf is nowhere near as strong as any one of the *three* biggest nerfs Ynnari have had (and deserved).
The core weakness of marines is poor defense (easily ignored defenses) so getting your damage in while you are still standing is extremely important. On the whole defense hasn't been increased at all except through tiny point drops and added wounds to a few units which were severely underperforming defensively.
IH repulsor/other vehicle spam just went up 16%, and halved their degredation on top. That's neither a tiny points drop nor simply adding wounds.
You can pod in Turn 1, for less than previously (albeit for likely too high a cost). That's something else.
Basic Marines went down 1ppm, and Grav went down up to 8ppm. 1ppm on a 14ppm unit is ~7%. That's not tiny. And 20pt Grav Cannons is a meaningful points drop.
A number of Primaris went from 2W to 3W. That's a big change.
I don't think Marines are a ton more durable than they were, but they did get some real improvements in that category.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (I should again clarify my stance, because it seems certain people always strawman me:
-Marines were improved, notably, overall.
-It's not clear yet to me (nobody has convinced me and reading the rules hasn't made it obvious to me) if the new rules will make Marines a contender again. It's certainly been a while since they were top-tier.
)
All I can say is you are flat out wrong about all of this. Gman has been the best marine army for the entire eddition of 2 years.
Not sure how talking about Gman lists can be "flat out wrong about all of this" simply because Gman lists were best. Completely lost there.
Aint no one played a razorback since around the time of the index before EVERY codex power level went WELL ABOVE marine power level.
I'm not sure how Razorback Spam being a thing pre-CA2017 is "flat out wrong" due to things that happened *after* CA2017.
Repuslors went up in price 15% - it is a net nerf. It's basic math.
Ermagerds, a single unit is 15% more costly! Sure, that's a nerf. But it's one of very, very many options that Marines have.
Further, as for a net nerf - a 15% nerf in cost for a 16% buff in durability and a halving of degradation and overwatch, plus a bunch of other buffs (Doctrines, better stratagems, etc) - it might be a net nerf, but showing it to be so isn't basic math.
The Gman change also pushes in on that, but that's still countered by all the other buffs. Not to mention, didn't the cost of Gman + 2xRepulsors + 3xPreds go down overall?
I think that specific *list* is worse off, because it leaned in heavily on Gman's aura. But there are many, many other lists possible with the book. And almost any list aside from that got better.
[...] Anyone who is invested in this game and keeps playing it plays at least semi competitive lists. Or at least are trying out combos they think will be powerful. No one is taking units because they think they'll perform worse and no one is trying to lose.
[...] The army is so strong I only bring it against people I really don't like very much.
So nobody plays units that will perform worse.
But you do when play lists weaker than yours, you do. Because, otherwise, you'd be a "freaking donkey cave".
But when playing someone you dislike, you don't.
Forgetting whether that makes you a "freaking donkey cave", isn't that a *triple* standard?
This game is an agreement. If you are agreeing to use weak units on both sides it's obviously a different situation. You are being intentionally obtuse. Everyone can see it to. Try harder to mask it.
Yes, obviously three different situations:
The first is "No other situation exists", so those of us who care about anything but powergaming don't exist and our opinions don't matter.
The second is "Obviously I never powergame against players who can't handle it. That'd just be being a dick".
The third is "I powergame against players who can't handle it if I don't like them".
I'm not being intentionally obtuse. I'm calling a triple-standard. These "situations" are contradictory. You have long strings of hyperbole, condescension, inconsistency, and Trumptastic postings. It's hard to have a constructive conversation when every post is "Y'all are morons, have no right to play the way you want, and I'm always right. I'm the greatest. Everyone knows.".
Martel732 wrote: Poison is very good vs most meta lists. Vehicle spam is uncommon and usually weak.
Eldar Flyer Spam, Triple Knights with Guard, Disco Lords. You were saying? I've pretty much dropped my FS venoms from my competitive list recently. I'm a regular tournament player and, whilst my meta is more ETC derived than ITC, I can say that it has plenty of vehicle heavy lists.
As an example, out of the last 2 60-90 man tournaments I've played (of which I came top 10 in one (8th? 7th? somewhere there) and ~20th in the second), my opponents have been: Knight and Guard (Poison is rubbish here), Pure IG (Posion is... ok I guess), Chaos with Tzaangor Bomb demon Princes and Friends (Poison is good here), Custodes and Knights (Lol splinter), Eldar Flyers (poison is near useless), Ad Mech Dragoons plus Knight (poor poison), Ad mech Cawl Bots (poison is good against the troops, but rubbish against the majority of the list), Imperial Guard Steel Legion Chimera and LR spam (yeah.....), Cutodes in an Orion Dropship and DSing (poison! no... wait), Genestealer Cult (OK Poison was great in this one).
The rest of my list has been pulling my ass out of the fire and I won 8/10 of those games, but the venoms have not been great except in lucky matchups. Eldar Flyer Spam is everywhere, as are Knights. I don't think Venoms are bad, in fact I really like them, but in the current meta they are a bit of a liability and there isn't really anything to replace them with in DE. Dropping my Venoms and Ravagers since the nerf has led me off into bringing a Harlie patrol with Skyweavers. Only tested it in prep so far, but we'll see how well the no venom or ravager list does at LGT.
Xenomancers wrote: I feel like I am molesting my opponent when I bring 6 venoms with khabs inside as flayed skull.
I feel like I'm bringing a transport armed with water pistols and with a crew who are also armed with water pistols.
What's more, you claim that you were using 6 Venoms . . and yet every single one of them had Kabalites in. No Mandrakes? No Incubi? No Wracks? No Wyches? No Lhamaeans? No Medusae? No Ur-Ghuls? etc.
Could it just be that a rule that only helps shooty units isn't actually much use when you've only got maybe 1-2 units in the entire army that can meaningfully benefit from it?
Xenomancers wrote: The army is so strong I only bring it against people I really don't like very much.
Feel free to regale me with tales of how your army of poison and more poison took down Imperial Knights or other spammed vehicles.
Mandrakes don't need a transport. Incubi suck - no argument here. Wracks the 9 points dudes with t5 and a 4++ and poison in CC (urine buff) - please - bordering on most OP unit for the cost. Wyches are best in 20 mans from deep strike - they show up in competitive all the time. Maybe we should nerf urine because every top DE list that was winning tournaments was using him. It is literally unreal the nonsense that is spouted on dakka. DE might have some weak choices but their strong choices are amazing. They aren't the best army vs vehicles but 3 void ravens and 3 ravager plus a ton of blasters can handle them. Without gimping you in other areas. You have massive mobility - on demand -1's to hit. 5++ or 4++ on practically every model. They are a solid army. If Mono codex was a requirement in ITC - they would probably be the top army.
80pts for 2d6str 6 ap-1 shots that can shoot twice from out of LOS. Even less need for souping in guard and their artillery if this is the case.
If BA also get this I will go and get 2 missile turrets for my rhinos asap so I can play 3 and have ~28 str 6 ap-1 shots for just 240pts to help clear enemy screens. Guard is still a cheaper battalion but I would rather play mono than soup
bullyboy wrote: The GMan nerf is the absolute best thing to happen to the codex. It will encourage players to look at other options, playstyles etc and if these don't match up competitively (which no one is in a position to say currently) then they can be adjusted with FAQ/CA since there isn't the GMan crutch to skew the results. Huge thumbs up from me with the direction of this codex.
What's absolute crazy talk is that the SM line hasn't been given a massive boost. For them to be still non-competitive after this it would mean that they would have to had been absolute bottom tier, even way lower than GKs and that's just not true.
And technically, soup is not completely out of the question, you will just be souping different Astartes which to maximize the playstyle of each.
Gman nerf is good for the book.
Repulsor nerf is not. Some of the stuff is weird - costed too high in points or cp.
I wouldn't really entertain that line of thinking. It's not good for the book because gman has nothing to do with other chapters. His ultimate power was to make weapons with low str more versatile so while a redempor dread with gatlings is better for ultramarines a plasma dread is probably better for ironhands So he can wound on 2's reroll 1's. His 400 point tax was more than enough to justify his buff. His overall effectiveness is due to the prevalence of invunes.
I'll go back to invo saves. Invo saves are the reason a gman buff is so effective in this game. Invo saves make anti vehicle weapons with 1 shot unpractical because anti vehicle weapons rely on AP to do their damage. So you have a defensive mechanic that is far too strong vs the intended weapons to counter them. This is a game design problem. If you do the math for CM LT aura vs correct intended targets. You'll find the gman buff weak in comparison (with a 400 point tax) if invo saves weren't a thing. Alas though. People are totally happy to have invo saves be a thing and have an army like marines suffer for not really having them and suck as a result. Nor should marines have access to a work around for something the can't exploit themselves (invo save spam). You really have to wonder why marines lose games? The answer is invo saves. Keep going on about how Gman was holding the army back. It's short sighted thinking. The army is heald back by relying on armor and not invos.
Xeno, you've said before you think a 6++ is more valuable than a 2+, or at least implied such when you said you don't think Invuln saves should EVER be able to be rerolled, while armor saves should be able to.
JNAProductions wrote: Xeno, you've said before you think a 6++ is more valuable than a 2+, or at least implied such when you said you don't think Invuln saves should EVER be able to be rerolled, while armor saves should be able to.
LOL a 6++ better than a 2+? That is absurd I never said that. Yes I think not being able to reroll invo would be a good fix. I'd be happier if they were maxed at 5++ though.
To be fair though a 2+ unit is going to be significantly more expensive than a 6++
Look at aggressors in the new codex, 21 before gear, then a Terminator is 23 but an aggressor has a wound and T5 and an extra attack on a Terminator. Thats just going from 2+ to 3+
JNAProductions wrote: Xeno, you've said before you think a 6++ is more valuable than a 2+, or at least implied such when you said you don't think Invuln saves should EVER be able to be rerolled, while armor saves should be able to.
LOL a 6++ better than a 2+? That is absurd I never said that. Yes I think not being able to reroll invo would be a good fix. I'd be happier if they were maxed at 5++ though.
I fail to remember the thread at the moment, but you pretty much said "There's so much AP-5 that a 2+ is basically useless."
I know because I was legitimately curious about how much AP-5 or better there was in the game. The answer is a lot... But very little sees actual play, especially since a ton is on overcosted FW models.
JNAProductions wrote: Xeno, you've said before you think a 6++ is more valuable than a 2+, or at least implied such when you said you don't think Invuln saves should EVER be able to be rerolled, while armor saves should be able to.
LOL a 6++ better than a 2+? That is absurd I never said that. Yes I think not being able to reroll invo would be a good fix. I'd be happier if they were maxed at 5++ though.
I fail to remember the thread at the moment, but you pretty much said "There's so much AP-5 that a 2+ is basically useless."
I know because I was legitimately curious about how much AP-5 or better there was in the game. The answer is a lot... But very little sees actual play, especially since a ton is on overcosted FW models.
A 2++ is useless vs a knight castellan that was extremely meta at the time. Ap -4 is a lot more common. Heck even my space marines have a ton of ap-4 - that is fine if my ap is just as effective as yours. It's not though. 4++ in general makes ap higher than 2 useless and a waste of stat points. Which is in particular why these doctrines aren't going to make much a difference.
Martel732 wrote: Poison is very good vs most meta lists. Vehicle spam is uncommon and usually weak.
Eldar Flyer Spam, Triple Knights with Guard, Disco Lords. You were saying? I've pretty much dropped my FS venoms from my competitive list recently. I'm a regular tournament player and, whilst my meta is more ETC derived than ITC, I can say that it has plenty of vehicle heavy lists.
As an example, out of the last 2 60-90 man tournaments I've played (of which I came top 10 in one (8th? 7th? somewhere there) and ~20th in the second), my opponents have been: Knight and Guard (Poison is rubbish here), Pure IG (Posion is... ok I guess), Chaos with Tzaangor Bomb demon Princes and Friends (Poison is good here), Custodes and Knights (Lol splinter), Eldar Flyers (poison is near useless), Ad Mech Dragoons plus Knight (poor poison), Ad mech Cawl Bots (poison is good against the troops, but rubbish against the majority of the list), Imperial Guard Steel Legion Chimera and LR spam (yeah.....), Cutodes in an Orion Dropship and DSing (poison! no... wait), Genestealer Cult (OK Poison was great in this one).
The rest of my list has been pulling my ass out of the fire and I won 8/10 of those games, but the venoms have not been great except in lucky matchups. Eldar Flyer Spam is everywhere, as are Knights. I don't think Venoms are bad, in fact I really like them, but in the current meta they are a bit of a liability and there isn't really anything to replace them with in DE. Dropping my Venoms and Ravagers since the nerf has led me off into bringing a Harlie patrol with Skyweavers. Only tested it in prep so far, but we'll see how well the no venom or ravager list does at LGT.
I was under the strong impression infantry was king. Local events are ork/demin heavy, which reinforced this.
bullyboy wrote: The GMan nerf is the absolute best thing to happen to the codex. It will encourage players to look at other options, playstyles etc and if these don't match up competitively (which no one is in a position to say currently) then they can be adjusted with FAQ/CA since there isn't the GMan crutch to skew the results. Huge thumbs up from me with the direction of this codex.
What's absolute crazy talk is that the SM line hasn't been given a massive boost. For them to be still non-competitive after this it would mean that they would have to had been absolute bottom tier, even way lower than GKs and that's just not true.
And technically, soup is not completely out of the question, you will just be souping different Astartes which to maximize the playstyle of each.
And make ultramarine players sad, and from what I have learned on the internet, everyone fething hates ultramarine players because that one guy wrote a bad codex once.
Here’s the deal, space marines have right now one competitive mono marine list. Just one. And when the new codex drops, that one is gone, and nothing is replacing it from what we have seen currently, though I have some folks dropping hints that totally one of the supplements is gonna super charge marines something fierce. But as it stands, marines are no longer competitive mono faction in any list. But a lot of people are fine with this because marine players get super attached to their subfactions more than the overall faction, and the one competitive list was those scummy ultramarines that we on the internet have to fething hate for the sins of Matt Ward, and so a lot of folks are cheering because their brand of space marines is getting a bit better while the hated one is being knee capped. But a bit better doesn’t mean they will ever hang with Eldar. Until one of those supplements appears and super charges one of the chapters
Xenomancers wrote: .... Which is in particular why these doctrines aren't going to make much a difference.
I agree for things like Plasma, Lascannons, etc. Doctrines aren't going to shift the meta for those. But turning an AP-0 Bolter/Assault 3 Autobolt rifle into AP-1 is significant, and AP-1 Bolt Rifle being AP-2 is even better.
And that's what so great about this change for Marines: it makes the "small arms" stuff much more threatening, which if fitting for Marines regardless of how it translates to gameplay.
And I for one appreciate that it's a faction wide biff without making them OP. That is always how buffs should be
Yeah the buff is significant but drop pods were actually...THAT BAD - that they can be significantly buffed and still not be very good. I find it hard to believe that the people making the rules can't see this. Is there an error in my logic somewhere that I am missing?
Yes there is; You've been impervious to any dissent, dismiss it outright as something that's not possible, and are absolutely dead set on your victim mentality. There's literally nothing anyone here can say that will sway how you feel and no new leaks that will affect how you feel. Marines can absolutely decimate the next years worth of tournaments, and you will still find some excuse as to why its not relevant probably involving some math that isn't applicable directly in the context game unless you pretend every unit can see and hit every other unit at all times.
The questions is, do you actually care about this problem in your logic, or where you just continuing your rhetoric for vanities sake?
Yeah the buff is significant but drop pods were actually...THAT BAD - that they can be significantly buffed and still not be very good. I find it hard to believe that the people making the rules can't see this. Is there an error in my logic somewhere that I am missing?
Yes there is; You've been impervious to any dissent, dismiss it outright as something that's not possible, and are absolutely dead set on your victim mentality. There's literally nothing anyone here can say that will sway how you feel and no new leaks that will affect how you feel. Marines can absolutely decimate the next years worth of tournaments, and you will still find some excuse as to why its not relevant probably involving some math that isn't applicable directly in the context game unless you pretend every unit can see and hit every other unit at all times.
The questions is, do you actually care about this problem in your logic, or where you just continuing your rhetoric for vanities sake?
Victim mentality or not. Drop pods are overcosted. It is indisputable. Unless you are willing to say a 65 point model is equal to being well..freeas in the case of a free relic or 1 CP. CP are not points ether - there is no value associated with a CP but a CP. They can be generated in game /refunded / ect. It would be great if you responded with an actual argument rather than trying to defame me. Argue the comparable ability being much cheaper and why the drop pod should cost 3x more than equipping a unit with gravsutes. Or have an equal cost to a unit that can drop pod a much larger unit every turn?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Kabalites are causing triple the damage per point to custodes than old marines, too.
They just haven't experienced flayed skull yet.
"Why are you rerolling for these guys in transports"
"oh they all get reroll 1's and ignore cover for being in this transport" ..
"Really"
"Yup"
"That seems OP"
"It is"
Martel732 wrote: Poison is very good vs most meta lists. Vehicle spam is uncommon and usually weak.
**Laughs heartily in Custodes jetbike/Russ/Bloat Drone/Elf jetbike spam**
You do realize that poison wounds jetbikes on 4s, right?
And that the custodes meta is entirely different now too, yeah?
Cutodes fare pretty well vs DE to be honest. 2+ saves are the best counter to poison attack. However. Void ravens and night fighters just murder custodes.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Kabalites are causing triple the damage per point to custodes than old marines, too.
Indeed. If you focus all your posion into one unit of bikers...it's probably going down.
bullyboy wrote: The GMan nerf is the absolute best thing to happen to the codex. It will encourage players to look at other options, playstyles etc and if these don't match up competitively (which no one is in a position to say currently) then they can be adjusted with FAQ/CA since there isn't the GMan crutch to skew the results. Huge thumbs up from me with the direction of this codex.
What's absolute crazy talk is that the SM line hasn't been given a massive boost. For them to be still non-competitive after this it would mean that they would have to had been absolute bottom tier, even way lower than GKs and that's just not true.
And technically, soup is not completely out of the question, you will just be souping different Astartes which to maximize the playstyle of each.
And make ultramarine players sad, and from what I have learned on the internet, everyone fething hates ultramarine players because that one guy wrote a bad codex once.
