Not Online!!! wrote: Honestly, i think the kellermorph, shouldn't have been a gunslinger but a saboteur.
High explosives, and a Stub carbine. Heck even a special one if need be.
Why? Because a mighty Astartes should be impervious to mere bullets?
Not Online!!! wrote: Honestly, i think the kellermorph, shouldn't have been a gunslinger but a saboteur.
High explosives, and a Stub carbine. Heck even a special one if need be.
Why? Because a mighty Astartes should be impervious to mere bullets?
No because for a guerilla faction that infiltrates all echelons of society, a dude with Stubgun, is a bloody shame. Especially because there exists a stubgun profile for 40k allready.
It's Range 6 S 3 Ap0 D 1.
Give the dude high explosives and a variety of high quality weaponry like the aftermentioned stubcarabine, a specially modified Autogun, etc. Instead of making him John wayne in space.
Not Online!!! wrote: Honestly, i think the kellermorph, shouldn't have been a gunslinger but a saboteur.
High explosives, and a Stub carbine. Heck even a special one if need be.
Why? Because a mighty Astartes should be impervious to mere bullets?
No because for a guerilla faction that infiltrates all echelons of society, a dude with Stubgun, is a bloody shame. Especially because there exists a stubgun profile for 40k allready.
It's Range 6 S 3 Ap0 D 1.
Give the dude high explosives and a variety of high quality weaponry like the aftermentioned stubcarabine, a specially modified Autogun, etc. Instead of making him John wayne in space.
He has "specially modified" (rare and high quality) pistols. I don't understand what you're asking for? Are you just complaining because GSC got something that was too cool and you hate that fact? The model is super popular.
The complaints about the Kellermorph could have something to do with the "ooh super gunslinger hero unit with inexplicably awesome pistols" fitting more with the cartoon-video-game aesthetic GW seems determined to push towards rather than the wargame aesthetic they're moving away from.
AnomanderRake wrote: The complaints about the Kellermorph could have something to do with the "ooh super gunslinger hero unit with inexplicably awesome pistols" fitting more with the cartoon-video-game aesthetic GW seems determined to push towards rather than the wargame aesthetic they're moving away from.
They aren't that inexplicably awesome. Give him 3 plasma pistols and holy gak it'd be crazy. So he's got a bit of a gunslinger vibe - Catachans have Predator/Vietnam era vibes, Krieg has WWI era vibes, etc. Nothing out of the ordinary there. Honestly it legitimately sounds like Astartes players upset that another faction got something cool.
AnomanderRake wrote: The complaints about the Kellermorph could have something to do with the "ooh super gunslinger hero unit with inexplicably awesome pistols" fitting more with the cartoon-video-game aesthetic GW seems determined to push towards rather than the wargame aesthetic they're moving away from.
They aren't that inexplicably awesome. Give him 3 plasma pistols and holy gak it'd be crazy. So he's got a bit of a gunslinger vibe - Catachans have Predator/Vietnam era vibes, Krieg has WWI era vibes, etc. Nothing out of the ordinary there. Honestly it legitimately sounds like Astartes players upset that another faction got something cool.
Am not even an astartes player, but besides that.
He doesn't even fit well with the aesthetique and the rest of the style of the faction. He just comparatively doesn't really fit in. Neither doctrine wise, nor style wise
And he doesn't even "not fit in" in a good way.
When i think of GSC and their infiltration and focus on mining, hiding and especially on infiltration of: military, PDF, Elites, I think of stuff like the nexos, magus, sanctus, the rider thingy with a sniperrifle on more rural worlds.
I also think sabotage and ambush, yet there is not one HQ for Sabotage?
Basically 99% of the faction is Ambush, sabotage, cold calculated alien planning, bio horror/ terrorism.... and then western style heroism?
Slayer-Fan123 792175 10936989 wrote:
If it isn't consistent toppings you don't prove a point.
Well that kind of a depends, when someone in your weight class floors all opponents his age to a point where some entries start faking injuries and droping out of an event, to not fight the "crazy" Azer looks more like 20 then 16, then he really doesn't have to win 10 events over a whole seson to be considered good.
So yeah, there were like 3 big wins for GK armies in large tournaments. I think it is and was awesome on the players side. But at the same time it is rather hard to imagine GK being good prior PA, specialy outside of tournament. GK ain't eldar, their casual builds are not beating other armies tournament lists on a 50/50 basis.
Again seems like I used the wrong example with GK. The 8th csm split in to multiple books was bad too. Worse even with the extra books. GW does it all the time. In 9th the split the rule book from the missions you need to actualy play the game.
Everyone arguing fluff comparison is completely missing the point. It's a damn game and the unit serves a purpose to the army in the form of a character assassin. It's stats need to represent it's role and be effective at doing it's job.
It doesn't mater if you can't figure out what the gun is shooting. It doesn't mater if you think it would be more thematic to double or triple down on the saboteur aspect. The faction got a character assassin unit (which ALSO fits with that theme btw) and it's stat line and weapons did the job the army needed it to.
Not Online!!! wrote: i guess served is a better description of the state of affairs.
And frankly, wasn't that role for the faction allready filled, with the sanctus?
Who gives a gak? Many armies have multiple units that do the same job. Why do SM have bikes, speeders, and jump pack infantry? If Necron infantry want to go fast they have their bikes. Thats it. If Tau infantry want to go fast they have vespids. Thats it. Multiple units in an army filling a similar or same role is not uncommon.
You get 2 flavors of character assassin in the GSC army list. Complaining because one of them has guns that do it's job is dumb as hell.
Nids get Lictors and Deathleaper. 2 units supposedly both supposed to be character assassins. Neither is effective at it's job.
Not Online!!! wrote: i guess served is a better description of the state of affairs.
And frankly, wasn't that role for the faction allready filled, with the sanctus?
Who gives a gak? Many armies have multiple units that do the same job. Why do SM have bikes, speeders, and jump pack infantry? If Necron infantry want to go fast they have their bikes. Thats it. If Tau infantry want to go fast they have vespids. Thats it. Multiple units in an army filling a similar or same role is not uncommon.
You get 2 flavors of character assassin in the GSC army list. Complaining because one of them has guns that do it's job is dumb as hell.
Why have 2 charachters that do the same thing, when one solves the issues allready and you still have a vast hole in the army doctrine and fighting style`?
it would've been better to fill that hole first, but GW do GW.
Nids get Lictors and Deathleaper. 2 units supposedly both supposed to be character assassins. Neither is effective at it's job.
Don't get me started on that ... Get rid of one, or fold it together as an upgrade, give out a nice model , and finally fix the rules to make it work...
Hellebore wrote:That's a crappy comparison between auto weapons.
Have you seen how many BOLT weapons there are the ridiculously absurd number of different profiles they have?
Heavy bolt rifles
auto bolt rifles
heavy bolt pistols
that executor one or whatever it's called
occulus
sniper
blah blah bolter
etc etc
If marines can have 50+ bolt variants then it's beyond trivial for ONE bloody model to get a gun that's SLIGHTLY better than other variants of the gun.
No one's been screaming the world down because there are now more bolter variants than units types in xenos armies, but one xenos army gets a single weapon that's slightly better than a normal one and oh no we can't have that.
The entitlement is gross.
Not an Astartes player. I actually don't care about the Kellermorph's gun. I'm just pointing out that any criticism of that gun is valid. It's stats are bonkers for what it is supposed to be. GW tosses out Mastercrafted weapons like popcorn and they are are exactly +1 Damage. But the Kellermorph's Liberator Autostub is +1 Attack, +1 S, -1 AP, +1 S compared to a Autopistol.
As for nobody complaining about the proliferation of Astartes Bolt weapons, you must not be paying attention to the many threads about Marines on this forum. People are constantly pointing out how ludicrous the Space Marine weapon proliferation is.
Hellebore wrote:That's a crappy comparison between auto weapons.
Have you seen how many BOLT weapons there are the ridiculously absurd number of different profiles they have?
Heavy bolt rifles
auto bolt rifles
heavy bolt pistols
that executor one or whatever it's called
occulus
sniper
blah blah bolter
etc etc
If marines can have 50+ bolt variants then it's beyond trivial for ONE bloody model to get a gun that's SLIGHTLY better than other variants of the gun.
No one's been screaming the world down because there are now more bolter variants than units types in xenos armies, but one xenos army gets a single weapon that's slightly better than a normal one and oh no we can't have that.
The entitlement is gross.
Not an Astartes player. I actually don't care about the Kellermorph's gun. I'm just pointing out that any criticism of that gun is valid. It's stats are bonkers for what it is supposed to be. GW tosses out Mastercrafted weapons like popcorn and they are are exactly +1 Damage. But the Kellermorph's Liberator Autostub is +1 Attack, +1 S, -1 AP, +1 S compared to a Autopistol.
^How many different types of handguns and bullets exist in reality?
harlokin wrote: An Imperial Inquisitor has the best Shuriken Catapult in the game, better than the one used by Asurman, the first Phoenix Lord...
If that makes sense....
When I first saw the model I thought it was a dire avangers autarch, worse I thought it was a dude eldar.
Wouldn't be the first time GW missed the vision for a faction and it's design representation in the rules by a mile, now wouldn't it
And because of the no model, no rules it become comical sometimes. The range phobo Lt, can deploy close tot he enemy with a pack, while the character melee killer phobos Lt has to hoof it from his own deployment zone.
But maybe they will get a rewrite, along side reavers in the up coming codex. Because the way they work now, with both intercessors and assault intercessors as troops, is just sad for people who may like the models.
Not Online!!! wrote: i guess served is a better description of the state of affairs.
And frankly, wasn't that role for the faction allready filled, with the sanctus?
Who gives a gak? Many armies have multiple units that do the same job. Why do SM have bikes, speeders, and jump pack infantry? If Necron infantry want to go fast they have their bikes. Thats it. If Tau infantry want to go fast they have vespids. Thats it. Multiple units in an army filling a similar or same role is not uncommon.
You get 2 flavors of character assassin in the GSC army list. Complaining because one of them has guns that do it's job is dumb as hell.
Why have 2 charachters that do the same thing, when one solves the issues allready and you still have a vast hole in the army doctrine and fighting style`?
it would've been better to fill that hole first, but GW do GW.
Nids get Lictors and Deathleaper. 2 units supposedly both supposed to be character assassins. Neither is effective at it's job.
Don't get me started on that ... Get rid of one, or fold it together as an upgrade, give out a nice model , and finally fix the rules to make it work...
"Lets make Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions into one unit and make it work."
"Let's fold Zoanthropes and Neurothropes into one unit and make it work"
"Let's fold Chaplains with Jump Packs and Vanguard into one unit and make it work."
"Let's . . . ."
Regarding the Liberator Autostub, do you think that this is an issue more with the name/fluff than anything else?
Given the connection to Tyranids, you'd think that the Kelermorph could have guns that fire psychically-charged rounds, or something to that effect. Hell, you could have them be bio-mechanical, or utilise knowledge that should be well outside of the planet's level (so that they're dramatically better, in spite of technological limits).
Then again, I might be a bit biased as I really don't care for the Kelermorph's fluff or design in general.
Lore, old options, but the most important thing of all. If GW makes 21 characters for marines, they seem to sell. I have a feeling, that if they made 21 GSCHQ options,t hey would not sell as well.
Lore, old options, but the most important thing of all. If GW makes 21 characters for marines, they seem to sell. I have a feeling, that if they made 21 GSCHQ options,t hey would not sell as well.
Obviously. But that's not exactly a "Game design" argument to make.
Not Online!!! wrote: i guess served is a better description of the state of affairs.
And frankly, wasn't that role for the faction allready filled, with the sanctus?
Who gives a gak? Many armies have multiple units that do the same job. Why do SM have bikes, speeders, and jump pack infantry? If Necron infantry want to go fast they have their bikes. Thats it. If Tau infantry want to go fast they have vespids. Thats it. Multiple units in an army filling a similar or same role is not uncommon.