Here’s the deal, space marines have right now one competitive mono marine list. Just one. And when the new codex drops, that one is gone, and nothing is replacing it from what we have seen currently, though I have some folks dropping hints that totally one of the supplements is gonna super charge marines something fierce. But as it stands, marines are no longer competitive mono faction in any list. But a lot of people are fine with this because marine players get super attached to their subfactions more than the overall faction, and the one competitive list was those scummy ultramarines [...]
That "one list" is Gman, 2 Repulsors, and filler. It's *an* UM list, but not the only UM list. Non-Gman UM lists are no more competitive than IH/RG/IF/etc. And anyone who's been playing UM armies for longer than 8th Ed has an army that didn't have Gman or Repulsors.
Much of where we're talking past eachother is that, to me, an UM list is a combined-arms list. They're the scions of the Codex, and as such should be using Tacs, Devs, and ASM (or their replacements) in concert - working together to do more than any one option alone could. So the idea of replacing all my Marines with Tanks is a nonstarter for some of us.
The one competitive list did use a new UM model. But most of the list (Repulsors, Preds, and even Gman) are UM in name only - they didn't even get UM chapter tactics (until the new book)! So the "one competitive build" is looked at as scummy, even by "classical" UM players, not because they're UM, but because it's a beardy/cheesy list. Not simply a "take the best stuff" kind of cheese, but a "Take models to double dip on rules benefits on units not primarily intended for those rules" kind of cheese. A "Build a list nothing like the fluff because it's good" kind of cheese.
I love UM. I hate that that list is good. It's up there almost with CWE Air Wing for "Silly thing this game shouldn't have" in that regard. But the list is good in large part because Gman's aura is so game-changing. It's more-than-double firepower, in most cases. On an *aura*. Remember all the hate when Doom gave a conditional probable buff that maxed out in the best cases at ~80% against a single unit? How OP that was? How hard that is to balance? What do you do with an Aura that's more than 100%? Without reigning that in, you can either:
-Make units that can get the buff good enough to compete with the buff, but be trash without it
-Make units that can compete without the buff, but are OP with it
So you're stuck with a best case of either making Gman lists OP and non-Gman lists OK, or Gman lists OK, and non-Gman lists trash. Gman needed to go (much like Ynnari - good riddence).
Marines had one not-quite-competitive build. That got nerfed. That sucks for people who enjoyed playing that way (which is a legitimate way to play, just not my way). But it had to go for the good of the game. Now, it's possible to buff Marines so that other lists aren't necessarily trash - without making Gman lists OP. It's possible they failed on this regard, but there's a lot of good in the book. Almost everything got better. Lots of things got notably better. Some things got a lot better.
We'll see if the Repulsor list got too heavily nerfed. I hope when things shake out you can still play the Armored Column you want to. But I'd rather see non-Gman lists get better than continue the "Gman or bust" mentality this edition have stuck Marines with.
(I don't own a Repulsor. I like bringing a Pred or Razorback or even two, but I don't like most of my Marine list being armor - that's what IG is for, to me. To each their own.)
Xenomancers wrote: .... Which is in particular why these doctrines aren't going to make much a difference.
I agree for things like Plasma, Lascannons, etc. Doctrines aren't going to shift the meta for those. But turning an AP-0 Bolter/Assault 3 Autobolt rifle into AP-1 is significant, and AP-1 Bolt Rifle being AP-2 is even better.
And that's what so great about this change for Marines: it makes the "small arms" stuff much more threatening, which if fitting for Marines regardless of how it translates to gameplay.
And I for one appreciate that it's a faction wide biff without making them OP. That is always how buffs should be
-
For sure. It will help those things. It wont exceed previous gman buff level. Which has already proven not to capable of high win rate. That is my argument. The goal of this codex should not have been to bring ultras in line with the rest of the chapters. It should have been to elevate all marines to a competitive level. IMO that is not accomplished. IMO all they have done is shift around which chapters are going to be played with very unimpressive results. I could be wrong. Ironhands doctrine if it has as much benifit as ultras could actually produce a viable army.
Also in general "chapters" should not be special in the sense that they are different from Siamhan/Ulthwe - they are just CWE. I see all marines as basically being equal. It's annoying to me that special characters play such a huge roll in marines but I have the models so I want to use them. 6 codex for each chapter is the exact opposite to what everyone has been wanting for a long time.
bullyboy wrote: The GMan nerf is the absolute best thing to happen to the codex. It will encourage players to look at other options, playstyles etc and if these don't match up competitively (which no one is in a position to say currently) then they can be adjusted with FAQ/CA since there isn't the GMan crutch to skew the results. Huge thumbs up from me with the direction of this codex.
What's absolute crazy talk is that the SM line hasn't been given a massive boost. For them to be still non-competitive after this it would mean that they would have to had been absolute bottom tier, even way lower than GKs and that's just not true.
And technically, soup is not completely out of the question, you will just be souping different Astartes which to maximize the playstyle of each.
And make ultramarine players sad, and from what I have learned on the internet, everyone fething hates ultramarine players because that one guy wrote a bad codex once.
Here’s the deal, space marines have right now one competitive mono marine list. Just one. And when the new codex drops, that one is gone, and nothing is replacing it from what we have seen currently, though I have some folks dropping hints that totally one of the supplements is gonna super charge marines something fierce. But as it stands, marines are no longer competitive mono faction in any list. But a lot of people are fine with this because marine players get super attached to their subfactions more than the overall faction, and the one competitive list was those scummy ultramarines that we on the internet have to fething hate for the sins of Matt Ward, and so a lot of folks are cheering because their brand of space marines is getting a bit better while the hated one is being knee capped. But a bit better doesn’t mean they will ever hang with Eldar. Until one of those supplements appears and super charges one of the chapters
Xenomancers wrote: .... Which is in particular why these doctrines aren't going to make much a difference.
I agree for things like Plasma, Lascannons, etc. Doctrines aren't going to shift the meta for those. But turning an AP-0 Bolter/Assault 3 Autobolt rifle into AP-1 is significant, and AP-1 Bolt Rifle being AP-2 is even better.
And that's what so great about this change for Marines: it makes the "small arms" stuff much more threatening, which if fitting for Marines regardless of how it translates to gameplay.
And I for one appreciate that it's a faction wide biff without making them OP. That is always how buffs should be
-
For sure. It will help those things. It wont exceed previous gman buff level. Which has already proven not to capable of high win rate. That is my argument. The goal of this codex should not have been to bring ultras in line with the rest of the chapters. It should have been to elevate all marines to a competitive level.
If your goal is to elevate all Marines to competitive levels, why is your measuring stick "Did Gman lists get stronger or weaker"? Gman lists are, by definition, UM-only lists.
To accomplish that goal, unless you buff each specific other subfaction with an equally-strong-but-different (because seperate has never had a problem of being equal...), you necessarily must nerf the "strongest" before buffing the shared options.
IMO that is not accomplished. IMO all they have done is shift around which chapters are going to be played with very unimpressive results. I could be wrong. Ironhands doctrine if it has as much benifit as ultras could actually produce a viable army.
That's a very reasonable stance. Not sure I disagree.
Also in general "chapters" should not be special in the sense that they are different from Siamhan/Ulthwe - they are just CWE. I see all marines as basically being equal.
Agree. Although I'd also rather see CWE also not have hugely-different between Craftworlds (maybe between Warhosts, but not Craftworlds). But totally agree I'd like to see *less* differentiation between Chapters.
It's annoying to me that special characters play such a huge roll in marines but I have the models so I want to use them.
Hence why I'm glad to see Gman nerfed.
And very 6 codex for each chapter is the exact opposite to what everyone has been wanting for a long time.
Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
I’m still not sold on the Whirlwind. It was always the worst of the indirect options, though did get 5pts cheaper. And isn’t the fire twice strat like 2cp and require no LOS? Even if 1cp, which is an okay cost, the restriction is oddly limiting on some tables. You’ll have to reserve a tank sized Los blocker for a unit that has the low point cost and decent toughness of a unit you probably would prefer the enemy shot at.
I’d love to be proven wrong, I’ve had a 2nd edition Whirlwind sitting on my shelf for over 20 years that each edition I take it down, play a game or two with it, realize still sucks, and put it back up.
...Heh, also just occurred to me, the older, slightly smaller Rhino chassis is going to be easier to hide out of LOS, so mine is unintentionally modeled for advantage.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
And LandRaiders are horribly priced.
Not really, but no one wants to risk taking them with knights kicking around.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
For starters - the landraider is also overcosted so it is a terrible bench mark. The reason is likely 2 fold - the transport capacity is being hugely overvalued. The godhammer LR just went down 20 points So that might actually be reasonable now but its still not great. The transport ability for 10 dudes can't have a value of more than 20 points. Because you can deep strike for that cost. Deep strike is obviously better than a transport. They seem to be charging you something like 40-50 for that - which is outrageous. Being in a transport is actually really dangerous. You have a 1 in 6 chance per model of being slayed when the vehicle is destroyed.
Lets just comapre the custodes MBT.
It's basically a repulsor with a much better main gun 8 shots str 8 ap-3 d3 damage hits on 2's with POTMS A pretty nice secondary weapon with 6 shots ap -2 str 6
It also moves 14"
Has a 5++ save too.
Basically it gives up 2 wounds and transport capacity to have comparable offense (it has a better main gun but about 15 less chaff shots) - it also has better gun range.
It has all the special rules of the repuslor. D6 explosion and POTMS.
Cost of this tank?
210?
Cost of new repuslor? In the 320 range?
Are you effing kidding me?
Why am I paying 100 more point to have an overall equally comparable unit?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bort wrote: I’m still not sold on the Whirlwind. It was always the worst of the indirect options, though did get 5pts cheaper. And isn’t the fire twice strat like 2cp and require no LOS? Even if 1cp, which is an okay cost, the restriction is oddly limiting on some tables. You’ll have to reserve a tank sized Los blocker for a unit that has the low point cost and decent toughness of a unit you probably would prefer the enemy shot at.
I’d love to be proven wrong, I’ve had a 2nd edition Whirlwind sitting on my shelf for over 20 years that each edition I take it down, play a game or two with it, realize still sucks, and put it back up.
...Heh, also just occurred to me, the older, slightly smaller Rhino chassis is going to be easier to hide out of LOS, so mine is unintentionally modeled for advantage.
They werent even worth it to buff them with gman. Shooting twice is a comparable effect...I did gman and whirlwinds for sngs a few times and they were just okay.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
And LandRaiders are horribly priced.
Not really, but no one wants to risk taking them with knights kicking around.
Or literally any lascannon type weapon turning it into pulp. Same with repulsors. Funny how actually good units don't have this issue. What am I gonna shoot at a unit of grots to make them disappear with ease? Basically nothing.
Or literally any lascannon type weapon turning it into pulp. Same with repulsors. Funny how actually good units don't have this issue. What am I gonna shoot at a unit of grots to make them disappear with ease? Basically nothing.
There are plenty of good units sans invulnerable that die just as fast, if not faster than a land raider, but they show up, because they're a smaller individual investment.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
It should, but land raiders should be cheaper. You will lose games just from having such an expensive model with no invuln.
bullyboy wrote: The GMan nerf is the absolute best thing to happen to the codex. It will encourage players to look at other options, playstyles etc and if these don't match up competitively (which no one is in a position to say currently) then they can be adjusted with FAQ/CA since there isn't the GMan crutch to skew the results. Huge thumbs up from me with the direction of this codex.
What's absolute crazy talk is that the SM line hasn't been given a massive boost. For them to be still non-competitive after this it would mean that they would have to had been absolute bottom tier, even way lower than GKs and that's just not true.
And technically, soup is not completely out of the question, you will just be souping different Astartes which to maximize the playstyle of each.
And make ultramarine players sad, and from what I have learned on the internet, everyone fething hates ultramarine players because that one guy wrote a bad codex once.
Here’s the deal, space marines have right now one competitive mono marine list. Just one. And when the new codex drops, that one is gone, and nothing is replacing it from what we have seen currently, though I have some folks dropping hints that totally one of the supplements is gonna super charge marines something fierce. But as it stands, marines are no longer competitive mono faction in any list. But a lot of people are fine with this because marine players get super attached to their subfactions more than the overall faction, and the one competitive list was those scummy ultramarines [...]
That "one list" is Gman, 2 Repulsors, and filler. It's *an* UM list, but not the only UM list. Non-Gman UM lists are no more competitive than IH/RG/IF/etc. And anyone who's been playing UM armies for longer than 8th Ed has an army that didn't have Gman or Repulsors.
Much of where we're talking past eachother is that, to me, an UM list is a combined-arms list. They're the scions of the Codex, and as such should be using Tacs, Devs, and ASM (or their replacements) in concert - working together to do more than any one option alone could. So the idea of replacing all my Marines with Tanks is a nonstarter for some of us.
The one competitive list did use a new UM model. But most of the list (Repulsors, Preds, and even Gman) are UM in name only - they didn't even get UM chapter tactics (until the new book)! So the "one competitive build" is looked at as scummy, even by "classical" UM players, not because they're UM, but because it's a beardy/cheesy list. Not simply a "take the best stuff" kind of cheese, but a "Take models to double dip on rules benefits on units not primarily intended for those rules" kind of cheese. A "Build a list nothing like the fluff because it's good" kind of cheese.
I love UM. I hate that that list is good. It's up there almost with CWE Air Wing for "Silly thing this game shouldn't have" in that regard. But the list is good in large part because Gman's aura is so game-changing. It's more-than-double firepower, in most cases. On an *aura*. Remember all the hate when Doom gave a conditional probable buff that maxed out in the best cases at ~80% against a single unit? How OP that was? How hard that is to balance? What do you do with an Aura that's more than 100%? Without reigning that in, you can either:
-Make units that can get the buff good enough to compete with the buff, but be trash without it
-Make units that can compete without the buff, but are OP with it
So you're stuck with a best case of either making Gman lists OP and non-Gman lists OK, or Gman lists OK, and non-Gman lists trash. Gman needed to go (much like Ynnari - good riddence).
Marines had one not-quite-competitive build. That got nerfed. That sucks for people who enjoyed playing that way (which is a legitimate way to play, just not my way). But it had to go for the good of the game. Now, it's possible to buff Marines so that other lists aren't necessarily trash - without making Gman lists OP. It's possible they failed on this regard, but there's a lot of good in the book. Almost everything got better. Lots of things got notably better. Some things got a lot better.
We'll see if the Repulsor list got too heavily nerfed. I hope when things shake out you can still play the Armored Column you want to. But I'd rather see non-Gman lists get better than continue the "Gman or bust" mentality this edition have stuck Marines with.
(I don't own a Repulsor. I like bringing a Pred or Razorback or even two, but I don't like most of my Marine list being armor - that's what IG is for, to me. To each their own.)
great, build your thematic list. Any admech, tau, eldar, and more armies will beat you 90 percent of the time. The new codex and supplement will change nothing at all in this regard. Marines playing the way they 'should' in a fluff does NOT win games. I wish I could show up with a combined list all transport mounted to reflect the space marine's penchance for rapid redeployment, with a number of tactical squads, some devs, and some assault, and actually WIN a game. But I have tried, and it don't work.
But now the people who wanted to play space marines and have a chance of winning games in anything but the most casual metas got their one shot kneecapped. It is so depressingly easy to build a leaf blower list out of a number of codexes, and those lists fething rock and roll space marines. And this isn't counting people going in with an eye to list building, this is literally just taking good shooting with no other tricks.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
And LandRaiders are horribly priced.
Not really, but no one wants to risk taking them with knights kicking around.
IKs dont keep my lrs off the table. At least, not alone.
bort wrote: I’m still not sold on the Whirlwind. It was always the worst of the indirect options, though did get 5pts cheaper. And isn’t the fire twice strat like 2cp and require no LOS? Even if 1cp, which is an okay cost, the restriction is oddly limiting on some tables. You’ll have to reserve a tank sized Los blocker for a unit that has the low point cost and decent toughness of a unit you probably would prefer the enemy shot at.
I’d love to be proven wrong, I’ve had a 2nd edition Whirlwind sitting on my shelf for over 20 years that each edition I take it down, play a game or two with it, realize still sucks, and put it back up.
...Heh, also just occurred to me, the older, slightly smaller Rhino chassis is going to be easier to hide out of LOS, so mine is unintentionally modeled for advantage.
Even if a whirlwind is 20% cheaper than a wyvern it is currently much worse. But with a ~7% pts drop, shoot twice stratagem and ap - 1 the first turn it looks viable. It has slightly better BS, slightly better against t5 and t8+. Longer range, better ap and a bit tougher. Much fewer shots but overall close performance point for point now. Not better but an alternative if you need some artillery and you arent fielding an astra battalion already.
Might even have some useful chapter tactics for it too. I thought about using an airbrush already to repaint my tanks and depending on the full rules I am thinking about making my vehicles in a slightly different color and play them as a different Space Marine chapter with some better vehicle tactics. Perhaps using imperial fists to ignore cover. Doesnt matter if you have fewer shots if they are much more effective against units in cover +ap1
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
Previous editions didn't have Super heavies. Super-heavies being in games outside of Apocalypse was something 6th ed added, and it stuck. 6th led to the mess that was 7th (which was more like 6.5), and 8th ed was introduced to sort it all out.
bullyboy wrote: The GMan nerf is the absolute best thing to happen to the codex. It will encourage players to look at other options, playstyles etc and if these don't match up competitively (which no one is in a position to say currently) then they can be adjusted with FAQ/CA since there isn't the GMan crutch to skew the results. Huge thumbs up from me with the direction of this codex.
What's absolute crazy talk is that the SM line hasn't been given a massive boost. For them to be still non-competitive after this it would mean that they would have to had been absolute bottom tier, even way lower than GKs and that's just not true.
And technically, soup is not completely out of the question, you will just be souping different Astartes which to maximize the playstyle of each.
And make ultramarine players sad, and from what I have learned on the internet, everyone fething hates ultramarine players because that one guy wrote a bad codex once.
Here’s the deal, space marines have right now one competitive mono marine list. Just one. And when the new codex drops, that one is gone, and nothing is replacing it from what we have seen currently, though I have some folks dropping hints that totally one of the supplements is gonna super charge marines something fierce. But as it stands, marines are no longer competitive mono faction in any list. But a lot of people are fine with this because marine players get super attached to their subfactions more than the overall faction, and the one competitive list was those scummy ultramarines [...]
That "one list" is Gman, 2 Repulsors, and filler. It's *an* UM list, but not the only UM list. Non-Gman UM lists are no more competitive than IH/RG/IF/etc. And anyone who's been playing UM armies for longer than 8th Ed has an army that didn't have Gman or Repulsors.