You get 2 flavors of character assassin in the GSC army list. Complaining because one of them has guns that do it's job is dumb as hell.
Why have 2 charachters that do the same thing, when one solves the issues allready and you still have a vast hole in the army doctrine and fighting style`?
it would've been better to fill that hole first, but GW do GW.
Why have 21 Space Marine HQ choices?
Not the same situation, one army still lacks a key component, (well a component one would expect) whilest the other is saturated, overly so in some cases.
"Lets make Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions into one unit and make it work."
"Let's fold Zoanthropes and Neurothropes into one unit and make it work"
"Let's fold Chaplains with Jump Packs and Vanguard into one unit and make it work."
"Let's . . . ."
Folding together OR getting rid of one. If folded togehter make a nice kit out of it with the leaper beeing an Upgraded version. You know, like the bloody upgrades that were once common to units, it'd even have models to have rules thanks to GW's nonsense.
also not the same, but a consolidation for say Chaos lords with terminator armor, jumppacks foot etc, would certainly improve overall the situation instead of having 5 seperate bloody entries.
Lore, old options, but the most important thing of all. If GW makes 21 characters for marines, they seem to sell. I have a feeling, that if they made 21 GSCHQ options,t hey would not sell as well.
Obviously. But that's not exactly a "Game design" argument to make.
If you think about it though, 21 choices is mostly a grand illusion done to create unit entries. You have Captains, Librarians, Leuitenants, Chaplains, and Techmarines, and then whatever Primaris versions exist of each. That's 10 without consolidation of profiles (which should really happen with the HQs). Saying there is 21 is openly saying GW created a separate entry for a Captain on a bike for no real reason.
Lore, old options, but the most important thing of all. If GW makes 21 characters for marines, they seem to sell. I have a feeling, that if they made 21 GSCHQ options,t hey would not sell as well.
Obviously. But that's not exactly a "Game design" argument to make.
I think it is very much a game design argument. Something sells more, so we give more similar things for people to buy, and because GW has a paradigma of no rules without a model. We end up with 21 marine HQs, on top of it they give all marine factions at least 1 new model when the codex comes out. And it is easier to make another hero, then a new unit.
Not Online!!! wrote: i guess served is a better description of the state of affairs.
And frankly, wasn't that role for the faction allready filled, with the sanctus?
Who gives a gak? Many armies have multiple units that do the same job. Why do SM have bikes, speeders, and jump pack infantry? If Necron infantry want to go fast they have their bikes. Thats it. If Tau infantry want to go fast they have vespids. Thats it. Multiple units in an army filling a similar or same role is not uncommon.
You get 2 flavors of character assassin in the GSC army list. Complaining because one of them has guns that do it's job is dumb as hell.
Why have 2 charachters that do the same thing, when one solves the issues allready and you still have a vast hole in the army doctrine and fighting style`?
it would've been better to fill that hole first, but GW do GW.
Why have 21 Space Marine HQ choices?
Not the same situation, one army still lacks a key component, (well a component one would expect) whilest the other is saturated, overly so in some cases.
"Saturated"
Have you looked at the marine book recently? Or the number of Imperial factions? And you're going to complain about a little overlap between two characters? You're serious aren't you?
"Lets make Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions into one unit and make it work."
"Let's fold Zoanthropes and Neurothropes into one unit and make it work"
"Let's fold Chaplains with Jump Packs and Vanguard into one unit and make it work."
"Let's . . . ."
Folding together OR getting rid of one. If folded togehter make a nice kit out of it with the leaper beeing an Upgraded version. You know, like the bloody upgrades that were once common to units, it'd even have models to have rules thanks to GW's nonsense.
also not the same, but a consolidation for say Chaos lords with terminator armor, jumppacks foot etc, would certainly improve overall the situation instead of having 5 seperate bloody entries.
So what's the bigger offender. . . Kelermorph or 30 Bolt wepons?
Lore, old options, but the most important thing of all. If GW makes 21 characters for marines, they seem to sell. I have a feeling, that if they made 21 GSCHQ options,t hey would not sell as well.
Obviously. But that's not exactly a "Game design" argument to make.
I think it is very much a game design argument. Something sells more, so we give more similar things for people to buy, and because GW has a paradigma of no rules without a model. We end up with 21 marine HQs, on top of it they give all marine factions at least 1 new model when the codex comes out. And it is easier to make another hero, then a new unit.
That's a business decision, not a decision motivated by game design.
Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
Not Online!!! wrote: Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
Which is a fine opinion to have but completely irrelevant to THIS discusion about the kellermorphs stat line and subsequent nerf.
The opinion that GSC could use a different character filling a different role has nothing to do with anything being discussed here.
I don't really understand why the Kelermorph upsets people for fluff reasons. The cries of "noooo, he should have 3 S3 AP- shots" just came across as so weird. Such would be... quite useless.
Going "Liberator autostubs=bad, volkite gyro-devourer uzi? Oh that's fine then." just doesn't make much sense to me.
I think there was an argument he had too good offensive firepower for just 60 points - but once it became clear he was impossible to screen and so was almost always a fire and forget missile (admittedly with potential double shooting at the cost of CP and sacrificing that stratagem on something else) those complaints receded. Also if he wasn't 1 per detachment.
Not Online!!! wrote: Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
You know the Imperium has four different types of assassins, right? Not even counting the Death Cult Assassins.
Am not even an astartes player, but besides that.
He doesn't even fit well with the aesthetique and the rest of the style of the faction. He just comparatively doesn't really fit in. Neither doctrine wise, nor style wise
And he doesn't even "not fit in" in a good way.
When i think of GSC and their infiltration and focus on mining, hiding and especially on infiltration of: military, PDF, Elites, I think of stuff like the nexos, magus, sanctus, the rider thingy with a sniperrifle on more rural worlds.
I also think sabotage and ambush, yet there is not one HQ for Sabotage?
To be honest, you're wrong.
Not Online!!! wrote: Why have 2 charachters that do the same thing, when one solves the issues allready and you still have a vast hole in the army doctrine and fighting style`?
it would've been better to fill that hole first, but GW do GW.
That isn't an argument against the Kelermorph. What is your actual argument against it?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tyel wrote: I don't really understand why the Kelermorph upsets people for fluff reasons. The cries of "noooo, he should have 3 S3 AP- shots" just came across as so weird. Such would be... quite useless.
It's literally people who think that GSC shouldn't have nice things, rules wise *or* fluff wise *or* model wise. They have to have others' play experience be worse to be satisfied.
Not Online!!! wrote: Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
You know the Imperium has four different types of assassins, right? Not even counting the Death Cult Assassins.
What role should have been filled instead?
It's not worth the discussion, Not Online is arguing the army is lacking in a few other key points so adding another unit entry that performs a similar/same role as another didn't add value to the army. That's not wrong but likewise replacing the kellermorph with a different 1 model character unit isn't going to fix the army either.
Imperium is spoiled with a glut of options by definition, despite that the 5 assassins do all have different functions at least.
Tyel wrote: I don't really understand why the Kelermorph upsets people for fluff reasons.
If you mean me, I don't care about the stats of his weapons. I just find the whole 'false hero of the people' thing absurd.
Are you really telling me no one stops to question why this "hero" has an extra limb? And unlike the Locus and his tail, it's not even as if the Kelermorph goes out of the way to hide that particular feature.
Am not even an astartes player, but besides that.
He doesn't even fit well with the aesthetique and the rest of the style of the faction. He just comparatively doesn't really fit in. Neither doctrine wise, nor style wise
And he doesn't even "not fit in" in a good way.
When i think of GSC and their infiltration and focus on mining, hiding and especially on infiltration of: military, PDF, Elites, I think of stuff like the nexos, magus, sanctus, the rider thingy with a sniperrifle on more rural worlds.
I also think sabotage and ambush, yet there is not one HQ for Sabotage?
To be honest, you're wrong.
Not Online!!! wrote: Why have 2 charachters that do the same thing, when one solves the issues allready and you still have a vast hole in the army doctrine and fighting style`?
it would've been better to fill that hole first, but GW do GW.
That isn't an argument against the Kelermorph. What is your actual argument against it?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tyel wrote: I don't really understand why the Kelermorph upsets people for fluff reasons. The cries of "noooo, he should have 3 S3 AP- shots" just came across as so weird. Such would be... quite useless.
It's literally people who think that GSC shouldn't have nice things, rules wise *or* fluff wise *or* model wise. They have to have others' play experience be worse to be satisfied.
Not Online is actually suggesting making the army stronger by giving them units that don't duplicate roles. That's the opposite of what you're ranting about. He's suggesting they get more, better toys.
Not Online!!! wrote: Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
You know the Imperium has four different types of assassins, right? Not even counting the Death Cult Assassins.
What role should have been filled instead?
It's not worth the discussion, Not Online is arguing the army is lacking in a few other key points so adding another unit entry that performs a similar/same role as another didn't add value to the army. That's not wrong but likewise replacing the kellermorph with a different 1 model character unit isn't going to fix the army either.
Imperium is spoiled with a glut of options by definition, despite that the 5 assassins do all have different functions at least.
This, the kellermorph couldve been an actual usefull choice instead of beeing an assasin that then promptly got nerfed into the ground.
Not Online!!! wrote: Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
You know the Imperium has four different types of assassins, right? Not even counting the Death Cult Assassins.
What role should have been filled instead?
It's not worth the discussion, Not Online is arguing the army is lacking in a few other key points so adding another unit entry that performs a similar/same role as another didn't add value to the army. That's not wrong but likewise replacing the kellermorph with a different 1 model character unit isn't going to fix the army either.
Imperium is spoiled with a glut of options by definition, despite that the 5 assassins do all have different functions at least.
This, the kellermorph couldve been an actual usefull choice instead of beeing an assasin that then promptly got nerfed into the ground.
Gosh, you think it would still be useful if it weren't nerfed into the ground?
Not Online!!! wrote: Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
You know the Imperium has four different types of assassins, right? Not even counting the Death Cult Assassins.
What role should have been filled instead?
It's not worth the discussion, Not Online is arguing the army is lacking in a few other key points so adding another unit entry that performs a similar/same role as another didn't add value to the army. That's not wrong but likewise replacing the kellermorph with a different 1 model character unit isn't going to fix the army either.
Imperium is spoiled with a glut of options by definition, despite that the 5 assassins do all have different functions at least.
Not Online!!! wrote: Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
You know the Imperium has four different types of assassins, right? Not even counting the Death Cult Assassins.
What role should have been filled instead?
It's not worth the discussion, Not Online is arguing the army is lacking in a few other key points so adding another unit entry that performs a similar/same role as another didn't add value to the army. That's not wrong but likewise replacing the kellermorph with a different 1 model character unit isn't going to fix the army either.
Imperium is spoiled with a glut of options by definition, despite that the 5 assassins do all have different functions at least.
This, the kellermorph couldve been an actual usefull choice instead of beeing an assasin that then promptly got nerfed into the ground.
Gosh, you think it would still be useful if it weren't nerfed into the ground?
Har har, but yes of course, because there are roles and capabilities that Make Units more nerf resistant then beeing a high dakka asassin.
Not Online!!! wrote: Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
You know the Imperium has four different types of assassins, right? Not even counting the Death Cult Assassins.
What role should have been filled instead?
It's not worth the discussion, Not Online is arguing the army is lacking in a few other key points so adding another unit entry that performs a similar/same role as another didn't add value to the army. That's not wrong but likewise replacing the kellermorph with a different 1 model character unit isn't going to fix the army either.
Imperium is spoiled with a glut of options by definition, despite that the 5 assassins do all have different functions at least.
This, the kellermorph couldve been an actual usefull choice instead of beeing an assasin that then promptly got nerfed into the ground.
Gosh, you think it would still be useful if it weren't nerfed into the ground?
Har har, but yes of course, because there are roles and capabilities that Make Units more nerf resistant then beeing a high dakka asassin.
So being a "high dakka assassin" isn't a viable role?
Not Online!!! wrote: Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
You know the Imperium has four different types of assassins, right? Not even counting the Death Cult Assassins.
What role should have been filled instead?
It's not worth the discussion, Not Online is arguing the army is lacking in a few other key points so adding another unit entry that performs a similar/same role as another didn't add value to the army. That's not wrong but likewise replacing the kellermorph with a different 1 model character unit isn't going to fix the army either.
Imperium is spoiled with a glut of options by definition, despite that the 5 assassins do all have different functions at least.
This, the kellermorph couldve been an actual usefull choice instead of beeing an assasin that then promptly got nerfed into the ground.
Gosh, you think it would still be useful if it weren't nerfed into the ground?
Har har, but yes of course, because there are roles and capabilities that Make Units more nerf resistant then beeing a high dakka asassin.
So being a "high dakka assassin" isn't a viable role?
No it would be but considering gw's track record of allowing assasins to work and having high dakka.... Eehh predestinated nerf target....
Not Online!!! wrote: Dude Like i said i am no astartes player.
And yes i am going to complain, not about the kellermorph as a unit but as a role that was filled whilest there still is a hole in the faction that should be filled instead.
You know the Imperium has four different types of assassins, right? Not even counting the Death Cult Assassins.
What role should have been filled instead?
It's not worth the discussion, Not Online is arguing the army is lacking in a few other key points so adding another unit entry that performs a similar/same role as another didn't add value to the army. That's not wrong but likewise replacing the kellermorph with a different 1 model character unit isn't going to fix the army either.
Imperium is spoiled with a glut of options by definition, despite that the 5 assassins do all have different functions at least.
This, the kellermorph couldve been an actual usefull choice instead of beeing an assasin that then promptly got nerfed into the ground.
Gosh, you think it would still be useful if it weren't nerfed into the ground?
Har har, but yes of course, because there are roles and capabilities that Make Units more nerf resistant then beeing a high dakka asassin.
So being a "high dakka assassin" isn't a viable role?
The bigg issue is it is an instant feels bad unit, if it does it's job the reciever of said assassination has just lost a key part of their army (stupid aura buffbots) or the kellormorf whiffs and the GSC player feels bad for taking said unit.
GW really need to decied do they want player agency or not and then build a game play paradigm and stick too it, not keep moving the goal posts every 3 codex's.
But Not Online is right assassins have always gone through woefully inept as when they finally get made to work like one shot wonders it's kinda sucky watching them destroy key charictors with zero defence.
Ice_can wrote: The bigg issue is it is an instant feels bad unit, if it does it's job the reciever of said assassination has just lost a key part of their army (stupid aura buffbots) or the kellormorf whiffs and the GSC player feels bad for taking said unit.
Honestly I don't give a gak if Little Timmy feels bad that his Astartes captain got assassinated. GSC players can take the wiff in stride. Players need to be able to make meaningful decisions in-game with consequences, otherwise it isn't a game, just "cinematic dice rolling" like Kirby used to say.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not Online!!! wrote: No it would be but considering gw's track record of allowing assasins to work and having high dakka.... Eehh predestinated nerf target....
The argument, then, is that GW shouldn't have nerfed it, if we're being intellectually honest.
Ice_can wrote: The bigg issue is it is an instant feels bad unit, if it does it's job the reciever of said assassination has just lost a key part of their army (stupid aura buffbots) or the kellormorf whiffs and the GSC player feels bad for taking said unit.
Honestly I don't give a gak if Little Timmy feels bad that his Astartes captain got assassinated. GSC players can take the wiff in stride. Players need to be able to make meaningful decisions in-game with consequences, otherwise it isn't a game, just "cinematic dice rolling" like Kirby used to say.
you might not care but GW does as they are supposedly trying to remove feelbad moments unless your playing against marines but it is what it is.
Ice_can wrote: you might not care but GW does as they are supposedly trying to remove feelbad moments unless your playing against marines but it is what it is.
Yes, and it's wrongheaded. The whole point is we're criticizing the decision as wrong.
Ice_can wrote: you might not care but GW does as they are supposedly trying to remove feelbad moments unless your playing against marines but it is what it is.
Yes, and it's wrongheaded. The whole point is we're criticizing the decision as wrong.
I agree but it's been this way for 20 years, every time they make assasins that work they either cost as much as a tank or throw snowballs.
GW seems to want to give people assasins just not ones that work.
Not Online!!! wrote:Instead of making him John wayne in space.
That's what sold me on the model.
Totally fits the aesthetic, fits in with the lore, and if it doesn't for your GSC, don't get one. Bikes don't fit my ideal aesthetic for Space Marines, so I don't often take them, but I don't complain they shouldn't exist.
Xenomancers wrote: Personally wielding revolvers in setting where lascannons are a common thing...makes me feel like I am in a bad episode of Enterprise...
Wouldn't it be a lot cooler if he had laser pistols?
All episodes of Enterprise are bad.
I dunno, I like the BLAM BLAM BLAM over the PEW PEW PEW. I'm thinking triple wielding S+W 500s.
Xenomancers wrote: Personally wielding revolvers in setting where lascannons are a common thing...makes me feel like I am in a bad episode of Enterprise...
Wouldn't it be a lot cooler if he had laser pistols?
All episodes of Enterprise are bad.
I dunno, I like the BLAM BLAM BLAM over the PEW PEW PEW. I'm thinking triple wielding S+W 500s.
Xenomancers wrote: Personally wielding revolvers in setting where lascannons are a common thing...makes me feel like I am in a bad episode of Enterprise...
Wouldn't it be a lot cooler if he had laser pistols?
All episodes of Enterprise are bad.
I dunno, I like the BLAM BLAM BLAM over the PEW PEW PEW. I'm thinking triple wielding S+W 500s.
Could go the Firefly route and have BLAM mixed with PEW.
Honestly I don't give a gak if Little Timmy feels bad that his Astartes captain got assassinated. GSC players can take the wiff in stride. Players need to be able to make meaningful decisions in-game with consequences, otherwise it isn't a game, just "cinematic dice rolling" like Kirby used to say.
I agree with you on principle, but I'm not seeing how the Kelermorph being able to effortlessly blow away even very tough characters makes for "meaningful decisions".
I would think, in order to have decisions of actual value, you would need to have more options and counterplay than 'Can assassin kill Captain in one round of shooting, y/n?'
whiny imperial players wrote: 3 pages of proving my point for me.
Lance845 wrote: Everyone arguing fluff comparison is completely missing the point. It's a damn game and the unit serves a purpose to the army in the form of a character assassin. It's stats need to represent it's role and be effective at doing it's job.
It doesn't mater if you can't figure out what the gun is shooting. It doesn't mater if you think it would be more thematic to double or triple down on the saboteur aspect. The faction got a character assassin unit (which ALSO fits with that theme btw) and it's stat line and weapons did the job the army needed it to.
How they explain it all is completely trivial.
THIS.
No problems with imperial assassins, no proems with space marine characters who can deal 3x the damage on the drop. Zero regard for the common statlines of characters in 8th necessitating a particular damage output for such a piece to work just "WEPPIN CALLED STUB SHOULD NOT HAVE CRAZY INSANE STATLINE LIKE S4 ap-1 d2!!!"
They dont even care about the actual lore explanation (the bullets are radioactive or something).
Marines get ap-1 on their stubbers by making them "ironhail." Whats the lore behind that? Eh, who cares. Certainly not yall.
And in fairness, GW could piss in bottles of water, sell them with 'we've literally urinated in these lmao' labels and they'd probably still sell out with a lot of people telling them it's the best water ever.
And then ebay scalpers would be making $300 a bottle.
You are wrong to do so , hahah
(actually I never really saw it, but I had a roommate who watched it religiously and it didn't grab me.)
All in fun, all in fun.
Xenomancers wrote: Personally wielding revolvers in setting where lascannons are a common thing...makes me feel like I am in a bad episode of Enterprise...
Wouldn't it be a lot cooler if he had laser pistols?
All episodes of Enterprise are bad.
I dunno, I like the BLAM BLAM BLAM over the PEW PEW PEW. I'm thinking triple wielding S+W 500s.
Could go the Firefly route and have BLAM mixed with PEW.
Aww it's been a while, I had to look it up.
I was also thinking of the Robocop gun, the scene at the firing range in particular.
Honestly I don't give a gak if Little Timmy feels bad that his Astartes captain got assassinated. GSC players can take the wiff in stride. Players need to be able to make meaningful decisions in-game with consequences, otherwise it isn't a game, just "cinematic dice rolling" like Kirby used to say.
I agree with you on principle, but I'm not seeing how the Kelermorph being able to effortlessly blow away even very tough characters makes for "meaningful decisions".
I would think, in order to have decisions of actual value, you would need to have more options and counterplay than 'Can assassin kill Captain in one round of shooting, y/n?'
I mean the question is whether or not to go in for that attack run on any given turn, and whether the opposing character tries to hide from the Kelermorph. There *is* counterplay, just it means not running your "press A to win" strategy that Astartes players love.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenomancers wrote: Personally wielding revolvers in setting where lascannons are a common thing...makes me feel like I am in a bad episode of Enterprise...
Wouldn't it be a lot cooler if he had laser pistols?
Maybe, but you could say the same thing about Astartes and their bolt weapons.
I mean the question is whether or not to go in for that attack run on any given turn, and whether the opposing character tries to hide from the Kelermorph. There *is* counterplay, just it means not running your "press A to win" strategy that Astartes players love.
I'll be honest, that really doesn't sound like meaningful options or counterplay.
And just to be clear, I'm not arguing that the Kelermorph should be weaker, because that doesn't fix the issue either.
It's more an illustration of the fact that 40k just isn't a mechanically deep game. Let's be honest here, 'move into range and shoot' is hardly involved gameplay or meaningful decision making. Not when it could just as easily be done by a simple if/then algorithm.
Xenomancers wrote: Personally wielding revolvers in setting where lascannons are a common thing...makes me feel like I am in a bad episode of Enterprise...
Wouldn't it be a lot cooler if he had laser pistols?
eh... i mean laser weapons are cool and all, but I imagine most imperial armor is meant to stop or defend against laser weaponry mroe than slugs. Also a large revolver in modern loads has a lot of energy behind it, often rivaling full rifle rounds, move that forward to space age materials with scifi things like a super hard diamond tip on rounds, some unheard of pressures being abel to be used, due to some unobtanium metal shell casing, forcing cone, barrel and cylinder etc.
As someone who has played orks Vindicares are far more terrifying and frustrating then the kelermorph ever was. They park across the map unable to be hit by anything except a suiciding flyer and just gib your weirdboy/big mek/warboss once a turn unless they are cowering in a trukk or battlewagon and thus contributing nothing to your army.
Not Online!!! wrote: No it would be but considering gw's track record of allowing assasins to work and having high dakka.... Eehh predestinated nerf target....
The argument, then, is that GW shouldn't have nerfed it, if we're being intellectually honest.
Actually, i am unsure, i think he was a bit overly effective.
The argument would be more akin to stop GW from using the Southpark Chicken kazoo method when balancing in general. Preferably before a dex is out.
Insectum7 wrote: Can we mention squads of marines that can shoot your characters from 36" away and out of line of sight?
I do wonder, what the thought behind that was, other then Sniperscouts need to be replaced by primaris, so make the primaris unit be the superior in any way to sniperscouts via allowing them to ignore LoS.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bosskelot wrote: Don't forget Space Marine characters that can get mastercrafted weapons and shoot characters.
There are similar relics/traits that make sense for specific subfactions but why SMHq's needed that when you have now access to two sniper units is indeed a bit wierd and reeks of:" we need to fill up the 6/ subfaction relics." "How about we make a sniper boltgun relic" "great idea".
Not Online!!! 792175 10938259 wrote:
There are similar relics/traits that make sense for specific subfactions but why SMHq's needed that when you have now access to two sniper units is indeed a bit wierd and reeks of:" we need to fill up the 6/ subfaction relics." "How about we make a sniper boltgun relic" "great idea".