Much of where we're talking past eachother is that, to me, an UM list is a combined-arms list. They're the scions of the Codex, and as such should be using Tacs, Devs, and ASM (or their replacements) in concert - working together to do more than any one option alone could. So the idea of replacing all my Marines with Tanks is a nonstarter for some of us.
The one competitive list did use a new UM model. But most of the list (Repulsors, Preds, and even Gman) are UM in name only - they didn't even get UM chapter tactics (until the new book)! So the "one competitive build" is looked at as scummy, even by "classical" UM players, not because they're UM, but because it's a beardy/cheesy list. Not simply a "take the best stuff" kind of cheese, but a "Take models to double dip on rules benefits on units not primarily intended for those rules" kind of cheese. A "Build a list nothing like the fluff because it's good" kind of cheese.
I love UM. I hate that that list is good. It's up there almost with CWE Air Wing for "Silly thing this game shouldn't have" in that regard. But the list is good in large part because Gman's aura is so game-changing. It's more-than-double firepower, in most cases. On an *aura*. Remember all the hate when Doom gave a conditional probable buff that maxed out in the best cases at ~80% against a single unit? How OP that was? How hard that is to balance? What do you do with an Aura that's more than 100%? Without reigning that in, you can either:
-Make units that can get the buff good enough to compete with the buff, but be trash without it
-Make units that can compete without the buff, but are OP with it
So you're stuck with a best case of either making Gman lists OP and non-Gman lists OK, or Gman lists OK, and non-Gman lists trash. Gman needed to go (much like Ynnari - good riddence).
Marines had one not-quite-competitive build. That got nerfed. That sucks for people who enjoyed playing that way (which is a legitimate way to play, just not my way). But it had to go for the good of the game. Now, it's possible to buff Marines so that other lists aren't necessarily trash - without making Gman lists OP. It's possible they failed on this regard, but there's a lot of good in the book. Almost everything got better. Lots of things got notably better. Some things got a lot better.
We'll see if the Repulsor list got too heavily nerfed. I hope when things shake out you can still play the Armored Column you want to. But I'd rather see non-Gman lists get better than continue the "Gman or bust" mentality this edition have stuck Marines with.
(I don't own a Repulsor. I like bringing a Pred or Razorback or even two, but I don't like most of my Marine list being armor - that's what IG is for, to me. To each their own.)
great, build your thematic list. Any admech, tau, eldar, and more armies will beat you 90 percent of the time. The new codex and supplement will change nothing at all in this regard. Marines playing the way they 'should' in a fluff does NOT win games. I wish I could show up with a combined list all transport mounted to reflect the space marine's penchance for rapid redeployment, with a number of tactical squads, some devs, and some assault, and actually WIN a game. But I have tried, and it don't work.
The perhaps the problem is *the rest of the book sucks*?
Ideally, they should fix the rest of the book. Now, lets pretend they fixed the rest of the book but didn't change Gman, so you could build a competitive non-Gman list. Great. But make a 400pt hole and put Gman in that list, and now you've got an even *better* list. So, if the non-Gman list is competitive, the Gman list is now OP.
*that* is why some of us are happy Gman got nerfed.
Now, did they make the rest of the Marine book competitive? Maybe, maybe not. We'll see.
But now the people who wanted to play space marines and have a chance of winning games in anything but the most casual metas got their one shot kneecapped. It is so depressingly easy to build a leaf blower list out of a number of codexes, and those lists fething rock and roll space marines. And this isn't counting people going in with an eye to list building, this is literally just taking good shooting with no other tricks.
People who want to play Space Marines are hosed with the current book. They weren't kneecapped. Those who traded Space Marines away for an armored column led by a Demon Prince wannabe and a chance to win are the ones who were kneecapped. If you want to play an armored column or such, that's fine. But don't talk down to us while we're celebrating our buffs just because one particular "Space Marine in name only" list got nerfed.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
I'm not sure IKs are the real culprit.
I think guardsmen and PBs are just as unhealthy. Cheap models per wound with invulns are even worse imo.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
That I agree with, Knights are not the right scale for 2000pt and smaller games, they invalidate almost every prior heavy vehicle, which is stupid. But that’s how GW wants to do things, so sadly stuck with them.
The Land Raider was always overpriced, but they could still do passably just cause many people didn’t bother to take the firepower necessary to kill them. With Knights everyone does.
I never played vs Baneblades etc back when they were overpriced FW only since so many prohibited FW back then.
Edit: yeah, crazy hordes break it the other way with no more templates too, but I’d still say the potential for 5 24w t8s running around warps things more, even if it’s not a top list.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
Previous editions didn't have Super heavies. Super-heavies being in games outside of Apocalypse was something 6th ed added, and it stuck. 6th led to the mess that was 7th (which was more like 6.5), and 8th ed was introduced to sort it all out.
No, they just had Monstrous Creatures vs Vehicles.
The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Martel732 wrote: Poison is very good vs most meta lists. Vehicle spam is uncommon and usually weak.
Eldar Flyer Spam, Triple Knights with Guard, Disco Lords. You were saying? I've pretty much dropped my FS venoms from my competitive list recently. I'm a regular tournament player and, whilst my meta is more ETC derived than ITC, I can say that it has plenty of vehicle heavy lists.
As an example, out of the last 2 60-90 man tournaments I've played (of which I came top 10 in one (8th? 7th? somewhere there) and ~20th in the second), my opponents have been: Knight and Guard (Poison is rubbish here), Pure IG (Posion is... ok I guess), Chaos with Tzaangor Bomb demon Princes and Friends (Poison is good here), Custodes and Knights (Lol splinter), Eldar Flyers (poison is near useless), Ad Mech Dragoons plus Knight (poor poison), Ad mech Cawl Bots (poison is good against the troops, but rubbish against the majority of the list), Imperial Guard Steel Legion Chimera and LR spam (yeah.....), Cutodes in an Orion Dropship and DSing (poison! no... wait), Genestealer Cult (OK Poison was great in this one).
The rest of my list has been pulling my ass out of the fire and I won 8/10 of those games, but the venoms have not been great except in lucky matchups. Eldar Flyer Spam is everywhere, as are Knights. I don't think Venoms are bad, in fact I really like them, but in the current meta they are a bit of a liability and there isn't really anything to replace them with in DE. Dropping my Venoms and Ravagers since the nerf has led me off into bringing a Harlie patrol with Skyweavers. Only tested it in prep so far, but we'll see how well the no venom or ravager list does at LGT.
I was under the strong impression infantry was king. Local events are ork/demin heavy, which reinforced this.
6 pt dudes with bs3+ seem amazing all the time.
Not really. Some of those lists show up, but they aren't winning much. Again I play in the European meta, so YMMV.
Martel732 wrote: Poison is very good vs most meta lists. Vehicle spam is uncommon and usually weak.
Eldar Flyer Spam, Triple Knights with Guard, Disco Lords. You were saying? I've pretty much dropped my FS venoms from my competitive list recently. I'm a regular tournament player and, whilst my meta is more ETC derived than ITC, I can say that it has plenty of vehicle heavy lists.
As an example, out of the last 2 60-90 man tournaments I've played (of which I came top 10 in one (8th? 7th? somewhere there) and ~20th in the second), my opponents have been: Knight and Guard (Poison is rubbish here), Pure IG (Posion is... ok I guess), Chaos with Tzaangor Bomb demon Princes and Friends (Poison is good here), Custodes and Knights (Lol splinter), Eldar Flyers (poison is near useless), Ad Mech Dragoons plus Knight (poor poison), Ad mech Cawl Bots (poison is good against the troops, but rubbish against the majority of the list), Imperial Guard Steel Legion Chimera and LR spam (yeah.....), Cutodes in an Orion Dropship and DSing (poison! no... wait), Genestealer Cult (OK Poison was great in this one).
The rest of my list has been pulling my ass out of the fire and I won 8/10 of those games, but the venoms have not been great except in lucky matchups. Eldar Flyer Spam is everywhere, as are Knights. I don't think Venoms are bad, in fact I really like them, but in the current meta they are a bit of a liability and there isn't really anything to replace them with in DE. Dropping my Venoms and Ravagers since the nerf has led me off into bringing a Harlie patrol with Skyweavers. Only tested it in prep so far, but we'll see how well the no venom or ravager list does at LGT.
I was under the strong impression infantry was king. Local events are ork/demin heavy, which reinforced this.
6 pt dudes with bs3+ seem amazing all the time.
Not really. Some of those lists show up, but they aren't winning much. Again I play in the European meta, so YMMV.
Yeah just a friendly reminder that a night fighter with 2 dessie is 135 points. One Thirty Five. You get 2.5 of these per repulsor. What an absolute joke of game balance. Why wouldn't you take 6 eldar flyers to a tournament?
This is why I get upset. The dessie cannon has been 15 points all eddition...The DE codex is loaded with OP gak they never nerf. Your gonna nerf my repulsor though and Gman at the same time? And DE clearly win more than Ultramarines? This is really started to get absurd guys. Wake up. Demand change. If you aren't upset. You are part of the problem.
Ya know, I for one am will to let a couple things slide for some factions. DE for instance at one point had their codex gutted and lost out on units and again lost out on a couple things transferring to the index. So sure they have an OP jet but their HQ Pool is more like a puddle
bort wrote: I’m still not sold on the Whirlwind. It was always the worst of the indirect options, though did get 5pts cheaper. And isn’t the fire twice strat like 2cp and require no LOS? Even if 1cp, which is an okay cost, the restriction is oddly limiting on some tables. You’ll have to reserve a tank sized Los blocker for a unit that has the low point cost and decent toughness of a unit you probably would prefer the enemy shot at.
I’d love to be proven wrong, I’ve had a 2nd edition Whirlwind sitting on my shelf for over 20 years that each edition I take it down, play a game or two with it, realize still sucks, and put it back up.
...Heh, also just occurred to me, the older, slightly smaller Rhino chassis is going to be easier to hide out of LOS, so mine is unintentionally modeled for advantage.
Even if a whirlwind is 20% cheaper than a wyvern it is currently much worse. But with a ~7% pts drop, shoot twice stratagem and ap - 1 the first turn it looks viable. It has slightly better BS, slightly better against t5 and t8+. Longer range, better ap and a bit tougher. Much fewer shots but overall close performance point for point now. Not better but an alternative if you need some artillery and you arent fielding an astra battalion already.
Might even have some useful chapter tactics for it too. I thought about using an airbrush already to repaint my tanks and depending on the full rules I am thinking about making my vehicles in a slightly different color and play them as a different Space Marine chapter with some better vehicle tactics. Perhaps using imperial fists to ignore cover. Doesnt matter if you have fewer shots if they are much more effective against units in cover +ap1
Thing with the "fire twice" stratagem is:
You can use it only once per phase and as it shares use with the Thunderfire Cannon, which has access to the insanely good Tremor Shells stratagem, there is prolly no argument for NOT using it on the TFC as doubling that slow effect is usually WAY more usefull than having a WW shoot twice...
Mandrakes don't need a transport. Incubi suck - no argument here. Wracks the 9 points dudes with t5 and a 4++ and poison in CC (urine buff) - please - bordering on most OP unit for the cost. Wyches are best in 20 mans from deep strike - they show up in competitive all the time.
I didn't say any of those units were bad in and of themselves.
What I said (and which you seem to have inadvertently confirmed, despite apparently arguing against it) is that there's maybe 1-2 units in the entire DE codex that get any meaningful benefit out of the Open Topped rule.
The rest of the book can't take transports (Scourges), don't want/need transports (Mandrakes), or are melee.
Xenomancers wrote: Maybe we should nerf urine because every top DE list that was winning tournaments was using him.
Your spellchecking powers are weak, old man.
Xenomancers wrote: DE might have some weak choices but their strong choices are amazing.
O...kay. I don't disagree but I'm not seeing how this is relevant to the open topped rule.
Xenomancers wrote: They aren't the best army vs vehicles but 3 void ravens and 3 ravager plus a ton of blasters can handle them.
Which aren't even transports, let alone open-topped ones.
By "massive mobility" you mean '2 fast transports and some fast units in the Fast Attack slot'.
I know I'm getting off topic now, but DE have:
0 mobile HQs 0 mobile Elites
0 mobile troops
1 mobile Heavy Support (and it's a vehicle)
You know how other armies get stuff like HQs with Jump Packs, Elites with Bikes, that sort of thing? Boy, sure am glad I'm playing an army as "mobile" as Dark Eldar. My M7" HQs feel really mobile compared to the sluggish Space marine Biker Captain and his mere 14" movement.
Are you even replying to the right person? I never denied that DE were a solid army.
What I said - and continue to say - is that the Open Topped rule is garbage for 99% of the codex. We just don't have anywhere near enough shooting units - let along enough good shooting units - to justify it. It was useful back when it also helped out melee units. Since the majority of our infantry that are eligible for transports are melee units.
I think this threads run its course. Xenomancer has raised some valid points, so have others in contrary, however it's just bickering now.
I think we all have to accept some choices made were perhaps questionable from a pro circuit perspective, some people don't understand and frankly some don't care.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
Wraithknights and Riptides did.
Exactly. Monstrous Creatures were the main problem all along.
Still, for reroll all wounds, from what I have understood, there is an UM thing that tags a unit at the start of the battle and everything gets all rerolls on it (correct me if I'm wrong on this), so for big treats you're still guillimaned, otherwise there is a FW chapter master, but that could be patched away.
Mandrakes don't need a transport. Incubi suck - no argument here. Wracks the 9 points dudes with t5 and a 4++ and poison in CC (urine buff) - please - bordering on most OP unit for the cost. Wyches are best in 20 mans from deep strike - they show up in competitive all the time.
I didn't say any of those units were bad in and of themselves.
What I said (and which you seem to have inadvertently confirmed, despite apparently arguing against it) is that there's maybe 1-2 units in the entire DE codex that get any meaningful benefit out of the Open Topped rule.
The rest of the book can't take transports (Scourges), don't want/need transports (Mandrakes), or are melee.
Xenomancers wrote: Maybe we should nerf urine because every top DE list that was winning tournaments was using him.
Your spellchecking powers are weak, old man.
Xenomancers wrote: DE might have some weak choices but their strong choices are amazing.
O...kay. I don't disagree but I'm not seeing how this is relevant to the open topped rule.
Xenomancers wrote: They aren't the best army vs vehicles but 3 void ravens and 3 ravager plus a ton of blasters can handle them.
Which aren't even transports, let alone open-topped ones.
By "massive mobility" you mean '2 fast transports and some fast units in the Fast Attack slot'.
I know I'm getting off topic now, but DE have:
0 mobile HQs 0 mobile Elites
0 mobile troops
1 mobile Heavy Support (and it's a vehicle)
You know how other armies get stuff like HQs with Jump Packs, Elites with Bikes, that sort of thing? Boy, sure am glad I'm playing an army as "mobile" as Dark Eldar. My M7" HQs feel really mobile compared to the sluggish Space marine Biker Captain and his mere 14" movement.
Are you even replying to the right person? I never denied that DE were a solid army.
What I said - and continue to say - is that the Open Topped rule is garbage for 99% of the codex. We just don't have anywhere near enough shooting units - let along enough good shooting units - to justify it. It was useful back when it also helped out melee units. Since the majority of our infantry that are eligible for transports are melee units.
@TheFleshIsWeak
First of all - The spelling error is intentional. Kinda like people like to call my Primarch Girlyman - I call Urien Rakarth "Urine Rakarth". It's all for fun .
Second - the power of a codex comes from syerngies between units and also units being able to function on their own. DE have no need to put these things in transports because they all take care of themselves nicely. Ofc venoms are for shooty units with poor defense. And while they don't do great against vehcials they do at least average vs infantry and often excell vs tough ones. The fact you can move into rapid fire turn 1 and have what I would call "unfair amounts of defense" for such a cheap unit which is also protects 5 glass cannons inside...they are a tremendous unit. I've fooled around putting incubi in them before and it actually worked out both times even though they are a terrible unit. My beefs with the DE codex are really cosmetic - like...why don't incubi get kabal traits? and why isn't their another type of HQ for kabals to choose from? none of these things really hold the army back. Space marines have real problems. Half the units can ride in half the transports. No deep strike stratagem. Lack of invune saves accross the board except for HQ's which happen to be untargetable anyways. Overcosted weaponry (they fixed some but not all). The mobile units are punished for moving. Overcosted units core to forming stratagies (drop pods/storm ravens) reliance on plasma in an eddition where negative modifiers are everywhere(inclucing for moving with heavies) and increase the risk of outright slaying your models (SLAYING!). So forgive me for being blunt here. As a DE player myself. DE has not room to complain in a space marine thread. Unless it's about not getting any new models and with that I can sympathize (If plastic Incubi came out I would by 20 instantaniously). Also - the Voidraven is probably the sweeteest looking model in the game anyways - have noticed it's similarities with the Birttish Vulkan Bomber (probably my favorite plane in history)?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CapRichard wrote: Still, for reroll all wounds, from what I have understood, there is an UM thing that tags a unit at the start of the battle and everything gets all rerolls on it (correct me if I'm wrong on this), so for big treats you're still guillimaned, otherwise there is a FW chapter master, but that could be patched away.
Yes I believe you have to be within 6 inches of the target but it will no doubt be power. Perhaps in a very aggressive list Utlizing agressors and repuslors. Utilziign the team overwatch stratagem for protection and the reroll all wounds relic...It might just work. In my head though it seems quite suicidal.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
I'm not sure IKs are the real culprit.
I think guardsmen and PBs are just as unhealthy. Cheap models per wound with invulns are even worse imo.
Gotta whine about guard, even in a space marine thread I see. I bet all your bacon, if the totally whack command point system and allies weren't so borked out the gate, you'd not see nearly as many of any of these problem units.
PBs maybe would still be seen, but pure guard lists weren't going to be stomping the scene forever, nor were knights going to be everywhere without their command point chaff bubbles.
Guards buff was in the fact of new AP system and wound system that did a good thing for durability of guard infantry however most light infantry benefit from that change. The only reason you saw them everywhere though, was command point batteries and cheap chaff for actually swingy imperial units, like knights.