Better gear, stats and relics is just proof of the superiority of the human race, not just being a meme in w40k.
Not Online!!! 792175 10938259 wrote:
There are similar relics/traits that make sense for specific subfactions but why SMHq's needed that when you have now access to two sniper units is indeed a bit wierd and reeks of:" we need to fill up the 6/ subfaction relics." "How about we make a sniper boltgun relic" "great idea".
Better gear, stats and relics is just proof of the superiority of the human race, not just being a meme in w40k.
Not Online!!! 792175 10938269 wrote:
Better gear, stats and relics is just proof of the superiority of the human race, not just being a meme in w40k.
Is that a joke Karol?
It is not, I tried to joke one time. And got a warning and post deleted for it. Not trying to joke any time in the future, just like in real life. I am trying to say that what people may not like to hear about w40k. Space marines are the protagonists of the settings. They have the most rules, most books about them, most players and most sales. So even when GW decides to give each marine subfaction a bolter, melee weapon, banner and armour, you are going to a ton of options and relics for them. And if someone at the studio is also interested in the subfaction, and gives them characterful options, it is hard to be suprised.
I mean no one has seen the SW codex yet, unless they work for GW or do codex translations, but is anyone expecting them to not have more then 1 melee relic in their codex?
I agree, Primaris are the Mary Sue of the 41st millenium, totally unrealistic to the setting. But we have to live with that, we have to play the game as the designers want us too or find another game.
Denegaar wrote: I agree, Primaris are the Mary Sue of the 41st millenium, totally unrealistic to the setting. But we have to live with that, we have to play the game as the designers want us too or find another game.
Find another game that isnt a lopsided piece of gak. The more money you give gw the more they think this is what you want. Stop paying them for the privilege of a bad product.
Insectum7 wrote: Can we mention squads of marines that can shoot your characters from 36" away and out of line of sight?
If you mean eliminators they faq'd the ammo to use line of sight now, those are just +2 to hit shots iirc.
And the S5 -2AP D3D + MW ammo?
Well, of course those are still there. How else do you expect loyalists to compete? I mean, do you expect people to play loyalists with things like tacs, devastators, and Razorbacks? What kind of madman would do that?
Insectum7 wrote: Can we mention squads of marines that can shoot your characters from 36" away and out of line of sight?
If you mean eliminators they faq'd the ammo to use line of sight now, those are just +2 to hit shots iirc.
And the S5 -2AP D3D + MW ammo?
That exists but has nothing to do with your original complaint.
Same unit remains pretty effective at sniping characters from a far more defensive posture than the Kelermorph.
You don't understand. Those are Astartes units. It's ok when they snipe an enemy HQ, but when a glorious Primaris hero is laid low by an enemy character, it had to be corrected.
Insectum7 wrote: Can we mention squads of marines that can shoot your characters from 36" away and out of line of sight?
If you mean eliminators they faq'd the ammo to use line of sight now, those are just +2 to hit shots iirc.
And the S5 -2AP D3D + MW ammo?
That exists but has nothing to do with your original complaint.
Same unit remains pretty effective at sniping characters from a far more defensive posture than the Kelermorph.
You don't understand. Those are Astartes units. It's ok when they snipe an enemy HQ, but when a glorious Primaris hero is laid low by an enemy character, it had to be corrected.
Of course, otherwise you wouldn't be able to make low quality, sarcastic, anti-marine quips like they were going out of fashion.
Insectum7 wrote: Can we mention squads of marines that can shoot your characters from 36" away and out of line of sight?
If you mean eliminators they faq'd the ammo to use line of sight now, those are just +2 to hit shots iirc.
And the S5 -2AP D3D + MW ammo?
That exists but has nothing to do with your original complaint.
Same unit remains pretty effective at sniping characters from a far more defensive posture than the Kelermorph.
You don't understand. Those are Astartes units. It's ok when they snipe an enemy HQ, but when a glorious Primaris hero is laid low by an enemy character, it had to be corrected.
Of course, otherwise you wouldn't be able to make low quality, sarcastic, anti-marine quips like they were going out of fashion.
Is not make a good counter argument.
I don't have all the information on the Kelermorph, I don't have the book and updates. But from what I recall it seems like people had a huge issue with an assassin that was heavily restricted in how many one could take and was effectively a suicide unit, vs another unit that was not a suicide unit, and you could happily take multiple of them.
Denegaar wrote: I agree, Primaris are the Mary Sue of the 41st millenium, totally unrealistic to the setting. But we have to live with that, we have to play the game as the designers want us too or find another game.
Denegaar wrote: I agree, Primaris are the Mary Sue of the 41st millenium, totally unrealistic to the setting. But we have to live with that, we have to play the game as the designers want us too or find another game.
Denegaar wrote: I agree, Primaris are the Mary Sue of the 41st millenium, totally unrealistic to the setting. But we have to live with that, we have to play the game as the designers want us too or find another game.
Aye, also, it'd be marty Stu, instead ..
I've used the generic term because I was refering to the whole idea of Primaris, not an individual character. Use Gary or Marty if you please.
And I keep thinking than in the fluff Primaris is a blatant case of Mary Sue, as they fullfill most of the features. We can talk about it, but the thread is not about that term, sorry for using it.
BrianDavion wrote: my point is, they're not mary sues, it's a term people trot out time and time again to refer to just about any character in fiction that they dislike.
I don't dislike Marines. I could even say that I like Firstborn.
A Mary Sue doesn't have to be a flawless character, alter ego of the author. Trekkies Tale is 50 years old...
GW wants their customers to be identified by the human race of their universe, and thats a form of Mary Sue, clearly. They couldn't use Firstborn because they were losing, so they created a character that is better in every role, with no real flaws, that could rescue Firstborn marines and be real heros in a context where heros shouldn't exist, the Primaris. It's a marketing practice for sure, but IMO it has a lot of features of a modenized Mary Sue.
But come on thar's just my opinion, wait and see, maybe I change my mind in a month.
Insectum7 wrote: Can we mention squads of marines that can shoot your characters from 36" away and out of line of sight?
If you mean eliminators they faq'd the ammo to use line of sight now, those are just +2 to hit shots iirc.
And the S5 -2AP D3D + MW ammo?
That exists but has nothing to do with your original complaint.
Same unit remains pretty effective at sniping characters from a far more defensive posture than the Kelermorph.
You don't understand. Those are Astartes units. It's ok when they snipe an enemy HQ, but when a glorious Primaris hero is laid low by an enemy character, it had to be corrected.
Of course, otherwise you wouldn't be able to make low quality, sarcastic, anti-marine quips like they were going out of fashion.
Is not make a good counter argument.
I don't have all the information on the Kelermorph, I don't have the book and updates. But from what I recall it seems like people had a huge issue with an assassin that was heavily restricted in how many one could take and was effectively a suicide unit, vs another unit that was not a suicide unit, and you could happily take multiple of them.
Both are fine for the game. Safe, long range sniper units are fine for the game, single-shot suicide assassin units are fine for the game. There's a certain amount of damage that each should do accounting for the amount of damage they're likely to be able to deal over the course of a game. An eliminator squad costs about as much as a kelermorph, and does about 1/2 the damage to a T4, 4++ character in a single round of shooting. Same deal with a Vindicare vs Callidus/Eversor, they'll deal about 1/2 the damage. The Culexus is more of a utility piece with a greatly decreased target band and much higher survivability so doesn't deal nearly as much damage.
But that's the thing. The eversor/callidus are both right there. Every imperial player has access to point removal assassins that can remove a character from the board just as easily as the kelermorph can, they can just pop them into their lists without losing anything thanks to the imperial agent rule.
Denegaar wrote: .A Mary Sue doesn't have to be a flawless character, alter ego of the author. Trekkies Tale is 50 years old...
GW wants their customers to be identified by the human race of their universe, and thats a form of Mary Sue, clearly. They couldn't use Firstborn because they were losing, so they created a character that is better in every role, with no real flaws, that could rescue Firstborn marines and be real heros in a context where heros shouldn't exist, the Primaris. It's a marketing practice for sure, but IMO it has a lot of features of a modenized Mary Sue.
Sure, and a strawman doesn't have to be an artificial construct to more easily support ones' argument. You know what as much as either of those terms are used on Dakka, using a term with only a slight connection to what it means sounds about right.
A Mary/Marty/Gary/etc. Sue is far more than a character with no flaws. That's a flawless character, period. A Mary Sue is also a character that is generally beloved my all without really earning it. Often to include grudgingly respect even from their enemies. Which sounds about as far from Primaris in and out of the setting. Primaris space marines are also not better at every role (Tactical flexibility and horde playstyles comes to mind). That's a boogeyman that some players have created because some rules in the soon to be obsolete codex were overtuned. In a week, The difference between Primaris and Firstborn is largely going to be an additional attack on their statline and wargear.
As for rescuing Firstborn in stories. What are you expecting from basically the cavalry coming over the hill in old west stories. Primaris in the Indomitus crusade were just that. There's a bunch of stories have them struggling to find acceptance in their chapter (especially with the Dark Angels). And even a few where their strength is no comparison to Firstborn marines experience (Gabriel Seth comes to mind). Once again, it sounds like a boogyman created my people not actually interacting with the lore firsthand and generating constructs that help strengthen the disdain they have for Primaris already.
I see little connection between Primaris being Mary Sues beyond the idea that Mary Sues are bad and things should try not and be them in the same manner Primaris/Guilliman are also a Deus ex machina. Words have meanings, and yes, sometimes those meanings evolve. However, I don't think watering down Mary Sue to the point of meaning, "Thing I don't like that is good at stuff." gives it much merit.
Denegaar wrote: I agree, Primaris are the Mary Sue of the 41st millenium, totally unrealistic to the setting. But we have to live with that, we have to play the game as the designers want us too or find another game.
Find another game that isnt a lopsided piece of gak. The more money you give gw the more they think this is what you want. Stop paying them for the privilege of a bad product.
Bingo!
It is why myself and other players on here have posts about how we have gone back to 5th edition and put in some fixes to correct the flaws in that edition.
We still love 40K the universe, lore and our minis we just don't like what GW is doing with it now. some time in the future they will likely do a complete redesign of the system again and all the people who started with/love the 8th/9th+ version of the game will be mad about it.
It is also true that there are a host of other games out there that are flat out better written than 40K or AOS
Warlords Bolt action seems to have a large/growing following, with good reviews for their antares game as well. WHFB players have gravitated to MANTICs kings of war. for direct comparison to the mechanics of 8th/9th edition, DUST 1947 (rules written by former GW/40K veteran Andy Chambers no less) is a far better system. infinity still is one of the best skirmish systems out there, battletech is still going strong being another game that got it's start in the late 1980s. the MKIII core rules for warmahordes are actually quite good, the hate towards the behavior of PP however has clouded that fact.
Prior to all the covid lock downs flames of war, star wars legion and X-wing still had strong community support. those are just the bigger titles not counting some of the more esoteric games out there people enjoy.
As gamers even in the wargaming niche hobby the amount of choices we have are massive which is why building regular gaming communities is so vital to our hobby and can easily be drowned out by the one giant elephant in the room that is GW.
Xenomancers wrote: Personally wielding revolvers in setting where lascannons are a common thing...makes me feel like I am in a bad episode of Enterprise...
Wouldn't it be a lot cooler if he had laser pistols?
All episodes of Enterprise are bad.
I dunno, I like the BLAM BLAM BLAM over the PEW PEW PEW. I'm thinking triple wielding S+W 500s.
I happen to like Enterprise.
Oh me too. Just thinking about one western episode where they came across some humans that were abducted during the 1850s or something and they faught against the enterprise crew with revolvers.
Denegaar wrote: .A Mary Sue doesn't have to be a flawless character, alter ego of the author. Trekkies Tale is 50 years old...