If armies were back to being mono dex, that would clear up a lot of these balance nightmares. With the nature of the game and costs, pure knight armies weren't going to rule the roost ever. You shouldn't need to spam cheap chaff to earn command points. I have no idea how they'll fix this issue but it feels like in this book they are going to be cracking down on getting the most out of your book by staying mono dex and only time will tell if that can happen enough but I bet you the guard boogeyman won't be nearly as scary without abuse in both of these venues. Just shouting one sentence " Guards is OMG OPZ !! " is obtuse at least, and dishonest at worst. The issues are far deeper than cheap guardsmen, they are baked into the core system as it stands. Unless you price guard on par with scions or sisters of battle, they'll still be the cheap chaff troop choice for imperial soup, or it'll flip all to Ad mech, and then they'll need to go up, after they just went down.
I hate to derail this thread of marine codex strength sadness but it gets pretty frustrating to keep seeing one sentence declarations that can't seem to see the forest for the trees and the actual depth of the problems but just blame one symptom.
They'd need a real big reword of core systems to fix a number of these issues as well as strong mono dex books that crack down on allies as one touch to it, and all of those things will take time.All we can do is be true about the real problems and not just point fingers because we dislike other people having it better than us for a bit. At some point you need to point the finger at GW for moving too slowly to fix an issue thats been pretty easy to see since the edition dropped and only got easier to see as book power creep began.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
It doesn't make sense - why single out the repuslor. If the docs affect all the weapons - every units should recieve comparable % increase in points. In fact - a lot of the units went down in price slightly. It just seems like a ploy to get people to buy the newer stuff. With the repulsor going up in price too it makes the executioner more apealing because it is just a better repulsor which has what the army neeeds (an actually formitable long range weapon) and the lowly priced impuslor seems like a bargain.
Xenomancers wrote: Yeah just a friendly reminder that a night fighter with 2 dessie is 135 points. One Thirty Five. You get 2.5 of these per repulsor. What an absolute joke of game balance. Why wouldn't you take 6 eldar flyers to a tournament?
This is why I get upset. The dessie cannon has been 15 points all eddition...The DE codex is loaded with OP gak they never nerf. Your gonna nerf my repulsor though and Gman at the same time? And DE clearly win more than Ultramarines? This is really started to get absurd guys. Wake up. Demand change. If you aren't upset. You are part of the problem.
Point of order - dissies took a bigger nerf losing doom than marines took with Bobby.
Xenomancers wrote: Yeah just a friendly reminder that a night fighter with 2 dessie is 135 points. One Thirty Five. You get 2.5 of these per repulsor. What an absolute joke of game balance. Why wouldn't you take 6 eldar flyers to a tournament?
This is why I get upset. The dessie cannon has been 15 points all eddition...The DE codex is loaded with OP gak they never nerf. Your gonna nerf my repulsor though and Gman at the same time? And DE clearly win more than Ultramarines? This is really started to get absurd guys. Wake up. Demand change. If you aren't upset. You are part of the problem.
Point of order - dissies took a bigger nerf losing doom than marines took with Bobby.
They're not really a huge deal any longer.
They are still better vs t8 than a dark lance and they still wound on 3's vs primaris and 1 shot them. Plus a cross codex synergy like that shouldn't exist anyways. That would be like buffing guard with the gman aura...how do you think that would have worked out? I think wed have guard close to 100% win rate if they had gman ultras buff. It just goes to shot how bad the marine codex is - with doom and guide on their whole army - they cant manage higher than 40% win rate in competitive and they STILL nerf it. Marine hate is real even from other marine players. Rant Over. Mike drop.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
I'm not sure IKs are the real culprit.
I think guardsmen and PBs are just as unhealthy. Cheap models per wound with invulns are even worse imo.
Gotta whine about guard, even in a space marine thread I see. I bet all your bacon, if the totally whack command point system and allies weren't so borked out the gate, you'd not see nearly as many of any of these problem units.
PBs maybe would still be seen, but pure guard lists weren't going to be stomping the scene forever, nor were knights going to be everywhere without their command point chaff bubbles.
Guards buff was in the fact of new AP system and wound system that did a good thing for durability of guard infantry however most light infantry benefit from that change. The only reason you saw them everywhere though, was command point batteries and cheap chaff for actually swingy imperial units, like knights.
If armies were back to being mono dex, that would clear up a lot of these balance nightmares. With the nature of the game and costs, pure knight armies weren't going to rule the roost ever. You shouldn't need to spam cheap chaff to earn command points. I have no idea how they'll fix this issue but it feels like in this book they are going to be cracking down on getting the most out of your book by staying mono dex and only time will tell if that can happen enough but I bet you the guard boogeyman won't be nearly as scary without abuse in both of these venues. Just shouting one sentence " Guards is OMG OPZ !! " is obtuse at least, and dishonest at worst. The issues are far deeper than cheap guardsmen, they are baked into the core system as it stands. Unless you price guard on par with scions or sisters of battle, they'll still be the cheap chaff troop choice for imperial soup, or it'll flip all to Ad mech, and then they'll need to go up, after they just went down.
I hate to derail this thread of marine codex strength sadness but it gets pretty frustrating to keep seeing one sentence declarations that can't seem to see the forest for the trees and the actual depth of the problems but just blame one symptom.
They'd need a real big reword of core systems to fix a number of these issues as well as strong mono dex books that crack down on allies as one touch to it, and all of those things will take time.All we can do is be true about the real problems and not just point fingers because we dislike other people having it better than us for a bit. At some point you need to point the finger at GW for moving too slowly to fix an issue thats been pretty easy to see since the edition dropped and only got easier to see as book power creep began.
I don't want to write small novellas for people to slog through. I merely pointed out units that i think are as problematic as iks. Their common property is extremity. Extreme cheapness, extreme durability, extrerme skew. Someone else literally complained about iks breaking the game, and i was responding to that. Not whining about ig.
I hear ya man, I really do. However when all you do is say " These are bad ! These are bad ! " It gets nothing done, doesn't even give a reason for it. If all that mattered was the points cost of units, we'd be able to see GK crushing all as they've just gone down in points, i'm sure we'd find the sweet spot for them.
No ? Then the issues have to be deeper than, too cheap, too expensive.
Our ideas of whining has to be different then. As all i ever see is one sentence saying something sucks, pretty much all the time. No meat of the thought just, marines suck, guard cheap, Eldar OP, etc, etc till it comes back to BA sucks.
You can say what you want, but people are here to share ideas, there isn't really anything to share from this sucks, that is better, this is weak. I'm pretty sure everyone knows you think marines suck, guard are and will always be too cheap forever and all the standard dooms and glooms.
At this point though, is the issue really guard infantry ? How many big tournaments are pure guard winning exactly ? If it was just them, they should be rolling all tournaments on their own, if not, the problem is deeper. Deeper than cost, and deeper than just marines codex being weak feeling from some nerfs with a number of buffs.
bort wrote: I’m still not sold on the Whirlwind. It was always the worst of the indirect options, though did get 5pts cheaper. And isn’t the fire twice strat like 2cp and require no LOS? Even if 1cp, which is an okay cost, the restriction is oddly limiting on some tables. You’ll have to reserve a tank sized Los blocker for a unit that has the low point cost and decent toughness of a unit you probably would prefer the enemy shot at.
I’d love to be proven wrong, I’ve had a 2nd edition Whirlwind sitting on my shelf for over 20 years that each edition I take it down, play a game or two with it, realize still sucks, and put it back up.
...Heh, also just occurred to me, the older, slightly smaller Rhino chassis is going to be easier to hide out of LOS, so mine is unintentionally modeled for advantage.
Even if a whirlwind is 20% cheaper than a wyvern it is currently much worse. But with a ~7% pts drop, shoot twice stratagem and ap - 1 the first turn it looks viable. It has slightly better BS, slightly better against t5 and t8+. Longer range, better ap and a bit tougher. Much fewer shots but overall close performance point for point now. Not better but an alternative if you need some artillery and you arent fielding an astra battalion already.
Might even have some useful chapter tactics for it too. I thought about using an airbrush already to repaint my tanks and depending on the full rules I am thinking about making my vehicles in a slightly different color and play them as a different Space Marine chapter with some better vehicle tactics. Perhaps using imperial fists to ignore cover. Doesnt matter if you have fewer shots if they are much more effective against units in cover +ap1
Thing with the "fire twice" stratagem is:
You can use it only once per phase and as it shares use with the Thunderfire Cannon, which has access to the insanely good Tremor Shells stratagem, there is prolly no argument for NOT using it on the TFC as doubling that slow effect is usually WAY more usefull than having a WW shoot twice...
Last time I checked that wouldn't work.
I was using Hellfire Shells on an HB in a Dev squad so I could use the Cherib to double-dip on the strat for a while before someone pointed out that it had been ruled that the strat only worked on a single firing action, I don't see any reason to believe that the new 'shoot twice' strat would be any different.
Must be Friday.. yep another day another instance of xeno complaining about SM being garbage because repulsors went up points without owning the new codex or playing a single game with the new rules.. Yep another day at the office.
On topic, I think whirlwinds and razorbacks look like good backline dakka units. The more I think about it the more jel of the cheap invuln transport they get -_-
AngryAngel80 wrote: I hear ya man, I really do. However when all you do is say " These are bad ! These are bad ! " It gets nothing done, doesn't even give a reason for it. If all that mattered was the points cost of units, we'd be able to see GK crushing all as they've just gone down in points, i'm sure we'd find the sweet spot for them.
No ? Then the issues have to be deeper than, too cheap, too expensive.
Our ideas of whining has to be different then. As all i ever see is one sentence saying something sucks, pretty much all the time. No meat of the thought just, marines suck, guard cheap, Eldar OP, etc, etc till it comes back to BA sucks.
You can say what you want, but people are here to share ideas, there isn't really anything to share from this sucks, that is better, this is weak. I'm pretty sure everyone knows you think marines suck, guard are and will always be too cheap forever and all the standard dooms and glooms.
At this point though, is the issue really guard infantry ? How many big tournaments are pure guard winning exactly ? If it was just them, they should be rolling all tournaments on their own, if not, the problem is deeper. Deeper than cost, and deeper than just marines codex being weak feeling from some nerfs with a number of buffs.
How many are won by pure ik? Guard have a few annoying problem units that appear over and over bc of soup. Imo the castellan list that won earlier this year was just as reliant on 80 cheap ablatives as the actual ik. The merging of extremes is the problem. The castellan is less extreme, guardsmen are still extreme.
Maybe you never saw the threads, but i assume people dont want the same math rehashed.
Ultimately, too cheap, too expensive is as about as deep as the game gets imo.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I hear ya man, I really do. However when all you do is say " These are bad ! These are bad ! " It gets nothing done, doesn't even give a reason for it. If all that mattered was the points cost of units, we'd be able to see GK crushing all as they've just gone down in points, i'm sure we'd find the sweet spot for them.
No ? Then the issues have to be deeper than, too cheap, too expensive.
Our ideas of whining has to be different then. As all i ever see is one sentence saying something sucks, pretty much all the time. No meat of the thought just, marines suck, guard cheap, Eldar OP, etc, etc till it comes back to BA sucks.
You can say what you want, but people are here to share ideas, there isn't really anything to share from this sucks, that is better, this is weak. I'm pretty sure everyone knows you think marines suck, guard are and will always be too cheap forever and all the standard dooms and glooms.
At this point though, is the issue really guard infantry ? How many big tournaments are pure guard winning exactly ? If it was just them, they should be rolling all tournaments on their own, if not, the problem is deeper. Deeper than cost, and deeper than just marines codex being weak feeling from some nerfs with a number of buffs.
How many are won by pure ik? Guard have a few annoying problem units that appear over and over bc of soup. Imo the castellan list that won earlier this year was just as reliant on 80 cheap ablatives as the actual ik. The merging of extremes is the problem. The castellan is less extreme, guardsmen are still extreme.
Maybe you never saw the threads, but i assume people dont want the same math rehashed.
Ultimately, too cheap, too expensive is as about as deep as the game gets imo.
Exactly, because of soup, thank you. I agree, soup sucks, allies and CP structure suck.
You can rehash the math all you want pure guard however aren't crushing all. It isn't them who are the issue as the book as it stands on its own is good but isn't meta breaking, or even meta leading. Guard infantry are cheap, in a book with lots of poor choices and lack luster units and some strong outliers but on its own it isn't extreme. If too cheap or too expensive was all that mattered we'd never need new books points would fix it all, they don't. Guard infantry are very good, but in their own book are a strong unit, in an ok book with lots of poor options all over.
I'm sure BA will be cool when they put out their buddy codex with BFF Necrons, a dual codex for the only true blood brothers of 40k.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
It doesn't make sense - why single out the repuslor. If the docs affect all the weapons - every units should recieve comparable % increase in points. In fact - a lot of the units went down in price slightly. It just seems like a ploy to get people to buy the newer stuff. With the repulsor going up in price too it makes the executioner more apealing because it is just a better repulsor which has what the army neeeds (an actually formitable long range weapon) and the lowly priced impuslor seems like a bargain.
God, are you still whining about it?
Repuslors got nerfed for either the fact that they were the best unit for their points in our book, or it's all GW's secret plot, there's no point in whining about it for over a week.
Xenomancers wrote: Yeah just a friendly reminder that a night fighter with 2 dessie is 135 points. One Thirty Five. You get 2.5 of these per repulsor. What an absolute joke of game balance. Why wouldn't you take 6 eldar flyers to a tournament?
This is why I get upset. The dessie cannon has been 15 points all eddition...The DE codex is loaded with OP gak they never nerf. Your gonna nerf my repulsor though and Gman at the same time? And DE clearly win more than Ultramarines? This is really started to get absurd guys. Wake up. Demand change. If you aren't upset. You are part of the problem.
Point of order - dissies took a bigger nerf losing doom than marines took with Bobby.
They're not really a huge deal any longer.
They are still better vs t8 than a dark lance and they still wound on 3's vs primaris and 1 shot them. Plus a cross codex synergy like that shouldn't exist anyways. That would be like buffing guard with the gman aura...how do you think that would have worked out? I think wed have guard close to 100% win rate if they had gman ultras buff. It just goes to shot how bad the marine codex is - with doom and guide on their whole army - they cant manage higher than 40% win rate in competitive and they STILL nerf it. Marine hate is real even from other marine players. Rant Over. Mike drop.
No mic drop, but I'll deal with that in the morning
AngryAngel80 wrote: I hear ya man, I really do. However when all you do is say " These are bad ! These are bad ! " It gets nothing done, doesn't even give a reason for it. If all that mattered was the points cost of units, we'd be able to see GK crushing all as they've just gone down in points, i'm sure we'd find the sweet spot for them.
No ? Then the issues have to be deeper than, too cheap, too expensive.
Our ideas of whining has to be different then. As all i ever see is one sentence saying something sucks, pretty much all the time. No meat of the thought just, marines suck, guard cheap, Eldar OP, etc, etc till it comes back to BA sucks.
You can say what you want, but people are here to share ideas, there isn't really anything to share from this sucks, that is better, this is weak. I'm pretty sure everyone knows you think marines suck, guard are and will always be too cheap forever and all the standard dooms and glooms.
At this point though, is the issue really guard infantry ? How many big tournaments are pure guard winning exactly ? If it was just them, they should be rolling all tournaments on their own, if not, the problem is deeper. Deeper than cost, and deeper than just marines codex being weak feeling from some nerfs with a number of buffs.
How many are won by pure ik? Guard have a few annoying problem units that appear over and over bc of soup. Imo the castellan list that won earlier this year was just as reliant on 80 cheap ablatives as the actual ik. The merging of extremes is the problem. The castellan is less extreme, guardsmen are still extreme.
Maybe you never saw the threads, but i assume people dont want the same math rehashed.
Ultimately, too cheap, too expensive is as about as deep as the game gets imo.
Exactly, because of soup, thank you. I agree, soup sucks, allies and CP structure suck.
You can rehash the math all you want pure guard however aren't crushing all. It isn't them who are the issue as the book as it stands on its own is good but isn't meta breaking, or even meta leading. Guard infantry are cheap, in a book with lots of poor choices and lack luster units and some strong outliers but on its own it isn't extreme. If too cheap or too expensive was all that mattered we'd never need new books points would fix it all, they don't. Guard infantry are very good, but in their own book are a strong unit, in an ok book with lots of poor options all over.
I'm sure BA will be cool when they put out their buddy codex with BFF Necrons, a dual codex for the only true blood brothers of 40k.
Units need to be costed within the ally structure. Or, wait for them to be spammed in settings where data is collected. You need only raise the price till they are no longer spammed. GW goes overboard like with the flyrant triple nerf.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
It doesn't make sense - why single out the repuslor. If the docs affect all the weapons - every units should recieve comparable % increase in points. In fact - a lot of the units went down in price slightly. It just seems like a ploy to get people to buy the newer stuff. With the repulsor going up in price too it makes the executioner more apealing because it is just a better repulsor which has what the army neeeds (an actually formitable long range weapon) and the lowly priced impuslor seems like a bargain.
God, are you still whining about it?
Repuslors got nerfed for either the fact that they were the best unit for their points in our book, or it's all GW's secret plot, there's no point in whining about it for over a week.
Get over it.
GW doesn't understand the necessity of invulns on big ticket models. Its that simple. Given the new marine codex, the repulsor hike is not crazy, its just not going to work out well the way 8th plays.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
It doesn't make sense - why single out the repuslor. If the docs affect all the weapons - every units should recieve comparable % increase in points. In fact - a lot of the units went down in price slightly. It just seems like a ploy to get people to buy the newer stuff. With the repulsor going up in price too it makes the executioner more apealing because it is just a better repulsor which has what the army neeeds (an actually formitable long range weapon) and the lowly priced impuslor seems like a bargain
.
It makes absolute sense.
A single tac marine has a bolter....that gets -1 AP for Tactical Doctrine.
A devastator has 1 weapon.
A dread often has 2 weapons, OK, but still nothing to write home about.
Those little increases are just not significant and therefore don't warrant a raise in points.
However, the repulsor often has...Hvy Onslaught, Onslaught, twin Hvy Bolter, 2 SBs, 2 ironhail hvy stubbers, 2 fragstorm launchers. What other single model has that many weapons? It's actually a little ludicrous and time-consuming IMHO. So based that 2/3 of them get an additional -1 in the first turn, and the remaining get a -1 when tactical is turned on, GW probably thought the current price was too cheap.
it's obviously not a marketing ploy, do you really think with a brand new SM codex release they don't want people buying their flagship new tanks for the over-hyped Primaris? Nah, they must want to sell more drop pods.
Units need to be costed within the ally structure. Or, wait for them to be spammed in settings where data is collected. You need only raise the price till they are no longer spammed. GW goes overboard like with the flyrant triple nerf.
So you see the issue, but you think the fix should be rendering mono codex armies worse because the alliance system sucks ? I can't really say how head in the sand such a fix is. Especially when they already appear to notice the issue as they have been trying to slow roll fixes and nerfs to mix faction forces for awhile now. The latest codex being the ideal sign of that. If they keep pushing these changes to make it less attractive to mixed faction, and more rewarding to mono faction and fix the CPfubar they have going on, it'll be golden, without nerfs.
I have disagreed with a great many of the nerfs they rolled out. The only reason I at all agree with Gmans nerf is the fact that he unavoidably is factored into Marine costing, he's a monster they had to control or else make the only good marine lists Gman centric which sucks from a game play and fluff point of view. We will see what shakes out and if marines turn out better from it all, we'll see.
I disagree with the point raise on cultists as well, if you can dig through past stances. If your BA suck, it isn't Guards fault, as a lot of armies are better than BA, armies that function better without allies even. Look at some of the better nerfs you have seen, many of them are about limiting allies interactions with each other. Unless GW is dim they will start to see, allies make the game difficult to balance, especially with such a large pool of books in imperium armies. No amount of them nerfing Guard will make weaker armies any better, as guard arent the top right now. All you seem to do is want to be spiteful, even after acknowledging their cost isn't what knocks the game off course. I know you'll just respond with the same one sentence response but at some point you have to target the actual issues and not keep scape goating because Guard give you night terrors.
Now on topic of this post, the new marine book could be to blame for them being weaker. Though I don't think that'll be the case. We will need to see though, especially with how the changes alter actual game play and not just mental gymnastics. Until it shakes out, we just don't know for sure. Though we can all say one build to rule them all in a book is an issue to be dealt with, I just hope it shakes out better with the fixes in there.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
And LandRaiders are horribly priced.
Not really, but no one wants to risk taking them with knights kicking around.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
It should, but land raiders should be cheaper. You will lose games just from having such an expensive model with no invuln.
It should if it has the same transport effect as a Land Raider, which it doesn't. The models you'd put in a Repulsor vs a Land Raider aren't the same. The Primaris only restriction on the Repulsor hurts it. For another 2 days there isn't a SC you can stick in it for 1 slot. Most of the Primaris Infantry already have a shortcut across the board, or don't want to cross the board anyway. You're pretty much stuck at Aggressors and support characters - No Sternguard, No Termies, No Company Vets, no Cents, No Repair Marines - making the Repulsor being used to transport a fat juicy target destined to remind of you of the scene from Dances With Wolves - a bunch of space marines standing on top with their arms thrown back waiting for the bullet. As long as people bring enough AT shooting to down a Knight - Expensive Tanksports like the LR and Repulsor either need to be equally durable, or have a reason to make things shoot at them less, not more.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
And LandRaiders are horribly priced.
Not really, but no one wants to risk taking them with knights kicking around.
IKs dont keep my lrs off the table. At least, not alone.
Its not the knight itself causing people to avoid the 300 point Tanksports. Its the armies that build in enough AT shooting to face a knight, just in case.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
Not really. Of course people weren't taking 3 of them and a hefty bit of guard for an extra headache.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
fraser1191 wrote: Do we have a total points value on the invictor dread?
Also shouldn't the pilot be a techmarine? I thought all operators /pilots were techmarines
Nah, most fluff has the operators/pilots being Marines seconded from the reserve companies - i.e. Assault Reserve Companies piloted the Land Speeders
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
No, the Repulsor never wants to change out of Devastator Doctrine. Only the Storm Bolters and Grenade Launchers gain from Tactical, The Repulsor already has POTMS, so loses nothing by moving and firing. Far more of their volume of fire is Heavy X
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: I dunno "I don't wanna assmble a TFC" is a pretty good arguement
Are you kidding? That was one of my favorites. I imagine it's even better now that it's plastic. Super easy to paint.
For the record, the durability for the Land Raider isn't exactly terrible for the price. In an open field it'll get the cargo to its destination.
HOWEVER, with degrading movement outside Iron Hands (at least for a while anyway), not being able to go forward or shoot once charged by even a single Cuktist (the latter only being solved by Ultramarines), and not exactly carrying a lot of firepower, it leaves a lot to be desired. People would use the Spartan instead the previous two editions for quite a few reasons (with armored ceremite being one of them of course), and of course with the pricing on that it doesn't get used anymore.
Units need to be costed within the ally structure. Or, wait for them to be spammed in settings where data is collected. You need only raise the price till they are no longer spammed. GW goes overboard like with the flyrant triple nerf.
So you see the issue, but you think the fix should be rendering mono codex armies worse because the alliance system sucks ? I can't really say how head in the sand such a fix is. Especially when they already appear to notice the issue as they have been trying to slow roll fixes and nerfs to mix faction forces for awhile now. The latest codex being the ideal sign of that. If they keep pushing these changes to make it less attractive to mixed faction, and more rewarding to mono faction and fix the CPfubar they have going on, it'll be golden, without nerfs.
I have disagreed with a great many of the nerfs they rolled out. The only reason I at all agree with Gmans nerf is the fact that he unavoidably is factored into Marine costing, he's a monster they had to control or else make the only good marine lists Gman centric which sucks from a game play and fluff point of view. We will see what shakes out and if marines turn out better from it all, we'll see.
I disagree with the point raise on cultists as well, if you can dig through past stances. If your BA suck, it isn't Guards fault, as a lot of armies are better than BA, armies that function better without allies even. Look at some of the better nerfs you have seen, many of them are about limiting allies interactions with each other. Unless GW is dim they will start to see, allies make the game difficult to balance, especially with such a large pool of books in imperium armies. No amount of them nerfing Guard will make weaker armies any better, as guard arent the top right now. All you seem to do is want to be spiteful, even after acknowledging their cost isn't what knocks the game off course. I know you'll just respond with the same one sentence response but at some point you have to target the actual issues and not keep scape goating because Guard give you night terrors.
Now on topic of this post, the new marine book could be to blame for them being weaker. Though I don't think that'll be the case. We will need to see though, especially with how the changes alter actual game play and not just mental gymnastics. Until it shakes out, we just don't know for sure. Though we can all say one build to rule them all in a book is an issue to be dealt with, I just hope it shakes out better with the fixes in there.
Your both correct in that simplisticly Martel is correct when he says hoard infantry IG especially are too cheap, butnyour also correct in saying that it's more complex than that.
GW fundamentally fails or systematically undervalues time and time again the value of just having a model stand somewhere in 8th editions rules. This also contributes to a large part ibto why people feel Assualt armies don't work due to the requirements of movement and positioning.
Without this base value being set and then improved stats and abilities being costed on top of the basic value you end up with the mess that is 8th edition hoards, vastly different stats and power levels cosring effectively the same.
This was made even worse with GW's "Hot Fix" (actually makingnit worse) CP system changes which also rewards cheapest slot choices with a significant difference in CP generation.
The Marine's cidex shows the first step along the path to fixing aome of these issues with trying to balance 8th edition mono codex vrs souping. However untill they address the CP system I'm not entirely convinced that they have enough design space to improve certain codex's monobuild without making them the new Yannari.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
And LandRaiders are horribly priced.
Not really, but no one wants to risk taking them with knights kicking around.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
It should, but land raiders should be cheaper. You will lose games just from having such an expensive model with no invuln.
It should if it has the same transport effect as a Land Raider, which it doesn't. The models you'd put in a Repulsor vs a Land Raider aren't the same. The Primaris only restriction on the Repulsor hurts it. For another 2 days there isn't a SC you can stick in it for 1 slot. Most of the Primaris Infantry already have a shortcut across the board, or don't want to cross the board anyway. You're pretty much stuck at Aggressors and support characters - No Sternguard, No Termies, No Company Vets, no Cents, No Repair Marines - making the Repulsor being used to transport a fat juicy target destined to remind of you of the scene from Dances With Wolves - a bunch of space marines standing on top with their arms thrown back waiting for the bullet. As long as people bring enough AT shooting to down a Knight - Expensive Tanksports like the LR and Repulsor either need to be equally durable, or have a reason to make things shoot at them less, not more.
Overpriced because of knights in this case. If a land raider is fairly priced until the knight meta exists, then the issue isn't the price or you punish lists that aren't designed to kill multiple knights a turn. In an ideal world what should be happening is that knights are prevalent > people spam AT to handle knights > AT heavy lists can't handle hordes > hordes struggle to kill knights etc. so you end up with a series of hard counters that force the game to keep shifting as different stuff becomes flavour of the month and no 1 list is unable to be countered. For whatever reason this hasn't really been happening too much and the outlier is a combination of souping and knights as they plug a lot of natural holes in forces.
Ideally most mono-codex armies should be able to be built to handle anything, ie balanced lists, but that's just an ideal now I think.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
And LandRaiders are horribly priced.
Not really, but no one wants to risk taking them with knights kicking around.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
It should, but land raiders should be cheaper. You will lose games just from having such an expensive model with no invuln.
It should if it has the same transport effect as a Land Raider, which it doesn't. The models you'd put in a Repulsor vs a Land Raider aren't the same. The Primaris only restriction on the Repulsor hurts it. For another 2 days there isn't a SC you can stick in it for 1 slot. Most of the Primaris Infantry already have a shortcut across the board, or don't want to cross the board anyway. You're pretty much stuck at Aggressors and support characters - No Sternguard, No Termies, No Company Vets, no Cents, No Repair Marines - making the Repulsor being used to transport a fat juicy target destined to remind of you of the scene from Dances With Wolves - a bunch of space marines standing on top with their arms thrown back waiting for the bullet. As long as people bring enough AT shooting to down a Knight - Expensive Tanksports like the LR and Repulsor either need to be equally durable, or have a reason to make things shoot at them less, not more.
Overpriced because of knights in this case. If a land raider is fairly priced until the knight meta exists, then the issue isn't the price or you punish lists that aren't designed to kill multiple knights a turn. In an ideal world what should be happening is that knights are prevalent > people spam AT to handle knights > AT heavy lists can't handle hordes > hordes struggle to kill knights etc. so you end up with a series of hard counters that force the game to keep shifting as different stuff becomes flavour of the month and no 1 list is unable to be countered. For whatever reason this hasn't really been happening too much and the outlier is a combination of souping and knights as they plug a lot of natural holes in forces.
Ideally most mono-codex armies should be able to be built to handle anything, ie balanced lists, but that's just an ideal now I think.
The fact that people feel like being able to build a list to remove 700 to 1000+ points in a single turn should even be a think to speeks volumes as to one of the core problems with 8th edition.
No army should really be able to put out enough dmage to be halfing your opponents army before they even get a chance to activate, that's rediculous levels of lethality. At that point it's not even close to be able to make a comeback from loosing the die foll for turn 1 it's game over by turn 2 with a 100% tabling.
The fact that people feel like being able to build a list to remove 700 to 1000+ points in a single turn should even be a think to speeks volumes as to one of the core problems with 8th edition.
No army should really be able to put out enough dmage to be halfing your opponents army before they even get a chance to activate, that's rediculous levels of lethality. At that point it's not even close to be able to make a comeback from loosing the die foll for turn 1 it's game over by turn 2 with a 100% tabling.
It's one model. Out of likely 3 or so. Let's not try and manipulate what we're talking about here. They're taking out one model/unit a turn with focused fire. The army that takes out 1000 points of knight on turn 1 is going to be crying when they see 2,000 points of guard infantry.
Overpriced because of knights in this case. If a land raider is fairly priced until the knight meta exists, then the issue isn't the price or you punish lists that aren't designed to kill multiple knights a turn. In an ideal world what should be happening is that knights are prevalent > people spam AT to handle knights > AT heavy lists can't handle hordes > hordes struggle to kill knights etc. so you end up with a series of hard counters that force the game to keep shifting as different stuff becomes flavour of the month and no 1 list is unable to be countered. For whatever reason this hasn't really been happening too much and the outlier is a combination of souping and knights as they plug a lot of natural holes in forces.
Ideally most mono-codex armies should be able to be built to handle anything, ie balanced lists, but that's just an ideal now I think.
I wouldn't say that either. If everyone's bringing a thousand points of tanks, be it three knights, or a bunch of Leman Russ, it doesn't matter why everyone has so much Anti Tank as well. It's just out there. And a 300 point Tanksport that doesn't have the same numbers of a Leman Russ, or the durability of a knight is just stuck in a no man's land. 2,000 points of IG Armored Company puts out a lot of tanks so they don't need to worry about the ONE tank. Both that list and the IK list will drag too much AT to the table for an army that is only bringing a couple transports at best. The big SM tanks aren't a Super Heavy like a knight even though they're around 75% of the cost of one... and they're not spammable like the Leman Russ. That's why they're priced wrong in a game that lets both extremes drive up the anti-tank that has to do SOMETHING with itself when facing not much tankiness.
The fact that people feel like being able to build a list to remove 700 to 1000+ points in a single turn should even be a think to speeks volumes as to one of the core problems with 8th edition.
No army should really be able to put out enough dmage to be halfing your opponents army before they even get a chance to activate, that's rediculous levels of lethality. At that point it's not even close to be able to make a comeback from loosing the die foll for turn 1 it's game over by turn 2 with a 100% tabling.
It's one model. Out of likely 3 or so. Let's not try and manipulate what we're talking about here. They're taking out one model/unit a turn with focused fire. The army that takes out 1000 points of knight on turn 1 is going to be crying when they see 2,000 points of guard infantry.
Overpriced because of knights in this case. If a land raider is fairly priced until the knight meta exists, then the issue isn't the price or you punish lists that aren't designed to kill multiple knights a turn. In an ideal world what should be happening is that knights are prevalent > people spam AT to handle knights > AT heavy lists can't handle hordes > hordes struggle to kill knights etc. so you end up with a series of hard counters that force the game to keep shifting as different stuff becomes flavour of the month and no 1 list is unable to be countered. For whatever reason this hasn't really been happening too much and the outlier is a combination of souping and knights as they plug a lot of natural holes in forces.
Ideally most mono-codex armies should be able to be built to handle anything, ie balanced lists, but that's just an ideal now I think.
I wouldn't say that either. If everyone's bringing a thousand points of tanks, be it three knights, or a bunch of Leman Russ, it doesn't matter why everyone has so much Anti Tank as well. It's just out there. And a 300 point Tanksport that doesn't have the same numbers of a Leman Russ, or the durability of a knight is just stuck in a no man's land. 2,000 points of IG Armored Company puts out a lot of tanks so they don't need to worry about the ONE tank. Both that list and the IK list will drag too much AT to the table for an army that is only bringing a couple transports at best. The big SM tanks aren't a Super Heavy like a knight even though they're around 75% of the cost of one... and they're not spammable like the Leman Russ. That's why they're priced wrong in a game that lets both extremes drive up the anti-tank that has to do SOMETHING with itself when facing not much tankiness.
The post I quoted said 2 knights not 1 and I've seen list that can take down 2 questorus class knights in a turn that's insane levels of lethality.
The counter play to different lists shouldn't always be just blast them off the table, knights should be the untableable list that you have to outscore, out play, not just wipe from the table.
If anything hoard lists shoukd similarly be a challenge for armies to table but be an army with limited damage output that you out damage all game and have to play smart to outscore.
Being able to remove 1000 points of the opponents army before it even acts is why we have turn 2 tabling games. With position and scoring not mattering. The offence for some lists really does need to be dialed back a bit otherwise loosing the roll off for going first is the decieding roll of the game.
It was one of marines old issues they had terrible offence in a game were the yard stick is 500-1000 points removed per turn when going first. Qhile they struggled to achieve 300-600.
My friend had delivery of both the new Codex and ultramarine supplement today. So, the stand out things for him were as follows:
1. Ultramarine doctrine counts all units that have moved but not advanced or fallback moves count as they have not moved. This means free PotMS to all vehicles, constant max range rapid fire shots and continuous double tapping agressors.
2. For 1CP an ultramarine unit that fell back can ignore the -1 to hit, and be allowed to charge in the charge phase. Confirmed that units with the fly keyword don't suffer the -1 to hit (unless a heavy weapon or it has PotMS) so the strat is really infantry focused, especially with shock assault.
3. The Psychic power scryers gaze allows you to automatically gain 1CP a turn, or allow a single ultramarine model in a unit to reroll one hit, wound and armour save a turn. Like Victor of the blood games, but can be used on a Sargent of a intercessor squad carrying a thunder hammer for example...
First of all - The spelling error is intentional. Kinda like people like to call my Primarch Girlyman - I call Urien Rakarth "Urine Rakarth". It's all for fun .
Oh okay. I hadn't heard that moniker for Urien before.
Second - the power of a codex comes from syerngies between units and also units being able to function on their own.
With you so far.
Xenomancers wrote: DE have no need to put these things in transports because they all take care of themselves nicely.
Er... no.
That's certainly true of Wracks and Mandrakes (though I doubt the latter would mind some extra protection). But Incubi? Wyches? The Archon's Court? Our entire HQ section bar the Haemonculi? You're really telling me none of these want/need transports?
Xenomancers wrote: Ofc venoms are for shooty units with poor defense. And while they don't do great against vehcials they do at least average vs infantry and often excell vs tough ones. The fact you can move into rapid fire turn 1 and have what I would call "unfair amounts of defense" for such a cheap unit which is also protects 5 glass cannons inside...they are a tremendous unit.
In my experience, moving into rapid-fire range is an excellent way to lose your Venoms, since all their protections are against shooting - not melee. What's more, if the enemy unit can encircle them then you can also kiss goodbye to the unit inside without your opponent ever needing to fire a shot against them.
Xenomancers wrote: I've fooled around putting incubi in them before and it actually worked out both times even though they are a terrible unit.
So, in spite of what you claimed earlier, units like Incubi do need to go in transports.
Xenomancers wrote: My beefs with the DE codex are really cosmetic - like...why don't incubi get kabal traits? and why isn't their another type of HQ for kabals to choose from?
I have rather more beefs with the army than you, I think. Almost all of which could be summed up with 'The ing HQ section'.
- Why do our HQs have 0 mobility options beyond transports? Our army includes Wings, Jetbikes and Skyboards and yet not a single one of our HQs can use even one of them.
- Why, when our HQs have no mobility options outside of transports do our transports not have space for them?