GW wants their customers to be identified by the human race of their universe, and thats a form of Mary Sue, clearly. They couldn't use Firstborn because they were losing, so they created a character that is better in every role, with no real flaws, that could rescue Firstborn marines and be real heros in a context where heros shouldn't exist, the Primaris. It's a marketing practice for sure, but IMO it has a lot of features of a modenized Mary Sue.
Sure, and a strawman doesn't have to be an artificial construct to more easily support ones' argument. You know what as much as either of those terms are used on Dakka, using a term with only a slight connection to what it means sounds about right.
A Mary/Marty/Gary/etc. Sue is far more than a character with no flaws. That's a flawless character, period. A Mary Sue is also a character that is generally beloved my all without really earning it. Often to include grudgingly respect even from their enemies. Which sounds about as far from Primaris in and out of the setting.
What
what
WHAT
WHAAAAAAAT
Just off the top of the ol' noggin:
-The dark angels begrudgingly allowing the Primaris to be the first inductees into their super-secret inner circle after seeing how great they are
-The old space wolf admiringly thinking about Primaris as "Guilliman managing to forge even harder steel from the astartes" while having his little chat with the fenrisian shield-maiden about how there's still no girls allowed in the emperor's pillow fort
-The two times in the Drukhari codex that Primaris are mentioned, the first time is Urien Rakarth offering a massive bounty because he just MUST have one of the new fancy primaris space marines as a test subject, and the second time is a story where they have a record crowd at the biggest wych cult arena because they've captured a squad of intercessors, which in the imagination of the author are more exciting than such old hat as gigantic tyranid monstrosities
-The new Fabius Bile novel has a section in which a chaos space marine comes up to Fabius asking him why he isn't worried because "They're better than us"
-The crusade section from the new rulebook has yet more Chaos Marine fanboying over primaris, where a Dark Mechanicum Magos marvels about how much better the new Bolt Rifles are than the bolters used during the Heresy, and says how great a trade 7 Iron Warriors CSM were for an unspecified number of bolt rifles.
-Even in the middle of Codex: Tyranids the final fluff entry in their timeline to bring them up to date talks about how the tyranids are defeated by the addition of Primaris Space Marines "Powerful genhanced space marine warriors!" to set up the tyranids with a defeat in time for their psychic awakening entry, again a defeat, again highlighting how great primaris are.
if you really have read recent fluff and haven't seen the continuous, pan-faction, pan-source, unending spanking about how great and awesome Primaris Space Marines are, I just have absolutely no idea what you are reading.
the_scotsman wrote: if you really have read recent fluff and haven't seen the continuous, pan-faction, pan-source, unending spanking about how great and awesome Primaris Space Marines are, I just have absolutely no idea what you are reading.
Just reads like whatever the current edition's latest Marine releases usually get.
I can understand "its new and I hate it". I can understand the idea the Imperium can just dip in the old gene vats and make "Marines+1" is lame.
But its like saying the Iphone 11 is a Mary Sue in a world of old model Iphones.
I think you could make a better argument Guilliman is a Mary Sue - but he and the other Primarchs sort of existed in the fluff as super-duper-superior to everyone and everything with mega charisma, so it sort of gets a pass.
-The dark angels begrudgingly allowing the Primaris to be the first inductees into their super-secret inner circle after seeing how great they are
-The old space wolf admiringly thinking about Primaris as "Guilliman managing to forge even harder steel from the astartes" while having his little chat with the fenrisian shield-maiden about how there's still no girls allowed in the emperor's pillow fort
-The two times in the Drukhari codex that Primaris are mentioned, the first time is Urien Rakarth offering a massive bounty because he just MUST have one of the new fancy primaris space marines as a test subject, and the second time is a story where they have a record crowd at the biggest wych cult arena because they've captured a squad of intercessors, which in the imagination of the author are more exciting than such old hat as gigantic tyranid monstrosities
-The new Fabius Bile novel has a section in which a chaos space marine comes up to Fabius asking him why he isn't worried because "They're better than us"
-The crusade section from the new rulebook has yet more Chaos Marine fanboying over primaris, where a Dark Mechanicum Magos marvels about how much better the new Bolt Rifles are than the bolters used during the Heresy, and says how great a trade 7 Iron Warriors CSM were for an unspecified number of bolt rifles.
-Even in the middle of Codex: Tyranids the final fluff entry in their timeline to bring them up to date talks about how the tyranids are defeated by the addition of Primaris Space Marines "Powerful genhanced space marine warriors!" to set up the tyranids with a defeat in time for their psychic awakening entry, again a defeat, again highlighting how great primaris are.
if you really have read recent fluff and haven't seen the continuous, pan-faction, pan-source, unending spanking about how great and awesome Primaris Space Marines are, I just have absolutely no idea what you are reading.
Isn't it possible for characters to express their feelings without Primaris actually being a Mary Sue?
the_scotsman wrote: if you really have read recent fluff and haven't seen the continuous, pan-faction, pan-source, unending spanking about how great and awesome Primaris Space Marines are, I just have absolutely no idea what you are reading.
Just reads like whatever the current edition's latest Marine releases usually get.
No. For one thing, the oldest fluff of 40k had space marines much MUCH less flawless than current fluff, but much more often in existing fluff the most powerful units of various factions would be defined as equals, or better than, astartes.
There's no in-universe reason why the various factions of non-imperials should give a gak about, let alone notice, some new permutation of Astartes that are slightly taller and have slightly boltier boltguns. The new crusade started up by Guilliman, the return of a primarch in general, sure, absolutely. What makes the accusation of being a mary sue apt for primaris in general is absolutely that it's the arrival of PRIMARIS SPACE MARINES (and the fact that they're better than those regular ol' space marines!) that gets continually mentioned and obsessed over in-universe by everyone.
What makes Mary Sue a Mary Sue in the original fanfiction is that she arrives, and immediately all the established main characters of the series noticed and gave a gak and saw her as significant despite having no real reason to do so.
Every single codex since 8th edition started has not talked about the arrival of the ynnari, or the return of the sisters of silence, or the return of the Custodes, or the active participation in battle of not one but two daemon primarchs. But in every one, you have each faction in turn calling for help from the Primaris, admiring the Primaris, obsessing over the primaris, shaking their fist at the primaris skeletor-style, etc.
-The dark angels begrudgingly allowing the Primaris to be the first inductees into their super-secret inner circle after seeing how great they are
-The old space wolf admiringly thinking about Primaris as "Guilliman managing to forge even harder steel from the astartes" while having his little chat with the fenrisian shield-maiden about how there's still no girls allowed in the emperor's pillow fort
-The two times in the Drukhari codex that Primaris are mentioned, the first time is Urien Rakarth offering a massive bounty because he just MUST have one of the new fancy primaris space marines as a test subject, and the second time is a story where they have a record crowd at the biggest wych cult arena because they've captured a squad of intercessors, which in the imagination of the author are more exciting than such old hat as gigantic tyranid monstrosities
-The new Fabius Bile novel has a section in which a chaos space marine comes up to Fabius asking him why he isn't worried because "They're better than us"
-The crusade section from the new rulebook has yet more Chaos Marine fanboying over primaris, where a Dark Mechanicum Magos marvels about how much better the new Bolt Rifles are than the bolters used during the Heresy, and says how great a trade 7 Iron Warriors CSM were for an unspecified number of bolt rifles.
-Even in the middle of Codex: Tyranids the final fluff entry in their timeline to bring them up to date talks about how the tyranids are defeated by the addition of Primaris Space Marines "Powerful genhanced space marine warriors!" to set up the tyranids with a defeat in time for their psychic awakening entry, again a defeat, again highlighting how great primaris are.
if you really have read recent fluff and haven't seen the continuous, pan-faction, pan-source, unending spanking about how great and awesome Primaris Space Marines are, I just have absolutely no idea what you are reading.
Isn't it possible for characters to express their feelings without Primaris actually being a Mary Sue?
Also, cherry picking?
I do love that one of the two examples you can come up with for how wrong I am is essentially "even with the might of the primaris reinforcements the victory was hard fought!"
And the other begins with a reminder "in the wake of their defeat at Baal " :^)
I do love that one of the two examples you can come up with for how wrong I am is essentially "even with the might of the primaris reinforcements the victory was hard fought!"
And the other begins with a reminder "in the wake of their defeat at Baal " :^)
And yet the Tyranids remain an unstoppable force, right? If that got carried through all the way there wouldn't be a setting left to play in so it kind of follows they have to lose sometimes.
I do love that one of the two examples you can come up with for how wrong I am is essentially "even with the might of the primaris reinforcements the victory was hard fought!"
And the other begins with a reminder "in the wake of their defeat at Baal " :^)
And yet the Tyranids remain an unstoppable force, right? If that got carried through all the way there wouldn't be a setting left to play in so it kind of follows they have to lose sometimes.
whataboutism.
The claim: Primaris space marines are not mary sues, mary sue does not just mean a character who is powerful or who you don't like. If Primaris were mary sues, you'd be seeing lots of people admiring them, and enemies begrudgingly admitting how great they are.
My response: Plenty of examples in post-primaris lore of allies admiring them, and enemies begrudgingly admitting how great they are.
Your rebuttal: By providing examples that directly contradict the initial claim being made you are, somehow, cherrypicking?
I need some help with the "Kellermorph is bad because player agency" argument. It makes no sense to me at all. As others have said, I can plunk down a Vindicaire in cover and snipe characters from the complete safety of the other side of the board. I can do the same thing to even stronger effect w/Eliminators. There are a multitude of units that I can just put down, barely have to move, and just roll dice, and there are relatively few people talking about "player agency" with regards to these. But then we get to a unit in the Kellermorph, that requires thought and timing in its use. You know it's only getting one crack at its intended target, and it will more than likely die immediately following the attempt. So you can't just plunk it down in a ruin and essentially roll dice mindlessly for several turns while your opponent takes models off the board. You have to plan it out. Pick the correct target to do the most damage, time it so that he comes down in the right spot at the right time, etc. But, somehow, the Kellermorph does not require "player agency"? A model that requires extremely careful timing and decision making to use, somehow goes against "player agency"? Are we sure we're using that term correctly here? lol
Tycho wrote: I need some help with the "Kellermorph is bad because player agency" argument. It makes no sense to me at all. As others have said, I can plunk down a Vindicaire in cover and snipe characters from the complete safety of the other side of the board. I can do the same thing to even stronger effect w/Eliminators. There are a multitude of units that I can just put down, barely have to move, and just roll dice, and there are relatively few people talking about "player agency" with regards to these. But then we get to a unit in the Kellermorph, that requires thought and timing in its use. You know it's only getting one crack at its intended target, and it will more than likely die immediately following the attempt. So you can't just plunk it down in a ruin and essentially roll dice mindlessly for several turns while your opponent takes models off the board. You have to plan it out. Pick the correct target to do the most damage, time it so that he comes down in the right spot at the right time, etc. But, somehow, the Kellermorph does not require "player agency"? A model that requires extremely careful timing and decision making to use, somehow goes against "player agency"? Are we sure we're using that term correctly here? lol
Eliminators like just about all of codex Who cares about balance are so broken at a conceptual level to be their own issue entirely.
They also apparently are completely immune to this unit is totally destroying the fun in games WTFGW?
The problem is GW doesnt like new players getting mugged as they then go complain about unit X or Y to GW who then nerf said unit.
Also assasins that work seem very much an idiotic unit design in an edition based on aura hammer.
It's just another example of GW's schizophrenia when it comes to a design space for an edition. Early sniper/assasin units hit like wet noodles.
From the redesigned they hit like nuclear weapons.
Tycho wrote: I need some help with the "Kellermorph is bad because player agency" argument. It makes no sense to me at all. As others have said, I can plunk down a Vindicaire in cover and snipe characters from the complete safety of the other side of the board. I can do the same thing to even stronger effect w/Eliminators. There are a multitude of units that I can just put down, barely have to move, and just roll dice, and there are relatively few people talking about "player agency" with regards to these. But then we get to a unit in the Kellermorph, that requires thought and timing in its use. You know it's only getting one crack at its intended target, and it will more than likely die immediately following the attempt. So you can't just plunk it down in a ruin and essentially roll dice mindlessly for several turns while your opponent takes models off the board. You have to plan it out. Pick the correct target to do the most damage, time it so that he comes down in the right spot at the right time, etc. But, somehow, the Kellermorph does not require "player agency"? A model that requires extremely careful timing and decision making to use, somehow goes against "player agency"? Are we sure we're using that term correctly here? lol
I mean, I basically just come to expect it when it comes to units like that. It's the same argument that gets trotted out in any kind of video game where you have any kind of "assassin/ambusher" style character or game piece, where there's very little you can do in the moment to counter their damage.
People will always adamantly be against the idea that the counterplay to that figure comes before their appearance - in the case of the kelermorph, that counterplay is primarily based around not giving him the target he wants to attack.
If a character is really truly essential to the makeup of your army, maybe add a durability upgrade to that character like a storm shield, or terminator armor, or a bike, or a durability-boosting stratagem like transhuman phys to allow him to survive the suicide unit's atacks?
Or use an interruption stratagem like auspex scan or forewarned to remove the suicide unit?
Or use transports, LOS blocking, or a screen to ensure the piece is not available to be targeted by the suicide unit?
The only assassin units people seem to be OK with existing are those that need incredible, phenomenal luck or crazy overwhelming numbers to remove even the most basic CHARACTER keyword unit from the board. 345pts of rangers to remove 1 basic 68pt marine captain. the special eldar sniper character who doesn't manage to kill a basic captain with 5 turns of average rolling. Lictors that do an average of 2 unsaved wounds to MEQ and have a 50/50 chance of making it in to combat in the first place.
People will always adamantly be against the idea that the counterplay to that figure comes before their appearance - in the case of the kelermorph, that counterplay is primarily based around not giving him the target he wants to attack.
And I would totally understand that if the Kellermorph were a "surprise". But since, in 40k, we share lists before the game so that you KNOW what's coming, you are given the chance right there, to counter it before it comes down. You know it's coming, you know what the likely targets for it will be, play accordingly. How is that not "player agency"?
As you say further down in your post, there are many potential counters to it.
gsc are kind of a gimick army right now. However - they are striking from safety with the kelpto. They are an ambush army - they come in with a whole force in front of them with their cult ambush.
Tycho wrote: I need some help with the "Kellermorph is bad because player agency" argument. It makes no sense to me at all. As others have said, I can plunk down a Vindicaire in cover and snipe characters from the complete safety of the other side of the board. I can do the same thing to even stronger effect w/Eliminators. There are a multitude of units that I can just put down, barely have to move, and just roll dice, and there are relatively few people talking about "player agency" with regards to these. But then we get to a unit in the Kellermorph, that requires thought and timing in its use. You know it's only getting one crack at its intended target, and it will more than likely die immediately following the attempt. So you can't just plunk it down in a ruin and essentially roll dice mindlessly for several turns while your opponent takes models off the board. You have to plan it out. Pick the correct target to do the most damage, time it so that he comes down in the right spot at the right time, etc. But, somehow, the Kellermorph does not require "player agency"? A model that requires extremely careful timing and decision making to use, somehow goes against "player agency"? Are we sure we're using that term correctly here? lol
If you were talking to me, please quote me where I put up the Vindicare as a good example of player agency.
Tycho wrote: I need some help with the "Kellermorph is bad because player agency" argument. It makes no sense to me at all. As others have said, I can plunk down a Vindicaire in cover and snipe characters from the complete safety of the other side of the board. I can do the same thing to even stronger effect w/Eliminators. There are a multitude of units that I can just put down, barely have to move, and just roll dice, and there are relatively few people talking about "player agency" with regards to these. But then we get to a unit in the Kellermorph, that requires thought and timing in its use. You know it's only getting one crack at its intended target, and it will more than likely die immediately following the attempt. So you can't just plunk it down in a ruin and essentially roll dice mindlessly for several turns while your opponent takes models off the board. You have to plan it out. Pick the correct target to do the most damage, time it so that he comes down in the right spot at the right time, etc. But, somehow, the Kellermorph does not require "player agency"? A model that requires extremely careful timing and decision making to use, somehow goes against "player agency"? Are we sure we're using that term correctly here? lol
Eliminators like just about all of codex Who cares about balance are so broken at a conceptual level to be their own issue entirely.
They also apparently are completely immune to this unit is totally destroying the fun in games WTFGW?
The problem is GW doesnt like new players getting mugged as they then go complain about unit X or Y to GW who then nerf said unit.
Also assasins that work seem very much an idiotic unit design in an edition based on aura hammer.
It's just another example of GW's schizophrenia when it comes to a design space for an edition. Early sniper/assasin units hit like wet noodles.
From the redesigned they hit like nuclear weapons.
before they inevitably get nerfed into the ground . because feelsbad moments are bad.
I do love that one of the two examples you can come up with for how wrong I am is essentially "even with the might of the primaris reinforcements the victory was hard fought!"
And the other begins with a reminder "in the wake of their defeat at Baal " :^)
And yet the Tyranids remain an unstoppable force, right? If that got carried through all the way there wouldn't be a setting left to play in so it kind of follows they have to lose sometimes.
whataboutism.
The claim: Primaris space marines are not mary sues, mary sue does not just mean a character who is powerful or who you don't like. If Primaris were mary sues, you'd be seeing lots of people admiring them, and enemies begrudgingly admitting how great they are.
My response: Plenty of examples in post-primaris lore of allies admiring them, and enemies begrudgingly admitting how great they are.
Your rebuttal: By providing examples that directly contradict the initial claim being made you are, somehow, cherrypicking?
Seeing as enemies were already begrudgingly admitting Loyalist Manlet Marines were powerful is that even really a point?
So yeah you're in the same boat as the people that call Cawl a Mary Sue. You don't actually understand the term and just apply it to powerful characters you don't like.
the_scotsman wrote: The only assassin units people seem to be OK with existing are those that need incredible, phenomenal luck or crazy overwhelming numbers to remove even the most basic CHARACTER keyword unit from the board. 345pts of rangers to remove 1 basic 68pt marine captain. the special eldar sniper character who doesn't manage to kill a basic captain with 5 turns of average rolling. Lictors that do an average of 2 unsaved wounds to MEQ and have a 50/50 chance of making it in to combat in the first place.
Maybe having assassins easily remove heroes from a game that you are actively designing to revolve around heroes just is not a good design idea because it make people feel bad about the game?
I know playing orks against Illic and rangers is not a particularly fun thing to do when all your characters go splat in the first two turns.
To me this really sounds like the debate the MtG community was having when WotC started to take land destruction out of the game, a notoriously unfun strategy to play against. Except unlike GW, WotC told people what and why they were doing it.
I haven't ever seen a kellermorph on my table, and I don't even know what the nerf was, so this is directed at assassin and sniper units in general.
Jidmah wrote: Maybe having assassins easily remove heroes from a game that you are actively designing to revolve around heroes just is not a good design idea because it make people feel bad about the game?
This was what I was trying to say before.
I think that people have greatly exaggerated the risk-factor of the Kelermorph. 'Move to within 12" and open fire' is hardly genius-tier levels of strategic play. Yes, it will probably die afterwards regardless, but the whole point of that sort of assassin is that it doesn't matter. These models exist to be expendable.
And since people keep bringing the sodding thing up, yes, the Vindicare is even worse as you can skip the 'move to within 12"' step, and just open fire.
The whole point I was trying to make earlier was that 40k is a bad game for assassins because there's so little play/counterplay available to begin with. And 'put your character behind a wall for the entire game because your opponent brought a vindicare' is hardly a shining example of counterplay. I'm just not convinced that any of these models belong in a shallow game with TLoS. Because either you make them good assassins, in which case the only """counterplay""" available to opponents is to hide their characters for most of the game or watch them die, or you make them suck at their job in which case no one will bother taking them.
There's also the issue of fluff. Other games with assassins generally require you to utilise magic or similar powers in order to either get them to their target or to have them actually perform the run. e.g. you might use abilities to give them extra movement or buff them or debuff their target to greatly increase the chances of success. However, the assassins in 40k are made out to be lone-warriors. Hence, even though their factions tend to have significant psyker support, they're generally designed to not need it. This makes sense but removes another possible level of play/counterplay.
To reiterate once again, I have nothing against the Kelermorph specifically, I just don't think current 40k is a good game for assassin-type units in general.
If you were talking to me, please quote me where I put up the Vindicare as a good example of player agency.
So I don't see where you said that (I guess I missed it?), but I brought it up w/out singling anyone out because it's a common argument that makes no sense to me. And if you're trying to argue the Vindicare, a unit that can be played with almost no thought what-so-ever, as an example of "good player agency", then we definitely have different ideas.
Can the Vindicare involve a ton of decision making? Yeah, it can, but you can also just blindly dunk it in cover and walk away. You said you didn't think "getting into range" counts as good gameplay - at least you HAVE to worry about getting into range w/the Kellermorph. Not so w/the Vindicare on the new board sizes. Is the Vindicare in range? Let me see - he's on the board so ... yep."
With the Kellermorph, you literally can't play it without a lot of careful decision making and that's the literal definition of agency here.
EDIT:
Looks like we posted at the same time. I hadn't this when I posted the above response:
And since people keep bringing the sodding thing up, yes, the Vindicare is even worse as you can skip the 'move to within 12"' step, and just open fire.
So it looks like we're generally on the same page but you're not targeting the Kellermorph specifically, but assasins in 40k more broadly. I can see your point in that.
Jidmah wrote: Maybe having assassins easily remove heroes from a game that you are actively designing to revolve around heroes just is not a good design idea because it make people feel bad about the game?
This was what I was trying to say before.
I think that people have greatly exaggerated the risk-factor of the Kelermorph. 'Move to within 12" and open fire' is hardly genius-tier levels of strategic play. Yes, it will probably die afterwards regardless, but the whole point of that sort of assassin is that it doesn't matter. These models exist to be expendable.
And since people keep bringing the sodding thing up, yes, the Vindicare is even worse as you can skip the 'move to within 12"' step, and just open fire.
The whole point I was trying to make earlier was that 40k is a bad game for assassins because there's so little play/counterplay available to begin with. And 'put your character behind a wall for the entire game because your opponent brought a vindicare' is hardly a shining example of counterplay. I'm just not convinced that any of these models belong in a shallow game with TLoS. Because either you make them good assassins, in which case the only """counterplay""" available to opponents is to hide their characters for most of the game or watch them die, or you make them suck at their job in which case no one will bother taking them.
There's also the issue of fluff. Other games with assassins generally require you to utilise magic or similar powers in order to either get them to their target or to have them actually perform the run. e.g. you might use abilities to give them extra movement or buff them or debuff their target to greatly increase the chances of success. However, the assassins in 40k are made out to be lone-warriors. Hence, even though their factions tend to have significant psyker support, they're generally designed to not need it. This makes sense but removes another possible level of play/counterplay.
To reiterate once again, I have nothing against the Kelermorph specifically, I just don't think current 40k is a good game for assassin-type units in general.
There's certainly scope and room for a character removing unit niche, oldschool snipers fill that nicely in that they can do it but rarely in 1 volley. The suicide assassins and snipers +1 are more of the issue than the niche of the unit.
the_scotsman wrote: The only assassin units people seem to be OK with existing are those that need incredible, phenomenal luck or crazy overwhelming numbers to remove even the most basic CHARACTER keyword unit from the board. 345pts of rangers to remove 1 basic 68pt marine captain. the special eldar sniper character who doesn't manage to kill a basic captain with 5 turns of average rolling. Lictors that do an average of 2 unsaved wounds to MEQ and have a 50/50 chance of making it in to combat in the first place.
Maybe having assassins easily remove heroes from a game that you are actively designing to revolve around heroes just is not a good design idea because it make people feel bad about the game?
I know playing orks against Illic and rangers is not a particularly fun thing to do when all your characters go splat in the first two turns.