- Why does an army designed around open-topped transports give all its HQs auras that don't work inside, out of or into said transports?
- Why is the Archon so bloody expensive when he's no better than a 45pt Canoness?
- Why are the Shadowfield rules still stuck in 3rd edition?
- Why does our dedicated melee HQ have the worst melee stats and the worst melee weapon?
- Why was wargear turned into stratagems? It's not like we were overburned with options to begin with. Now we have literally no wargear options that aren't weapons.
- Why does the Haemonculus need 50 different weapons that are all variations on 'crap poison weapon' or 'even crappier weapon that isn't poisoned'?
- Why could our entire HQ section be replicated in form and function by someone throwing up on the codex?
- Why is poison such utter gak? So almost ever 'tough' unit had its wounds increased - often double or triple what they were before - and yet poison remained exactly the same (and it wasn't even good before). Oh yeah, Brilliant wheeze that.
- Why doesn't the Poison Tongue Kabal bonus work on the Poison Tongue artefact? I know this is petty but it doesn't make it any less bloody annoying. It doesn't work with the Djin Blade either (that is, the only Kabal that buffs melee won't buff melee if you take the only melee artefact). Boy, glad we've got all this synergy as Dark Eldar. - Where's the other half of our codex?
If you're saying that DE are currently strong, sure. I don't dispute that. But if I might repeat something I said in a different thread:
Spoiler:
Regarding the matter of DEHQs, I'm not too bothered about them being overcosted.
What really bothers me is that they're not fun.
I'm playing an army that's a mix of space-Dark-Elves, space-pirates, all-women-space-gladiators and the nightmarish creations of mad scientists (in space ).
However, as soon as it gets to our HQ section, all the fun and excitement drains away. Forget lions led by donkeys, it's like an entire menagerie (including many fantastical beasts) being led by narcoleptic accountants.
Where are the Archons with Scourge wings and clawed feet, falling on enemies like the birds of prey they now resemble? Where are the prizes weapons, armour and wargear Archons supposedly take into battle with them? Have they all developed severe spinal injuries that prevent them from carrying anything more cumbersome than a sword and pistol? What happened to Clone Fields and Ghostplate Armour?Where are the arcane artefacts and weapons that Haemonculi supposedly wield? Where are weapons like the Shattershard? Where are the Orbs of Despair? Where are the Succubi riding Jetbikes or Hellion Skyboards? Hell, where are the Succubi who are actually capable of going head-to-head with anything more formidable than a Master of Ordnance.
I can accept DEHQs not being efficiently costed, but do they really have to be so unbelievably bland? They've got barely any options (basically none if you discount all the false choices), no wargear beyond the most basic of weapons, no wings, skyboards or jetbikes, and no fun or interesting abilities, Is it really too much to ask that DEHQs have even the faintest spark of creativity in their design?
I'm sorry but Space Marines just got a second codex with a pile of buffs and extra rules, on top of even more releases, whilst Dark Eldar have been completely gutted, losing almost half their units, most of their wargear, and really anything that might make them remotely fun or interesting.
I'm sorry but I just can't feel sympathetic towards the army that constantly gains rules and models far in excess of any other in the game, especially when you're comparing it to one that hasn't even been thrown a single bone.
If only you had some other method of deep striking. Something that could deep strike even on turn one, despite the rules not allowing such for any other army.
Xenomancers wrote: Lack of invune saves accross the board except for HQ's which happen to be untargetable anyways.
I'm sorry to hear that AP is allowed to function against Space Marines. Clearly they should be above such petty rules.
Yep. SMs are the only army in the game with overcosted weapons.
Xenomancers wrote: Overcosted units core to forming stratagies (drop pods/storm ravens) reliance on plasma in an eddition where negative modifiers are everywhere(inclucing for moving with heavies) and increase the risk of outright slaying your models (SLAYING!).
And having been on the receiving end of that plasma, it is bloody devastating. Even against models with -1 to hit, the losses suffered to plasma overheats are a small price to pay for wiping enemy units off the table with ease.
Furthermore, overcharging is entirely optional in this edition. If you don't want to lost models to overheat then don't bloody overcharge them.
Xenomancers wrote: As a DE player myself. DE has not room to complain in a space marine thread.
Well, if you'll cast your mind back, my initial post was little more than a joke. Someone said that SMs had no good units to put in drop pods and I joked that I felt the same about the open-topped ability on DE vehicles.
You were the one who took issue with that and turned it into a full-fledged argument.
Xenomancers wrote: Unless it's about not getting any new models and with that I can sympathize (If plastic Incubi came out I would by 20 instantaniously). Also - the Voidraven is probably the sweeteest looking model in the game anyways - have noticed it's similarities with the Birttish Vulkan Bomber (probably my favorite plane in history)?
I mean, yeah, the lack of models are a fething huge issue. Partially because we've already lost so many options, yet not a single one has ever been returned or replaced. But also because new models are now the only way to get rules. I'd be perfectly happy just getting new rules and converting the relevant models myself but apparently that's not an option.
Going back to Land Raiders, I actually don't think the Crusader is in a terrible spot. It's 268pts with the SB and has reasonable Turn 1 survivability since if you go second you activate defensive positions for 1+ save. Vs Aeldari -4AP, that's still equivalent to having a 5++. It was better with Bolter Dsicipline on vehicles, but it at least has a chance to get your cargo upfield. As Dark Angels, it can also fall back and shoot for 2CP, so not just Ultras with the rule.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I hear ya man, I really do. However when all you do is say " These are bad ! These are bad ! " It gets nothing done, doesn't even give a reason for it. If all that mattered was the points cost of units, we'd be able to see GK crushing all as they've just gone down in points, i'm sure we'd find the sweet spot for them.
No ? Then the issues have to be deeper than, too cheap, too expensive.
Our ideas of whining has to be different then. As all i ever see is one sentence saying something sucks, pretty much all the time. No meat of the thought just, marines suck, guard cheap, Eldar OP, etc, etc till it comes back to BA sucks.
You can say what you want, but people are here to share ideas, there isn't really anything to share from this sucks, that is better, this is weak. I'm pretty sure everyone knows you think marines suck, guard are and will always be too cheap forever and all the standard dooms and glooms.
At this point though, is the issue really guard infantry ? How many big tournaments are pure guard winning exactly ? If it was just them, they should be rolling all tournaments on their own, if not, the problem is deeper. Deeper than cost, and deeper than just marines codex being weak feeling from some nerfs with a number of buffs.
How many are won by pure ik? Guard have a few annoying problem units that appear over and over bc of soup. Imo the castellan list that won earlier this year was just as reliant on 80 cheap ablatives as the actual ik. The merging of extremes is the problem. The castellan is less extreme, guardsmen are still extreme.
Maybe you never saw the threads, but i assume people dont want the same math rehashed.
Ultimately, too cheap, too expensive is as about as deep as the game gets imo.
Wow I couldnt have said it better myself. What you are paying for stuff is basically what this game is.
I have rather more beefs with the army than you, I think. Almost all of which could be summed up with 'The ing HQ section'.
- Why do our HQs have 0 mobility options beyond transports? Our army includes Wings, Jetbikes and Skyboards and yet not a single one of our HQs can use even one of them.
- Why, when our HQs have no mobility options outside of transports do our transports not have space for them?
- Why does an army designed around open-topped transports give all its HQs auras that don't work inside, out of or into said transports?
- Why is the Archon so bloody expensive when he's no better than a 45pt Canoness?
- Why are the Shadowfield rules still stuck in 3rd edition?
- Why does our dedicated melee HQ have the worst melee stats and the worst melee weapon?
- Why was wargear turned into stratagems? It's not like we were overburned with options to begin with. Now we have literally no wargear options that aren't weapons.
- Why does the Haemonculus need 50 different weapons that are all variations on 'crap poison weapon' or 'even crappier weapon that isn't poisoned'?
- Why could our entire HQ section be replicated in form and function by someone throwing up on the codex?
- Why is poison such utter gak? So almost ever 'tough' unit had its wounds increased - often double or triple what they were before - and yet poison remained exactly the same (and it wasn't even good before). Oh yeah, Brilliant wheeze that.
- Why doesn't the Poison Tongue Kabal bonus work on the Poison Tongue artefact? I know this is petty but it doesn't make it any less bloody annoying. It doesn't work with the Djin Blade either (that is, the only Kabal that buffs melee won't buff melee if you take the only melee artefact). Boy, glad we've got all this synergy as Dark Eldar.
- Where's the other half of our codex?
PCSD, Post-Chapterhouse-Stress-dissorder.
Same reason really why half the SM options for bikers etc are now index only, etc.
And i think it will go on and on. And at some point reintroduced for £7£/Euro.
My beefs with the DE codex are really cosmetic - like...why don't incubi get kabal traits?
Because they're Aspect Warriors. They get Battle Focus instead. You just never notice because they don't have guns.
[Marines] Lack of invune saves accross the board except for HQ's which happen to be untargetable anyways.
Which is why IG, CWE, and Kabs are so garbage - lack of army-wide invulns!
Also - the Voidraven is probably the sweeteest looking model in the game anyways - have noticed it's similarities with the Birttish Vulkan Bomber (probably my favorite plane in history)?
Clearly factually wrong. It's like you've never even *seen* a FW Avatar! Pfft.
CapRichard wrote: Still, for reroll all wounds, from what I have understood, there is an UM thing that tags a unit at the start of the battle and everything gets all rerolls on it (correct me if I'm wrong on this), so for big treats you're still guillimaned, otherwise there is a FW chapter master, but that could be patched away.
Yes I believe you have to be within 6 inches of the target but it will no doubt be power. Perhaps in a very aggressive list Utlizing agressors and repuslors. Utilziign the team overwatch stratagem for protection and the reroll all wounds relic...It might just work. In my head though it seems quite suicidal.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
It doesn't make sense - why single out the repuslor. If the docs affect all the weapons - every units should recieve comparable % increase in points.
Balance 101.
Assume:
-Repulsors are 90% good enough
-Vindicators are 50% good enough
-You want both to be ~100%
(Numbers are only for demonstration purposes. They're directionally accurate only.)
Option 1:
-Buff the book by doubling ability all-around.
Vindis are now good enoough! Woot! They're at 100%.
But now Repulsors are at 160%. Why take Vindis when you can take Repulsors! Why play any faction when Repulsors will kill you!
Marines are now an OP book. Vindis and everythign else works, but Repulsors dominate.
Option 2:
-Nerf Repulsors by nearly half - bringing them to 50%.
-Buff the book by doubling ability all-around.
Now Vindis and Repulsors both work at 100%. You can take either. Or something else. And the book is neither OP nor trash.
*That* is why you nerf the strongest stuff when buffing a book. Now, maybe the buffs didn't go far enough - that's a reasonable argument. But it certainly makes sense to nerf the Repulsor if the intention was for the buffs to bring the book up.
In fact - a lot of the units went down in price slightly. It just seems like a ploy to get people to buy the newer stuff. With the repulsor going up in price too it makes the executioner more apealing because it is just a better repulsor which has what the army neeeds (an actually formitable long range weapon) and the lowly priced impuslor seems like a bargain.
Which is why Reapers were so OP for so long - such a new kit, it's even Finecast! Or why Spears were so OP. That sweet super new resin conversion kit. For every OP new toy, there's an OP old toy. The Repulsor is still a "new toy", so nerfing it to drive sales on new stuff seems off.
Xenomancers wrote: Yeah just a friendly reminder that a night fighter with 2 dessie is 135 points. One Thirty Five. You get 2.5 of these per repulsor. What an absolute joke of game balance. Why wouldn't you take 6 eldar flyers to a tournament?
This is why I get upset. The dessie cannon has been 15 points all eddition...The DE codex is loaded with OP gak they never nerf. Your gonna nerf my repulsor though and Gman at the same time? And DE clearly win more than Ultramarines? This is really started to get absurd guys. Wake up. Demand change. If you aren't upset. You are part of the problem.
Point of order - dissies took a bigger nerf losing doom than marines took with Bobby.
They're not really a huge deal any longer.
They are still better vs t8 than a dark lance and they still wound on 3's vs primaris and 1 shot them. Plus a cross codex synergy like that shouldn't exist anyways. That would be like buffing guard with the gman aura...how do you think that would have worked out? I think wed have guard close to 100% win rate if they had gman ultras buff.
It's more like Guard shooting Null Zoned targets. Should Null Zone have no impact on the enemy just because the shooter isn't a Marine?
It just goes to shot how bad the marine codex is - with doom and guide on their whole army - they cant manage higher than 40% win rate in competitive and they STILL nerf it. Marine hate is real even from other marine players. Rant Over. Mike drop.
The book doesn't have a 40% win rate. It's not out yet.
In theory I agree with you, but the Repulsor is simply too offensive geared with no defensive gimmicks at all. They're just too fragile for their cost. I guess if people will take them at 215, they can't be too bad.
Martel732 wrote: In theory I agree with you, but the Repulsor is simply too offensive geared with no defensive gimmicks at all.
Yeah. At some point stacking more offence on think just isn't worth the points if the durability isn't increased as well. It just becomes a liability as there is a good chance that the whole investment gets killed before it can do anything. Relating to which, I'm a bit bummed that the IHFNP isn't among the traits you can choose for your custom chapter, nor is the Sally -1 AP ignoring one.
- Why is poison such utter gak? So almost ever 'tough' unit had its wounds increased - often double or triple what they were before - and yet poison remained exactly the same (and it wasn't even good before). Oh yeah, Brilliant wheeze that.
Poison didn't remain exactly the same, it got worse. This is because Venoms went from 12 shots at 36" to 6 shots at 36" and 12 shots at 18". As this is one of our main poison delivery methods (the splinter cannon) it is a pretty big hit. On top of that alot of equivalents in other codexes had their firepower doubled. So everyone else doubled at optimal range, we halved. 12 Shots used to be impressive, especially at the range Venoms could act at. Now Assault Cannon Razroback have that (in 7th they had 4 shots I think!). The increase in toughness on targets you mentioned is then the cherry on top.
Are DE strong at the moment? Yeah, they are, but they are getting weaker as updates come out. They are MUCH weaker than a year ago and some of the boogieman units are no longer that strong. Particularly anything with disintegrators, which are now just worse grav cannons most of the time, how many people are maxing grav cannons again?
- Why is poison such utter gak? So almost ever 'tough' unit had its wounds increased - often double or triple what they were before - and yet poison remained exactly the same (and it wasn't even good before). Oh yeah, Brilliant wheeze that.
Poison didn't remain exactly the same, it got worse. This is because Venoms went from 12 shots at 36" to 6 shots at 36" and 12 shots at 18". As this is one of our main poison delivery methods (the splinter cannon) it is a pretty big hit. On top of that alot of equivalents in other codexes had their firepower doubled. So everyone else doubled at optimal range, we halved. 12 Shots used to be impressive, especially at the range Venoms could act at. Now Assault Cannon Razroback have that (in 7th they had 4 shots I think!). The increase in toughness on targets you mentioned is then the cherry on top.
Are DE strong at the moment? Yeah, they are, but they are getting weaker as updates come out. They are MUCH weaker than a year ago and some of the boogieman units are no longer that strong. Particularly anything with disintegrators, which are now just worse grav cannons most of the time, how many people are maxing grav cannons again?
FFS a grav cannon is heavy (DE ignore heavy penalties) and cost 28 points prior to this codex. For 1 more shot. with 12" less range. Marines would spam dissie cannons if they could. It is easily the best weapon for the cost in the entire game.
- Why is poison such utter gak? So almost ever 'tough' unit had its wounds increased - often double or triple what they were before - and yet poison remained exactly the same (and it wasn't even good before). Oh yeah, Brilliant wheeze that.
Poison didn't remain exactly the same, it got worse. This is because Venoms went from 12 shots at 36" to 6 shots at 36" and 12 shots at 18". As this is one of our main poison delivery methods (the splinter cannon) it is a pretty big hit. On top of that alot of equivalents in other codexes had their firepower doubled. So everyone else doubled at optimal range, we halved. 12 Shots used to be impressive, especially at the range Venoms could act at. Now Assault Cannon Razroback have that (in 7th they had 4 shots I think!). The increase in toughness on targets you mentioned is then the cherry on top.
Are DE strong at the moment? Yeah, they are, but they are getting weaker as updates come out. They are MUCH weaker than a year ago and some of the boogieman units are no longer that strong. Particularly anything with disintegrators, which are now just worse grav cannons most of the time, how many people are maxing grav cannons again?
FFS a grav cannon is heavy (DE ignore heavy penalties) and cost 28 points prior to this codex. For 1 more shot. with 12" less range. Marines would spam dissie cannons if they could. It is easily the best weapon for the cost in the entire game.
It's not even a weapon I take anymore. What is it good against? A minimum cost for 3 grav cannons is what? 149 points, minimum cost for 3 Disintegrators is 125. Disintegrators can't be taken on infantry. Are they better than grav cannons? Yeah, sure they are, but not that much better. They are worse than plasma guns.
Disintegrators cost 40 points each (including the ravager chassis), more if you take them on anything else. That's... not great. Plasma Inceptors are 59 (so 50% more) and have more shots, at a higher strength. They aren't considered to be awesome, though they are ok also.
You seem to really over estimate the disintegrator. Except for taking them on a crappy transport for 75 points per disintegrator, you are limited to a max of 15 in the army. Those 15 cost you 780 points (they do come with RWJF missiles as well, and a rubbish pop gun). Those 15 disintegrators do ~9 wounds to a knight (with max character buffs). That's worse than a drop podding grav dev squad (with the strat and character support) will do in the new codex. Against Guard they kill ~27 (so nearly 3 IS squads!) and against Orks with a KFF they manage to kill 13. They ruin Primaris marines, sure, but what thing common in the meta are disintegrators good against? Claiming they are 15 points in a vacuum is either very ill informed or extremely disingenuous.
Fundamentally, plasma inceptors are suicide units. Very expensive suicide units. Using a 36" gun is not a suicide run. Yes, they suffer vs IG and demons. So does every weapon in the game.
Martel732 wrote: Fundamentally, plasma inceptors are suicide units. Very expensive suicide units. Using a 36" gun is not a suicide run. Yes, they suffer vs IG and demons. So does every weapon in the game.
Ravagers are nto tough and are easy to kill at range. I wasn;t saying they suffer against IG and demons. I was saying they suffer against everything except primaris and, maybe, nobs. In fact I didn't even mention demons.
Martel732 wrote: Fundamentally, plasma inceptors are suicide units.