To me this really sounds like the debate the MtG community was having when WotC started to take land destruction out of the game, a notoriously unfun strategy to play against. Except unlike GW, WotC told people what and why they were doing it.
I haven't ever seen a kellermorph on my table, and I don't even know what the nerf was, so this is directed at assassin and sniper units in general.
it was a nutcase pts hike i believe.
and the issue is indeed communitcation with GW balance beeing just non existent.
Dudeface wrote: There's certainly scope and room for a character removing unit niche, oldschool snipers fill that nicely in that they can do it but rarely in 1 volley. The suicide assassins and snipers +1 are more of the issue than the niche of the unit.
Snipers have issues on a completely different level. I have both DG and orks, a plague surgeon can walk through sniper fire for three turns and beat them to death with his sword, while an ork painboy implodes with the first volley. You'd think snipers would care a lot less about armor.
Characters being functionally invulnerable such that one of the game's meta strategies involves stacking 2CP plus your warlord trait into a butt-naked 68pt captain to allow your entire 2000pt list to reroll hit rolls is, and has been since the dawn of 8th, dirt stupid.
I play orks.
I apparently talk about how orks need better rules enough that people make claims about me like my sig.
I think the intellectual stress of having to figure out how to hide a character out of LOS for the turn it will take me to either get the use out of them that I would have gotten or remove my opponent's sniper unit is not enough to give me a stroke.
Character removal options are an incredibly important balancing factor in 40k and absolutely need to be made more universal, not less.
the_scotsman wrote: Characters being functionally invulnerable such that one of the game's meta strategies involves stacking 2CP plus your warlord trait into a butt-naked 68pt captain to allow your entire 2000pt list to reroll hit rolls is, and has been since the dawn of 8th, dirt stupid.
I play orks.
I apparently talk about how orks need better rules enough that people make claims about me like my sig.
I think the intellectual stress of having to figure out how to hide a character out of LOS for the turn it will take me to either get the use out of them that I would have gotten or remove my opponent's sniper unit is not enough to give me a stroke.
Character removal options are an incredibly important balancing factor in 40k and absolutely need to be made more universal, not less.
Anything that can quickly take out a chapter master in one turn will render any other support character unplayable. If the chapter master remains a problem despite their next codex, then the chapter master needs fixing. Cranking all assassins up to eleven and pushing all characters less survivable than captains out of the game is not a good solution.
the_scotsman wrote: Characters being functionally invulnerable such that one of the game's meta strategies involves stacking 2CP plus your warlord trait into a butt-naked 68pt captain to allow your entire 2000pt list to reroll hit rolls is, and has been since the dawn of 8th, dirt stupid.
I play orks.
I apparently talk about how orks need better rules enough that people make claims about me like my sig.
I think the intellectual stress of having to figure out how to hide a character out of LOS for the turn it will take me to either get the use out of them that I would have gotten or remove my opponent's sniper unit is not enough to give me a stroke.
Character removal options are an incredibly important balancing factor in 40k and absolutely need to be made more universal, not less.
Anything that can quickly take out a chapter master in one turn will render any other support character unplayable. If the chapter master remains a problem despite their next codex, then the chapter master needs fixing. Cranking all assassins up to eleven and pushing all characters less survivable than captains out of the game is not a good solution.
Things that can quickly take out chapter masters in one turn exist, and have not rendered every other support character unplayable.
A squad of eliminators with average rolls deals 3 unsaved wounds on average to a totally unprotected, unarmored ork support model, who are pretty much the most extreme characters in the game I can come up with when it comes to their points cost vs their lack of defenses. Maybe GSC characters are worse, I'm not sure.
If my opponent takes whatever 160pts of eliminators, and I'm dumb enough to not try to do anything to keep him hidden or protected in any way, I'm 100% A-OK with losing 75pts of..weirdboy, or something. 50% points return with what is regarded the most cRaZiEsT OP sniper unit in the game vs the most unprotected character in the game does not seem either crazy or unreasonable.
again I have to bring up here examples of the competition to these assassin type units which are smash characters/units like the killa klaw bikeboss, the TH blood angels jump captain, Bloodletter bombs, etc.
These units tend to be just as reliable at getting into melee as melee assassin type units, and tend to deal vastly more damage vs characters while also being vastly more flexible. Before you do anything at all to increase his damage output, a blood angels captain with a regular thunder hammer does 3x the damage in melee to multiwound targets than an eversor assassin. And he's even better at getting in with a 3d6+1 charge roll. I also have to ask just how often your support characters actually stay alive the entire game rather than what seems to me the incredibly common scenario of "everything they're buffing gets whacked, then they get whacked by regular firepower."
The gulf between "sniped early" and "just regular ol' killed by their entire section of the board getting blown away" seems to be a difference of, usually, one single turn.
There are a few marine chapters with the right tactics, doctrine and buffs that average up to4,9-5,4damage to t4 3+ profile with enough buffs. Raven Guard successor can do it against 3+/5++ and IF against 3+ in cover for example. 3 squads would do 3x that. You probably wouldnt take eliminators in a list that cant use them very welll so using unbuffed eliminators isnt really a good point.
Just have to say that to compare a BA smash captain the BA player have invested about as many points as 1,5 assassins, 1 HQ slot and a bunch of CP(minimum 3 and up to 12). Its not even a good unit anymore and it mostly leads to boring games way too often. I have used actual assassins more than smash captains so far in 9th with my BA even. But people seem to forget how damn expensive a BA smash captain is in both points and CP, and now HQ slots as well. People get too hung up on the old 124pt(+literally all the BA players CP in a cp hungry army) captain killing 600pt knights and not looking at anything else.
Klickor wrote: There are a few marine chapters with the right tactics, doctrine and buffs that average up to4,9-5,4damage to t4 3+ profile with enough buffs. Raven Guard successor can do it against 3+/5++ and IF against 3+ in cover for example. 3 squads would do 3x that. You probably wouldnt take eliminators in a list that cant use them very welll so using unbuffed eliminators isnt really a good point.
Just have to say that to compare a BA smash captain the BA player have invested about as many points as 1,5 assassins, 1 HQ slot and a bunch of CP(minimum 3 and up to 12). Its not even a good unit anymore and it mostly leads to boring games way too often. I have used actual assassins more than smash captains so far in 9th with my BA even. But people seem to forget how damn expensive a BA smash captain is in both points and CP, and now HQ slots as well. People get too hung up on the old 124pt(+literally all the BA players CP in a cp hungry army) captain killing 600pt knights and not looking at anything else.
This is a game with nearly infinite variations of possible traits, relics, skills, stratagems, subfactions, etc. People get hung up on the ideal situation, the ideal perfect combo of traits and buffs and strats and whatever in a game that's pretty much always changing.
When I use an example, you can be pretty sure it's stripped down to the barest minimum it can be. If I talk about a BA captain with a thunder hammer and a jump pack using 1 particular stratagem, I'm not assuming anything beyond those parameters. If i talk about Eliminators targeting an ork character, I'm not assuming the Eliminators are in this doctrine or that chapter or this aura or that stratagem, just like I'm not assuming that every ork character is in a 5++ and has a 6+FNP, or is wearing mega armor, or has Biggest Boss up, or is near gretchins.
I'm pointing out an alternative, with similar threat reliability, the same arrival time, similar points bracket, that can deal more damage and has existed in the game since the start of 8th without causing the death of the subcategory of units called out as 'dead'.
Some things are played vanilla but most really are not. Most boys will probably not have invul or fnp and instead just use numbers so its kinda fair to use them naked in examples. Eliminators after nerfed arent really seen much at all anymore and should be expected to have some synergies involved. Same with a BA smash captain. You dont take a 155pt captain without spending 3 cp upgrading him so its not 1 stratagem for 2cp but 4 (relic, trait, DC, delivery strat) for 5cp. The other 3-6cp you might use could probably be ignored but the first 3 before he is even set up should be accounted for.
I think you should try to use units in examples the way they are likely to show up in games. Perhaps not with all the buffs since they arent likely to have them all the time but at least some. Very few units are a problem on their own without any buffs at all and comparing them in a complete vaccum says nothing.
Its mostly this pet peeve I have with people mentioning BA smash captains like they are cheap and of no cost to the BA player by ignoring the insane amount of CP they cost. They might have been a problem in soup and a symptom of some of the things that were wrong in 8th but they are mostly just misrepresented.
Denegaar wrote: .A Mary Sue doesn't have to be a flawless character, alter ego of the author. Trekkies Tale is 50 years old...
GW wants their customers to be identified by the human race of their universe, and thats a form of Mary Sue, clearly. They couldn't use Firstborn because they were losing, so they created a character that is better in every role, with no real flaws, that could rescue Firstborn marines and be real heros in a context where heros shouldn't exist, the Primaris. It's a marketing practice for sure, but IMO it has a lot of features of a modenized Mary Sue.
Sure, and a strawman doesn't have to be an artificial construct to more easily support ones' argument. You know what as much as either of those terms are used on Dakka, using a term with only a slight connection to what it means sounds about right.
A Mary/Marty/Gary/etc. Sue is far more than a character with no flaws. That's a flawless character, period. A Mary Sue is also a character that is generally beloved my all without really earning it. Often to include grudgingly respect even from their enemies. Which sounds about as far from Primaris in and out of the setting.
What
what
WHAT
WHAAAAAAAT
Just off the top of the ol' noggin:
And unsuprisingly given your negitivity re anything astartes your noggen is filled with half facts, inaccuracies etc.
[/quote[
-The dark angels begrudgingly allowing the Primaris to be the first inductees into their super-secret inner circle after seeing how great they are
the first primaris indutee was actually a firstborn whom later crossed the Rubicon, eventually yes other primaris dark angels proved their worth and where inducted into the higher mysteries, the take away here is having 3 extra organs doesn't somehow make them treat you massivly differant.
-The old space wolf admiringly thinking about Primaris as "Guilliman managing to forge even harder steel from the astartes" while having his little chat with the fenrisian shield-maiden about how there's still no girls allowed in the emperor's pillow fort
OHH MY GOD! ONE SPACE WOLF NOTES THAT PRIMARIS ARE PRETTY TOUGH! STOP THE PRESSES! The Space Wolf codex also notes several Space Wolf Jarsl (or Wolf Lords if you perfer) objected to Primaris Space Marines, on the grounds of it diluting their tradtions. In the end Logan allowed them in because they shared the same genetic herritage. ya know the exact precident applied to the Wulfen.
-The two times in the Drukhari codex that Primaris are mentioned, the first time is Urien Rakarth offering a massive bounty because he just MUST have one of the new fancy primaris space marines as a test subject, and the second time is a story where they have a record crowd at the biggest wych cult arena because they've captured a squad of intercessors, which in the imagination of the author are more exciting than such old hat as gigantic tyranid monstrosities
an entirely new breed of space Marine would indeed be of intreast to a biologist as you'd wanna know what makes him differant from the old breed (and how to defeat it and otrture it most effectively) As for a squad of intercessors being a big draw, that's no suprise. it's something NEW, a giant Tyranid monstrocity? "eh we've seen a Tyrannfex before"
-The new Fabius Bile novel has a section in which a chaos space marine comes up to Fabius asking him why he isn't worried because "They're better than us"
I mean Primaris Marines are, strictly speaking, better. they're tougher, stronger, and have better equipment. And well a scene where Bile discussses them isn't mary sue it's logical, the very first thing people said when Primaris where announced was to speculate how Bile would react.Here's the question for you, did Bile panic?
-The crusade section from the new rulebook has yet more Chaos Marine fanboying over primaris, where a Dark Mechanicum Magos marvels about how much better the new Bolt Rifles are than the bolters used during the Heresy, and says how great a trade 7 Iron Warriors CSM were for an unspecified number of bolt rifles.
your point? we all know the bolt rifle is better then then boltgun. this isn't news. of course a dark mech magos would be happy to score some, and a handful of flunkies? christ he'd proably consider that worth trading for a crate of new pattern lasguns.