Not sure if that's going to be true still. With 3Ws per model now and Impulsors being available, I actually think it will be loads easier to ensure Plasmaceptors come in will enough support not to be vaped (except probably by their own hand rolling 1s)
Martel732 wrote: Fundamentally, plasma inceptors are suicide units. Very expensive suicide units. Using a 36" gun is not a suicide run. Yes, they suffer vs IG and demons. So does every weapon in the game.
Ravagers are nto tough and are easy to kill at range. I wasn;t saying they suffer against IG and demons. I was saying they suffer against everything except primaris and, maybe, nobs. In fact I didn't even mention demons.
Ravagers are frustratingly hard to kill. I don't know what yours are getting killed by, but most lists don't have the best tools. Lascannons and other low RoF high AP don't do it.
I'm mentioning demons. Because they are a very important data point. Even still, the S5 2 damage with 3 shots is decent vs PB.
Martel732 wrote: Fundamentally, plasma inceptors are suicide units.
Not sure if that's going to be true still. With 3Ws per model now and Impulsors being available, I actually think it will be loads easier to ensure Plasmaceptors come in will enough support not to be vaped (except probably by their own hand rolling 1s)
-
I'm confident that most lists can still remove a handful of T5 models with no invuln very easily. "Support" in 40K doesn't stop you from being vaporized for the most part. Unless its Azrael. Ignore the stupid marine "support" units, and vaporize the inceptors. Not hard.
Martel732 wrote: Ravagers are frustratingly hard to kill. I don't know what yours are getting killed by, but most lists don't have the best tools. Lascannons and other low RoF high AP don't do it.
I'm confident that most lists can still remove a handful of T5 models with no invuln very easily. "Support" in 40K doesn't stop you from being vaporized for the most part. Unless its Azrael. Ignore the stupid marine "support" units, and vaporize the inceptors. Not hard.
Martel732 wrote: Fundamentally, plasma inceptors are suicide units.
Not sure if that's going to be true still. With 3Ws per model now and Impulsors being available, I actually think it will be loads easier to ensure Plasmaceptors come in will enough support not to be vaped (except probably by their own hand rolling 1s)
-
I'm confident that most lists can still remove a handful of T5 models with no invuln very easily. "Support" in 40K doesn't stop you from being vaporized for the most part. Unless its Azrael. Ignore the stupid marine "support" units, and vaporize the inceptors. Not hard.
Agreed, if they get targeted, they'll still probably die. My point was that they don't have to be the only threat up close anymore, so there could be other targets distracting from them, like Hellblasters that just jumped out of Impulsors
- Why is poison such utter gak? So almost ever 'tough' unit had its wounds increased - often double or triple what they were before - and yet poison remained exactly the same (and it wasn't even good before). Oh yeah, Brilliant wheeze that.
Poison didn't remain exactly the same, it got worse. This is because Venoms went from 12 shots at 36" to 6 shots at 36" and 12 shots at 18". As this is one of our main poison delivery methods (the splinter cannon) it is a pretty big hit. On top of that alot of equivalents in other codexes had their firepower doubled. So everyone else doubled at optimal range, we halved. 12 Shots used to be impressive, especially at the range Venoms could act at. Now Assault Cannon Razroback have that (in 7th they had 4 shots I think!). The increase in toughness on targets you mentioned is then the cherry on top.
Are DE strong at the moment? Yeah, they are, but they are getting weaker as updates come out. They are MUCH weaker than a year ago and some of the boogieman units are no longer that strong. Particularly anything with disintegrators, which are now just worse grav cannons most of the time, how many people are maxing grav cannons again?
FFS a grav cannon is heavy (DE ignore heavy penalties) and cost 28 points prior to this codex. For 1 more shot. with 12" less range. Marines would spam dissie cannons if they could. It is easily the best weapon for the cost in the entire game.
It's not even a weapon I take anymore. What is it good against? A minimum cost for 3 grav cannons is what? 149 points, minimum cost for 3 Disintegrators is 125. Disintegrators can't be taken on infantry. Are they better than grav cannons? Yeah, sure they are, but not that much better. They are worse than plasma guns.
Disintegrators cost 40 points each (including the ravager chassis), more if you take them on anything else. That's... not great. Plasma Inceptors are 59 (so 50% more) and have more shots, at a higher strength. They aren't considered to be awesome, though they are ok also.
You seem to really over estimate the disintegrator. Except for taking them on a crappy transport for 75 points per disintegrator, you are limited to a max of 15 in the army. Those 15 cost you 780 points (they do come with RWJF missiles as well, and a rubbish pop gun). Those 15 disintegrators do ~9 wounds to a knight (with max character buffs). That's worse than a drop podding grav dev squad (with the strat and character support) will do in the new codex. Against Guard they kill ~27 (so nearly 3 IS squads!) and against Orks with a KFF they manage to kill 13. They ruin Primaris marines, sure, but what thing common in the meta are disintegrators good against? Claiming they are 15 points in a vacuum is either very ill informed or extremely disingenuous.
They are good against everything but the cheapest chaff in the game - where they are actually still pretty good there because they have ap-3 so no save. There is a reason tons of eldar armies take 3 dessie night fighters - it's not because dessies aren't good at killing things ether. It's a lot better than a plasmagun, a lot better than a star cannon, it outperforms darklance against vehicles. It's literally a plasma gun with none of the drawbacks. It doesn't slay you - it has good range - and has ROF out to its max range. Are you seriously coming into a thread about marines and talking about base unit costs? Do you know how superior the ravager is to every tool I have in space marines? Wound numbers are the same. T is lower and armor is lower but weapons tend to drop marine units to a 5+ save anyways. Ravagers have 5++. On demand -1 to hit. Better threat range. Way less cost than a predator with the ability to move and shoot with no penalty can always be exactly 36" away from their intended target. Maybe 2-3 units can shoot at a rav at any time realistically. That is not enough to kill it.
Units need to be costed within the ally structure. Or, wait for them to be spammed in settings where data is collected. You need only raise the price till they are no longer spammed. GW goes overboard like with the flyrant triple nerf.
So you see the issue, but you think the fix should be rendering mono codex armies worse because the alliance system sucks ? I can't really say how head in the sand such a fix is. Especially when they already appear to notice the issue as they have been trying to slow roll fixes and nerfs to mix faction forces for awhile now. The latest codex being the ideal sign of that. If they keep pushing these changes to make it less attractive to mixed faction, and more rewarding to mono faction and fix the CPfubar they have going on, it'll be golden, without nerfs.
I have disagreed with a great many of the nerfs they rolled out. The only reason I at all agree with Gmans nerf is the fact that he unavoidably is factored into Marine costing, he's a monster they had to control or else make the only good marine lists Gman centric which sucks from a game play and fluff point of view. We will see what shakes out and if marines turn out better from it all, we'll see.
I disagree with the point raise on cultists as well, if you can dig through past stances. If your BA suck, it isn't Guards fault, as a lot of armies are better than BA, armies that function better without allies even. Look at some of the better nerfs you have seen, many of them are about limiting allies interactions with each other. Unless GW is dim they will start to see, allies make the game difficult to balance, especially with such a large pool of books in imperium armies. No amount of them nerfing Guard will make weaker armies any better, as guard arent the top right now. All you seem to do is want to be spiteful, even after acknowledging their cost isn't what knocks the game off course. I know you'll just respond with the same one sentence response but at some point you have to target the actual issues and not keep scape goating because Guard give you night terrors.
Now on topic of this post, the new marine book could be to blame for them being weaker. Though I don't think that'll be the case. We will need to see though, especially with how the changes alter actual game play and not just mental gymnastics. Until it shakes out, we just don't know for sure. Though we can all say one build to rule them all in a book is an issue to be dealt with, I just hope it shakes out better with the fixes in there.
Your both correct in that simplisticly Martel is correct when he says hoard infantry IG especially are too cheap, butnyour also correct in saying that it's more complex than that.
GW fundamentally fails or systematically undervalues time and time again the value of just having a model stand somewhere in 8th editions rules. This also contributes to a large part ibto why people feel Assualt armies don't work due to the requirements of movement and positioning.
Without this base value being set and then improved stats and abilities being costed on top of the basic value you end up with the mess that is 8th edition hoards, vastly different stats and power levels cosring effectively the same.
This was made even worse with GW's "Hot Fix" (actually makingnit worse) CP system changes which also rewards cheapest slot choices with a significant difference in CP generation.
The Marine's cidex shows the first step along the path to fixing aome of these issues with trying to balance 8th edition mono codex vrs souping. However untill they address the CP system I'm not entirely convinced that they have enough design space to improve certain codex's monobuild without making them the new Yannari.
This, is all I was trying to say and I agree. It's an issue that needs to be fixed and I hope eventually it is. as the current game as it stands ends up punishing monodex with high availability for allies to try and limit issues but really then only pushes you into soup which is what they tried to get away with changing Gman. Gman and friends led to a codex needing to be skewed in case you used Gman, which led to one way to play effectiely which sucks. So, they need to handle their CP and allies issue or else trying to balanced abuse just pushes people to abuse soup as it ends up as the only viable option, same as Gman lists ended up being.
I would much rather this thread be used for discussing the differences between old vs new codex and helping confirm/deny changes, rather than the continued angry bleating from the usual suspects about why the codex isn't good because this one clutch list wasn't made stronger or complaining about guard/knights/whateverthefeth.
My friend had delivery of both the new Codex and ultramarine supplement today. So, the stand out things for him were as follows:
1. Ultramarine doctrine counts all units that have moved but not advanced or fallback moves count as they have not moved. This means free PotMS to all vehicles, constant max range rapid fire shots and continuous double tapping agressors.
Not quite. You have to be in tactical Doctrine - and the constant rapid fire max range doesn't apply to vehicles.
2. For 1CP an ultramarine unit that fell back can ignore the -1 to hit, and be allowed to charge in the charge phase. Confirmed that units with the fly keyword don't suffer the -1 to hit (unless a heavy weapon or it has PotMS) so the strat is really infantry focused, especially with shock assault.
How did you confirm this? I think you're talking about Fall Back and Re-Engage - which is a 1/2 CP strat and doesn't mention Heavy or POTMS.
3. The Psychic power scryers gaze allows you to automatically gain 1CP a turn, or allow a single ultramarine model in a unit to reroll one hit, wound and armour save a turn. Like Victor of the blood games, but can be used on a Sargent of a intercessor squad carrying a thunder hammer for example...
I'm pretty sure it allows one unit or model - it's (surprise surprise) worded poorly but I now lean towards model, to reroll all their hits, OR all their Wounds, OR all their Damage - because it says or not and - and it's the roll not "a". You roll all the hits together so the hit roll is all of them?
Sterling191 wrote: It’s not remotely a blanket guide/doom. All rolls are done individually, even when you fast roll. It’s a single reroll.
Ugh, I had to go through three different books finally to look up the shooting phase saying Heavy 6 is 6 attacks, and a psychic power that uses the word unit twice is about AN attack from A model. At this point 9 times out of 10 or better, I'd rather have the CP. The only thing this gives you can't get reasonably close with Calgar/LT is rerolling the damage roll. So it's pretty much limited to a high random damage shot - Lascannon, Heavy Laser Destroyer (some decent potential there- as it can't get any worse - of course, it can't get much better so take the CP.) and the like.
While the CP is likely more versatile, remember the reroll is one you can use in addition to the CP reroll. Decent pick of you want to line up a shot that has to go through.
I'm just really sad that Crusader Squads cost more than tactical squads, whilst being locked into a meme tier chapter tactic. Maybe they'll get a nifty Super Doctrine when the 'Sons of Dorn' book comes out. Maybe. Maaaybe... probably not.
Sterling191 wrote: While the CP is likely more versatile, remember the reroll is one you can use in addition to the CP reroll. Decent pick of you want to line up a shot that has to go through.
Between Chapter Masters and Lieutenants, you’re already rerolling hits and wounds. Use the command reroll on the damage, regen the CP through a chapter trait and bank an extra.
My friend had delivery of both the new Codex and ultramarine supplement today. So, the stand out things for him were as follows:
1. Ultramarine doctrine counts all units that have moved but not advanced or fallback moves count as they have not moved. This means free PotMS to all vehicles, constant max range rapid fire shots and continuous double tapping agressors.
Not quite. You have to be in tactical Doctrine - and the constant rapid fire max range doesn't apply to vehicles.
2. For 1CP an ultramarine unit that fell back can ignore the -1 to hit, and be allowed to charge in the charge phase. Confirmed that units with the fly keyword don't suffer the -1 to hit (unless a heavy weapon or it has PotMS) so the strat is really infantry focused, especially with shock assault.
How did you confirm this? I think you're talking about Fall Back and Re-Engage - which is a 1/2 CP strat and doesn't mention Heavy or POTMS.
1) UMs have both a Warlord Trait and a Strat that let you pick a unit and assign it a Doctrine for the turn. Using both to get a couple of critical units into Tactical Doctrine turn one feels like it might be a waste of resources though.
2) This was confirmed in a sidebar in one of those two codexes. Don't have it handy for a page reference.
A few things I noticed on my read through that were different from one preview or another:
The Whirlwind / Thunderer strat specifies that it works on an Indirect Fire weapon, not that it works on a target you don't have LoS to. It also doesn't say anything about shooting the same target.
The "go back to a previous doctrine" strat is once per game. The UM "go from Assault to Devastator" strat is not.
The Inflitrator's comm unit only works with Phobos characters.
The Phobos Captain's sniper rifle is Assault 1. Pretty sure it was a Heavy 1 before.
Phobos Lieutenant picked up the new dual knife and can now be a Reiver if he's armed correctly. Not sure why you would, but it's an option...
Iirc Hunters and Stalkers got a strat to reroll to-hit and to-wound when shooting Aircraft. If I'm remembering that wrong and it said Flyers then it's a lot better.
Assault Centurions got cheaper, Devastator Centurions did not. The Centurion Missile Launcher got cheaper though.
Tacs and Assault Marines gor cheaper, Devastator Marines did not. ...I need to check, but I think Jump Packs might have gone back up.
Autobolters being Assault 3 is just what they needed, but they're still 1 point so they're still wrong.
Auxiliary Grenade Launchers are 1 point again.
Base Reivers are now cheaper that Intercessors.
The Assault and Rapid Fire Plasma Incinerators are both 15 points now. The heavy is still 17 for no good reason.
The Icarus pod went up to D2, so that's a bonus for Redemptors.
I thought it was amusing that they wasted the ink reprinting Champions of Humanity since it has done literally nothing since ObSec was introduced.
The Phobos Captain's Master-Crafted Instigator Bolt Carbine never made sense as Heavy. It's a MC version of what the Eliminator Sergeants can take(except worse, kinda, because the Eliminator version lets the squad Overwatch and retreat while the Captain's does not).
Sterling191 wrote: While the CP is likely more versatile, remember the reroll is one you can use in addition to the CP reroll. Decent pick of you want to line up a shot that has to go through.
it's a handy power to have in a list where every CP is dear.
Does anyone else find i weird that the Fists' bolter double hits on sixes trait is not selectable as custom trait? Usually half of the main tactics is selectable, but not so with IF and CF. There is 'Bolter Fusillade' but that's reroll of ones with bolters (strange in an army with captains.) Almost like this was originally what the IF and CF traits did but they changed it and forgot to change the custom trait...
I've noticed that some chapter traits from the first founders are avaliable but not all. although your guess might be right, not a big deal, least so far as I'm concerned. being able to re-roll 1s on bolt weapons is pretty powerful in and of itself used right (it means your basic bolter troopers don't need a captain around em)
Played my first game with Ultra marines vs Custodes. It went surprisingly well. I got to go first. I took 2x batallions so I had 15 CP to start the game. Took an additional relic (seal of oath) so I picked a unit of jetbikers to reroll all hits and wounds. I also took a warlord trait to change a unit to tactical doctrine turn 1.
So I was able to move a 10 man intercessor in range to shoot 40 ap-2 reroll everything bolt guns into a 3 man jetbiker unit. That killed 2 bikes of that bat even in the -1 to hit banner and the prepared positions stratagem. It was insanely powerful in practice. Knights still going be getting wrecked by ultramarines.
Turn 2 I switched to tactical doctrine. Which was kind of underwelming but okay. I was able to move with all my redemptors which ended up slaying hard in CC turn 3. I can definately see how marines who benifit from devestator doctrine are going to be the best though - especially redemptors.
All I can say is the non guilliman build has gone up dramatically. I am really interesting in the iron hands to see what their super doctrine is going to be. We could be looking at a much improved overall space marine experience. Keep in mind I was playing against mono custodes which couldnt really kill my vheicals so my weakness couldn't really be exploited at all.
Xenomancers wrote: Played my first game with Ultra marines vs Custodes. It went surprisingly well. I got to go first. I took 2x batallions so I had 15 CP to start the game. Took an additional relic (seal of oath) so I picked a unit of jetbikers to reroll all hits and wounds. I also took a warlord trait to change a unit to tactical doctrine turn 1.
So I was able to move a 10 man intercessor in range to shoot 40 ap-2 reroll everything bolt guns into a 3 man jetbiker unit. That killed 2 bikes of that bat even in the -1 to hit banner and the prepared positions stratagem. It was insanely powerful in practice. Knights still going be getting wrecked by ultramarines.
Turn 2 I switched to tactical doctrine. Which was kind of underwelming but okay. I was able to move with all my redemptors which ended up slaying hard in CC turn 3. I can definately see how marines who benifit from devestator doctrine are going to be the best though - especially redemptors.
All I can say is the non guilliman build has gone up dramatically. I am really interesting in the iron hands to see what their super doctrine is going to be. We could be looking at a much improved overall space marine experience. Keep in mind I was playing against mono custodes which couldnt really kill my vheicals so my weakness couldn't really be exploited at all.
Xenomancers wrote: Played my first game with Ultra marines vs Custodes. It went surprisingly well. I got to go first. I took 2x batallions so I had 15 CP to start the game. Took an additional relic (seal of oath) so I picked a unit of jetbikers to reroll all hits and wounds. I also took a warlord trait to change a unit to tactical doctrine turn 1.
So I was able to move a 10 man intercessor in range to shoot 40 ap-2 reroll everything bolt guns into a 3 man jetbiker unit. That killed 2 bikes of that bat even in the -1 to hit banner and the prepared positions stratagem. It was insanely powerful in practice. Knights still going be getting wrecked by ultramarines.
Turn 2 I switched to tactical doctrine. Which was kind of underwelming but okay. I was able to move with all my redemptors which ended up slaying hard in CC turn 3. I can definately see how marines who benifit from devestator doctrine are going to be the best though - especially redemptors.
All I can say is the non guilliman build has gone up dramatically. I am really interesting in the iron hands to see what their super doctrine is going to be. We could be looking at a much improved overall space marine experience. Keep in mind I was playing against mono custodes which couldnt really kill my vheicals so my weakness couldn't really be exploited at all.
So, wait a minute, are you saying you actually used the book after all the shouts of " Game over man, Game over ! " and found that it's better than you imagined, and while Gman may have been nerfed, the builds without him have gotten better ? I'm both shocked and amazed. It's almost like waiting to see how something works before freaking out might have some merit to it.
Turn 2 I switched to tactical doctrine. Which was kind of underwelming but okay. I was able to move with all my redemptors which ended up slaying hard in CC turn 3. I can definately see how marines who benifit from devestator doctrine are going to be the best though - especially redemptors.
Heavy is easily the weapon type that's going to benefit most from the doctrines - either being able to move and fire via Scions/Tactical, or the additional save mods in Dev Doctrine for the high volume low AP choices. 8-12 shots per model shows up on a lot of models with heavy weapons. 8-12 attacks shows up on very few models with CCW's - and then it's frequently already on a high APCCW on a beatstick character. I won't be surprised to see UM armies go to Assault Doctrine on Turn 5 or so, as I'll expect them to CP/Stratagem their way back to Dev on Turn 6 or so - without the stratagem I don't see any other army getting as far as Assault Doctrine. Even WS with their bikes are more likely to stay in tactical I think. Unless they also got a Doctrine cycle Stratagem.
There is a stealth buff to guilliman. He can now honor the chapter. He could not do that before. Makes him better at killing, say, a knight, when he needs to.
My friend had delivery of both the new Codex and ultramarine supplement today. So, the stand out things for him were as follows:
1. Ultramarine doctrine counts all units that have moved but not advanced or fallback moves count as they have not moved. This means free PotMS to all vehicles, constant max range rapid fire shots and continuous double tapping agressors.
Not quite. You have to be in tactical Doctrine - and the constant rapid fire max range doesn't apply to vehicles.
2. For 1CP an ultramarine unit that fell back can ignore the -1 to hit, and be allowed to charge in the charge phase. Confirmed that units with the fly keyword don't suffer the -1 to hit (unless a heavy weapon or it has PotMS) so the strat is really infantry focused, especially with shock assault.
How did you confirm this? I think you're talking about Fall Back and Re-Engage - which is a 1/2 CP strat and doesn't mention Heavy or POTMS.
1) UMs have both a Warlord Trait and a Strat that let you pick a unit and assign it a Doctrine for the turn. Using both to get a couple of critical units into Tactical Doctrine turn one feels like it might be a waste of resources though.
2) This was confirmed in a sidebar in one of those two codexes. Don't have it handy for a page reference.
A few things I noticed on my read through that were different from one preview or another:
The Whirlwind / Thunderer strat specifies that it works on an Indirect Fire weapon, not that it works on a target you don't have LoS to. It also doesn't say anything about shooting the same target.
The "go back to a previous doctrine" strat is once per game. The UM "go from Assault to Devastator" strat is not.
The Inflitrator's comm unit only works with Phobos characters.
The Phobos Captain's sniper rifle is Assault 1. Pretty sure it was a Heavy 1 before.
Phobos Lieutenant picked up the new dual knife and can now be a Reiver if he's armed correctly. Not sure why you would, but it's an option...
Iirc Hunters and Stalkers got a strat to reroll to-hit and to-wound when shooting Aircraft. If I'm remembering that wrong and it said Flyers then it's a lot better.
Assault Centurions got cheaper, Devastator Centurions did not. The Centurion Missile Launcher got cheaper though.
Tacs and Assault Marines gor cheaper, Devastator Marines did not. ...I need to check, but I think Jump Packs might have gone back up.
Autobolters being Assault 3 is just what they needed, but they're still 1 point so they're still wrong.
Auxiliary Grenade Launchers are 1 point again.
Base Reivers are now cheaper that Intercessors.
The Assault and Rapid Fire Plasma Incinerators are both 15 points now. The heavy is still 17 for no good reason.
The Icarus pod went up to D2, so that's a bonus for Redemptors.
I thought it was amusing that they wasted the ink reprinting Champions of Humanity since it has done literally nothing since ObSec was introduced.
Assault Marines w/ Jump Packs stayed the same price, 15 a pop. With the Born in the Saddle Strategem, there's a strong case for bikes. All they lose is fly, but for 8 more points you get an extra wound, an extra toughness, RF2 bolters instead of pistols (and if you are WS or UM why do you want pistols?), a bit more movement and access to more special weapons (Plasma Guns, hooo)
stratigo wrote: There is a stealth buff to guilliman. He can now honor the chapter. He could not do that before. Makes him better at killing, say, a knight, when he needs to.
stratigo wrote: There is a stealth buff to guilliman. He can now honor the chapter. He could not do that before. Makes him better at killing, say, a knight, when he needs to.
Only if taken in a Supreme command
stratigo is, I assume, refering to a stratigium. it's a SM fight twice strat.
My friend had delivery of both the new Codex and ultramarine supplement today. So, the stand out things for him were as follows:
1. Ultramarine doctrine counts all units that have moved but not advanced or fallback moves count as they have not moved. This means free PotMS to all vehicles, constant max range rapid fire shots and continuous double tapping agressors.
Not quite. You have to be in tactical Doctrine - and the constant rapid fire max range doesn't apply to vehicles.
2. For 1CP an ultramarine unit that fell back can ignore the -1 to hit, and be allowed to charge in the charge phase. Confirmed that units with the fly keyword don't suffer the -1 to hit (unless a heavy weapon or it has PotMS) so the strat is really infantry focused, especially with shock assault.
How did you confirm this? I think you're talking about Fall Back and Re-Engage - which is a 1/2 CP strat and doesn't mention Heavy or POTMS.
1) UMs have both a Warlord Trait and a Strat that let you pick a unit and assign it a Doctrine for the turn. Using both to get a couple of critical units into Tactical Doctrine turn one feels like it might be a waste of resources though.
2) This was confirmed in a sidebar in one of those two codexes. Don't have it handy for a page reference.
A few things I noticed on my read through that were different from one preview or another:
The Whirlwind / Thunderer strat specifies that it works on an Indirect Fire weapon, not that it works on a target you don't have LoS to. It also doesn't say anything about shooting the same target.
The "go back to a previous doctrine" strat is once per game. The UM "go from Assault to Devastator" strat is not.
The Inflitrator's comm unit only works with Phobos characters.
The Phobos Captain's sniper rifle is Assault 1. Pretty sure it was a Heavy 1 before.
Phobos Lieutenant picked up the new dual knife and can now be a Reiver if he's armed correctly. Not sure why you would, but it's an option...
Iirc Hunters and Stalkers got a strat to reroll to-hit and to-wound when shooting Aircraft. If I'm remembering that wrong and it said Flyers then it's a lot better.
Assault Centurions got cheaper, Devastator Centurions did not. The Centurion Missile Launcher got cheaper though.
Tacs and Assault Marines gor cheaper, Devastator Marines did not. ...I need to check, but I think Jump Packs might have gone back up.
Autobolters being Assault 3 is just what they needed, but they're still 1 point so they're still wrong.
Auxiliary Grenade Launchers are 1 point again.
Base Reivers are now cheaper that Intercessors.
The Assault and Rapid Fire Plasma Incinerators are both 15 points now. The heavy is still 17 for no good reason.
The Icarus pod went up to D2, so that's a bonus for Redemptors.
I thought it was amusing that they wasted the ink reprinting Champions of Humanity since it has done literally nothing since ObSec was introduced.
Assault Marines w/ Jump Packs stayed the same price, 15 a pop. With the Born in the Saddle Strategem, there's a strong case for bikes. All they lose is fly, but for 8 more points you get an extra wound, an extra toughness, RF2 bolters instead of pistols (and if you are WS or UM why do you want pistols?), a bit more movement and access to more special weapons (Plasma Guns, hooo)
So Assault Marines did get cheaper if you wanted to put them in a transport for some reason.
Confirmed that the Hunter/Stalker strat just specifies models with Fly, but it's +1 to hit, +1 to wound, and double damage. That's kind of silly for a single cp.
Xenomancers wrote: Played my first game with Ultra marines vs Custodes. It went surprisingly well. I got to go first. I took 2x batallions so I had 15 CP to start the game. Took an additional relic (seal of oath) so I picked a unit of jetbikers to reroll all hits and wounds. I also took a warlord trait to change a unit to tactical doctrine turn 1.
So I was able to move a 10 man intercessor in range to shoot 40 ap-2 reroll everything bolt guns into a 3 man jetbiker unit. That killed 2 bikes of that bat even in the -1 to hit banner and the prepared positions stratagem. It was insanely powerful in practice. Knights still going be getting wrecked by ultramarines.
Turn 2 I switched to tactical doctrine. Which was kind of underwelming but okay. I was able to move with all my redemptors which ended up slaying hard in CC turn 3. I can definately see how marines who benifit from devestator doctrine are going to be the best though - especially redemptors.
All I can say is the non guilliman build has gone up dramatically. I am really interesting in the iron hands to see what their super doctrine is going to be. We could be looking at a much improved overall space marine experience. Keep in mind I was playing against mono custodes which couldnt really kill my vheicals so my weakness couldn't really be exploited at all.
So, wait a minute, are you saying you actually used the book after all the shouts of " Game over man, Game over ! " and found that it's better than you imagined, and while Gman may have been nerfed, the builds without him have gotten better ? I'm both shocked and amazed. It's almost like waiting to see how something works before freaking out might have some merit to it.
To be fair I didn't have the complete picture and the reviews were pretty terrible as they didn't go into a lot of detail. The biggest upgrade to the codex even with all the bonus rules they got are the stratagem. I mean holy gak there are a lot of stratagems and a lot of them are really good.
Ultramarines in particular are going to be amazing with all their CP generation. Calgar gives you 2 for free and regens on a 5+ so youll likely get one back every turn with that and tiggy with a +1 to cast and a reroll is good for a CP per turn as well with the scryrs gaze spell (which also has a really nice alternate mode which gives you 3 rerolls for a unit of your choice as well). Also without Gman ina list double batallion is in the mix - though I can't really figure out a way to make a brigade work because taking 3 fast attacks (with options you want to take) puts you well over the mark. You can do it - it's just not going to be an ideal list. 2 Batallions allows you to punt the on the units you don't want to take and with clagar and 2 batallions you start with 15 CP. That is a nice amount of CP considering you are going to be getting 1-2 more a turn. Ultramarines have really good stratagems to. The hands down best being the overwatch stratagem which allows you to overwatch with 3 additional units as if they were the target of the charge. This allows you to move up in formation being buffed by all your characters and get into the middle of the board. Even a 3 man custodes biker unit opted not to take a 9 inch charge against me because it just wasn't worth the risk for a long shot.
The ability to take additional warlord traits is fantatic as well because there are a lot of key build defining stratagames as a warlord trait. Like the ability to change to tactic doctrine for 1 unit - very nice. Unhappy about the vet intercessors nerf - I don't think that will be utilized much anymore. However for an additional relic an ultramarine character can give out a 6" +1 attack bubble....1 CP for multiple units to get +1 attack...Okay...GW must really think leadership matters in this game...It does not. You could however make an absolutely crazy melle intercessor army with this build. You'd drop a ton of CP on it but you can have 4 attack intercessors with +1 str from a chaplain dread with vets plus the 6" aura for +1 attack. I don't think it's viable but you could do it. Overall it is exciting to have new builds and have actual stratagems to use. I'll try taking ultras to an ITC and see how it goes in a few weeks. Facing top teir armies might be a completely different experience than facing mono custodies.
EDIT
It's actually more silly. Ultramarines banner also gives +1 attack
So this is pretty funny but you can actually get 20 attacks out of gman in a turn.
7 attacks if he charges
8 for the banner
9 for might of heros
10 for the relic aura.
20 if he fights twice for 3 CP....
My friend had delivery of both the new Codex and ultramarine supplement today. So, the stand out things for him were as follows:
1. Ultramarine doctrine counts all units that have moved but not advanced or fallback moves count as they have not moved. This means free PotMS to all vehicles, constant max range rapid fire shots and continuous double tapping agressors.
Not quite. You have to be in tactical Doctrine - and the constant rapid fire max range doesn't apply to vehicles.
2. For 1CP an ultramarine unit that fell back can ignore the -1 to hit, and be allowed to charge in the charge phase. Confirmed that units with the fly keyword don't suffer the -1 to hit (unless a heavy weapon or it has PotMS) so the strat is really infantry focused, especially with shock assault.
How did you confirm this? I think you're talking about Fall Back and Re-Engage - which is a 1/2 CP strat and doesn't mention Heavy or POTMS.
1) UMs have both a Warlord Trait and a Strat that let you pick a unit and assign it a Doctrine for the turn. Using both to get a couple of critical units into Tactical Doctrine turn one feels like it might be a waste of resources though.
2) This was confirmed in a sidebar in one of those two codexes. Don't have it handy for a page reference.
A few things I noticed on my read through that were different from one preview or another:
The Whirlwind / Thunderer strat specifies that it works on an Indirect Fire weapon, not that it works on a target you don't have LoS to. It also doesn't say anything about shooting the same target.
The "go back to a previous doctrine" strat is once per game. The UM "go from Assault to Devastator" strat is not.
The Inflitrator's comm unit only works with Phobos characters.
The Phobos Captain's sniper rifle is Assault 1. Pretty sure it was a Heavy 1 before.
Phobos Lieutenant picked up the new dual knife and can now be a Reiver if he's armed correctly. Not sure why you would, but it's an option...
Iirc Hunters and Stalkers got a strat to reroll to-hit and to-wound when shooting Aircraft. If I'm remembering that wrong and it said Flyers then it's a lot better.
Assault Centurions got cheaper, Devastator Centurions did not. The Centurion Missile Launcher got cheaper though.
Tacs and Assault Marines gor cheaper, Devastator Marines did not. ...I need to check, but I think Jump Packs might have gone back up.
Autobolters being Assault 3 is just what they needed, but they're still 1 point so they're still wrong.
Auxiliary Grenade Launchers are 1 point again.
Base Reivers are now cheaper that Intercessors.
The Assault and Rapid Fire Plasma Incinerators are both 15 points now. The heavy is still 17 for no good reason.
The Icarus pod went up to D2, so that's a bonus for Redemptors.
I thought it was amusing that they wasted the ink reprinting Champions of Humanity since it has done literally nothing since ObSec was introduced.
Assault Marines w/ Jump Packs stayed the same price, 15 a pop. With the Born in the Saddle Strategem, there's a strong case for bikes. All they lose is fly, but for 8 more points you get an extra wound, an extra toughness, RF2 bolters instead of pistols (and if you are WS or UM why do you want pistols?), a bit more movement and access to more special weapons (Plasma Guns, hooo)
So Assault Marines did get cheaper if you wanted to put them in a transport for some reason.
Confirmed that the Hunter/Stalker strat just specifies models with Fly, but it's +1 to hit, +1 to wound, and double damage. That's kind of silly for a single cp.
Sooooooo the 3" to range weapons and the +1 to charge out of a Drop Pod? Not good but there ya go.
Yep - always better to reserve judgement and not get upset about respulor nerf which honestly isn't going to matter much.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also guys I Just looked thorugh the whole codex and found a nice little bonus. You can take a terminator ancient now - and hes got a power fist and storm bolter. So you get a 5++ invo and 2+ save for those pesk snipers. Getting a little melle out of your ancient is a plus - typically he wants to be on the front line and charges anyways to be where he needs to be. Now he can be better protected and do something - kinda pricey at 98 points if my math is right in my head. If you've got the points to spare not to terrible of an idea.
Xenomancers wrote: The biggest upgrade to the codex even with all the bonus rules they got are the stratagem. I mean holy gak there are a lot of stratagems and a lot of them are really good.
Ultramarines in particular are going to be amazing with all their CP generation.
I fething said this! I said the Ultras were good for this reason! Having a ton of CP is a huge benefit for marines now But noo! "Muh glorious primarch is nerfed, woe is me, all is ruined!"
Xenomancers wrote: The biggest upgrade to the codex even with all the bonus rules they got are the stratagem. I mean holy gak there are a lot of stratagems and a lot of them are really good.
Ultramarines in particular are going to be amazing with all their CP generation.
I fething said this! I said the Ultras were good for this reason! Having a ton of CP is a huge benefit for marines now But noo! "Muh glorious primarch is nerfed, woe is me, all is ruined!"
I hate to break it to you. He is actually buffed as a fighter. Hit him with MOH and he goes to str 9 with the sword which will wound on 3's and he still rerolls 1. The power of the sword though is rolling 6's to wound. D3 mortals each time. So additional attacks really make his beastly. Now that he can fight twice for 3 cp...he going to kill twice as much and maybe more because of other +1 attack abilities. I am having fun not including him in lists right now but holy crap. 20 Gman attacks isn't even fair dude.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
godardc wrote: Would you say Hunter / stalker are worth taking now ? My main opponent love to play his twin flyrants...
Yeah absolutely - stalker. They have always been a pretty good choice. Throw chronus into one for some SNG's. Pop the stratagem and 1 shot the flyer even on the move. You are also ap-2 in devastator doctrine as well. So even if he has cover hes only getting a 4+ save. A hunter is probably the best use of the ultramarine auto hitting ability too. Scryers gaze gives you a reroll wound and damage result too. If he fails a save and you roll a 6 (2 chances) hes 1 shot.
Xenomancers wrote: hate to break it to you. He is actually buffed as a fighter. Hit him with MOH and he goes to str 9 with the sword which will wound on 3's and he still rerolls 1. The power of the sword though is rolling 6's to wound. D3 mortals each time. So additional attacks really make his beastly. Now that he can fight twice for 3 cp...he going to kill twice as much and maybe more because of other +1 attack abilities. I am having fun not including him in lists right now but holy crap. 20 Gman attacks isn't even fair dude.
JFC! Almost like all that wailing and gnashing of teeth and crying about your nerfed primarch for who knows how many pages was completely baseless! I really wish this would teach you some self awareness but I'm not exactly holding my breath here.
ing 