-Even in the middle of Codex: Tyranids the final fluff entry in their timeline to bring them up to date talks about how the tyranids are defeated by the addition of Primaris Space Marines "Powerful genhanced space marine warriors!" to set up the tyranids with a defeat in time for their psychic awakening entry, again a defeat, again highlighting how great primaris are.
So new potent weapon wins a few key roles against an opponent, that's normal.
if you really have read recent fluff and haven't seen the continuous, pan-faction, pan-source, unending spanking about how great and awesome Primaris Space Marines are, I just have absolutely no idea what you are reading.
I have read the recent fluff, but I've read it without looking for reasons to hate on Primaris Marines.
I do love that one of the two examples you can come up with for how wrong I am is essentially "even with the might of the primaris reinforcements the victory was hard fought!"
And the other begins with a reminder "in the wake of their defeat at Baal " :^)
And yet the Tyranids remain an unstoppable force, right? If that got carried through all the way there wouldn't be a setting left to play in so it kind of follows they have to lose sometimes.
whataboutism.
The claim: Primaris space marines are not mary sues, mary sue does not just mean a character who is powerful or who you don't like. If Primaris were mary sues, you'd be seeing lots of people admiring them, and enemies begrudgingly admitting how great they are.
My response: Plenty of examples in post-primaris lore of allies admiring them, and enemies begrudgingly admitting how great they are.
Your rebuttal: By providing examples that directly contradict the initial claim being made you are, somehow, cherrypicking?
The actual definition of a "mary sue" is that the universe bends to their will/ submits to their needs to the extreme point that it breaks the universal reality. not just powerful or admired.
I do love that one of the two examples you can come up with for how wrong I am is essentially "even with the might of the primaris reinforcements the victory was hard fought!"
And the other begins with a reminder "in the wake of their defeat at Baal " :^)
And yet the Tyranids remain an unstoppable force, right? If that got carried through all the way there wouldn't be a setting left to play in so it kind of follows they have to lose sometimes.
whataboutism.
The claim: Primaris space marines are not mary sues, mary sue does not just mean a character who is powerful or who you don't like. If Primaris were mary sues, you'd be seeing lots of people admiring them, and enemies begrudgingly admitting how great they are.
My response: Plenty of examples in post-primaris lore of allies admiring them, and enemies begrudgingly admitting how great they are.
Your rebuttal: By providing examples that directly contradict the initial claim being made you are, somehow, cherrypicking?[/quote
]
The actual definition of a "mary sue" is that the universe bends to their will/ submits to their needs to the extreme point that it breaks the universal reality. not just powerful or admired.
aphyon wrote: The actual definition of a "mary sue" is that the universe bends to their will/ submits to their needs to the extreme point that it breaks the universal reality. not just powerful or admired.
The actual definition of a "Mary Sue" is a highly complicated and much-debated topic. TV Tropes alone lists what I would reasonably describe as 12 possible definitions (The 13th appears to be a reminder of the fact that despite falling into one or more of these categories, a Mary Sue can still be genuinely entertaining) for what referring to something as a "Mary Sue" could mean.
Poorly Written
Author Avatar
Idealized Character
Power Fantasy
Infallible
Center of Attention (Which is the definition the quote brought up)
Somebody's Fanfic OC
An "alien" element out of place for the setting
Fit the Classic Mary Sue Type
Fit the Classic Marty Stu Type
Heavily Cliched
Someone you Don't Like
Those last two more questionable ones have further diluted the meaning of the term, but the point is what is and is not a Sue is heavily subject to debate, perspective and taste. You could evaluate Belisarius Cawl or Roboute Gulliman on each of those criteria individually and say they are or are not a Sue on the basis of one of these.
Another good example is Rei from disney starwars-no training, but somehow knows all the things it took jedi masters years or decades to master and she is better at it than anybody else. with rei around you don't even need a rebel alliance. but yeah basically Cawl in 40K, especially when they, with very thin back story, first introduced him, and even with the new retconned lore it is still a hard push to make it workable in universe.
Denegaar wrote: So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?
Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?
Multiwound: Just as non-existant as before. Just different reason.
Single wound: Maybe gives extra 4-5 warriors back for 20 strong blop. Assuming you don't get wiped out in one go(which is still possible seeing how 40k lethality goes up).
So far looks more of codex: c'tan than codex: necron
Denegaar wrote: So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?
Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?
Good for warriors and immortals, bad for the things with more wounds like the various flavors of destroyers and lychguard. I guess the latter are probably going to spend another edition in the dumpster.
I'm not expert on Necrons but it seems that you now have more opportunities to use your "signature rule" than before. A friend of mine that plays Necrons says that in 8th is not something that you use much.
For me, is what I want from Xenos books, having more ways to use our cool rules, we are aliens after all.
I'm not expert on Necrons but it seems that you now have more opportunities to use your "signature rule" than before. A friend of mine that plays Necrons says that in 8th is not something that you use much.
For me, is what I want from Xenos books, having more ways to use our cool rules, we are aliens after all.
you use it virtually never for multi wound(oh sorry. You get to use it more often. You just don't BENEFIT from it any more). For single wound still not much. Opponent starts with some small weak firepower that drops couple, then drops big unit that simply wipes out entire unit at once. 40k is so deadly that plenty of units will drop 10 immortals in one go. 20 warriors might get 4-5 warriors from it if you get lucky and then whole unit just dissapears.
It's basically worse than 5+++ unless you are 1W AND face tons of dam2 weapons. If DG will keep the 5+++ they get lot more mileage out of that with 2W than necrons get out of RP.
I think it's too early to say for sure as obviously there are things we dunno for sure, over all the impression I get is it's definatly a buff for 'crons. the command protocals suggests that GW right now is in an "Experimental phase" and is trying to feel out how to make the "non soup bonuses" work best. I feel the necron command protocals might be a bit fiddly but it's the type of thing I can see the right type of player REALLY enjoying and using to suprisingly good effect. (I can also see a lot of people forgetting to use them)
one thing I wanna notes is that while we know Marines HAVE doctrines we have no idea what's happening on that front. Anyone remember when Doctrines where the Ultramarines chapter trait back in 7th edition? no you proably don't because they kinda sucked. you could activate each type of doctrine ONCE on one of your turns. it was potentially potent but it wasn't exactly a super OP game winner.
TBF, 7th had a lot, of effects that were not just potent but outright broken. Comparing an technically immensively potent ability within an edition that was by all acounts full of broken gak (OP and UP) will make it look favourably especially against the really OP stuff.....
Denegaar wrote: So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?
Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?
Good for warriors and immortals, bad for the things with more wounds like the various flavors of destroyers and lychguard. I guess the latter are probably going to spend another edition in the dumpster.
+1A for lychguard at the very least. It is kinda sad just HOW bad immortals are as compared to basic assault terminators, so at least A3 helps a tiny bit.
it does kind of boggle the mind that warscythes remain such a sad weapon.
one thing I wanna notes is that while we know Marines HAVE doctrines we have no idea what's happening on that front. Anyone remember when Doctrines where the Ultramarines chapter trait back in 7th edition? no you proably don't because they kinda sucked. you could activate each type of doctrine ONCE on one of your turns. it was potentially potent but it wasn't exactly a super OP game winner.
UM definitely got to use their doctrines more than once, iirc I was able to get doctrine rerolls for the whole game.
Denegaar wrote: So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?
Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?
I haven't been a Necron player, but I'm painting up my Indomitus and pile of shame stuff like many others I imagine. I think the rule is very interesting...
So, with the default, statistically for every 3 guys you lose, you get one back provided the squad has not been wiped out. If you can get a +1 to that roll, now for every two you lose you get one back.
However the extra dice rolls needed to bring multi wound models means that in practice those units are much more vulnerable to being whittled down by multiple anti infantry units, and also being wiped out before they have a chance to roll by harder hitting stuff. Without getting a +1 to their roll, a 3 man squad of 3W things might as well not even have the ability. With people expecting marines, the 2W units will be especially vulnerable.
That doesn't mean it is useless on multi wound units though:
-Personally I was planning on going Nephrek for the 6" advance through terrain and now see they have an army wide 6++ on top of that. Both abilities make it significantly harder to wipe out those smaller multi wound units.
-The max size units of these multi wound types will usually be overkill for what you want them to do and therefore something of a waste, but maybe there is a sweet spot in between where say 4 of the 3W models makes the most sense to put on the field.
-Those 2W guys that are vulnerable to being whittled down (1 in 9 chance to make the RP roll) do get a lot tougher with some investment. Make them Nephrek and now in many situations where just one of them would have died that invuln combined with the RP gives them about 28% chance to survive, almost as good as a 1W guy from a different dynasty. Give them the +1 RP buff and now its 42%. And thats with just one of them dying, your chances of getting at least one guy back increases with each squad member killed. It seems significant to me.
-Wait and see stuff. A strategem that lets you resurrect one guy automatically or roll even if the whole unit gets wiped out seem like possibilities. AFAIK the whole book has not been leaked yet.
Just a few thoughts on it, I'm certainly no Necron expert.
Note that the fact that RP for multi-wounds models is not very good when you lose a single model, it gets much better when you lose multiple models. For 2 wound model your recover rate is:
1 Model = 11% for 1 Model (vs 33% for 1 Wound Models)
2 Models = 30% for 1 Model, 1% for 2 Models (vs 55/11% for 1 Wound Models)
3 Models = 65% for 1 Model, 10% for 2 Models (vs 70/26/4% for 1 Wound Models)
4 Models = 80% for 1 Model, 25% for 2 Models, 2% for 3 Models (vs 80/41/11% for 1 Wound Models)
Sure that isn't as good as for 1 Wound Models, but 2 wound models are harder to kill and indications are they will also have Living Metal to increase overall durability.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
If we have all the rules, then what are we waiting for?
in this case the codices. 99% of the complaining has been about marines, when there's a new marine codex coming up in likely less then a month (I suspect the codex will be first week of October) waiting until we have a bit more info for that does seem wise. but too many people are assuming it'll be a straight buff of the last codex.
Oh! So if we have the codecies, and we see previews that look out of balance with other codecies (like 2w marines) can we complain about the disparity between the previewed marines and the other codexes that we're currently playing with? There might be some nerfs to marines in the marine codex, but we're plainly getting 2w marines and at the same time using 1w orks, aspect warriors and genestealers. Because we have all the rules, right?
We have enough rules to play. And certainly enough to play an engaging game versus most opponents. For some reason the more tournaments feature the fewer marines we see. Right now in the upside-down of Australia a podcaster is taking Nid hordes to a tournament. He beat 9 Eradicator Salamanders 83 to 58. Clearly a skew, but then if 9 Eradicators can't handle a simple skew and the horde can still place top tables then maybe the game doesn't work as the forum dictates. Maybe it is that he got first turn. We literally don't know.
So, why should you wait to draw conclusions? Because it isn't the same god damn dog and pony show.
When is the last time GW screwed something up with an FAQ and fixed it the same day?
When is the last time GW published a tournament-level mission set and didn't have competing mission sets like like Eternal & Maelstrom?
When is the last time you saw a fundamental rule dynamic like CORE that wasn't in the BRB? Even stratagems were there.
We don't know what will happen with the new book. We don't know how they'll handle new secondaries. Normally we'd have the first codexes out by now, but we don't. There are literally fundamental changes in those codexes.
You and I know nothing, but pretending to know something without all the information is just god damn intellectually dishonest now, isn't it? People that piss all over people who say, "just wait until we have all the info" just makes them donkey-caves.
L
M
A
O
“Wait and see instead of knee jerking about Marines being OP”, declares same poster who made a thread demanding everyone BOYCOTT the genestealer cult dex weeks before release, because he just knew that handflamers and the Kelermorph would be too powerful and meta warping.
Do you.... do you realise how transparent you are to literally every neutral poster who doesn’t share your particular Marine bias? You’re like a parody of yourself at this point. Please stop weighing in on these threads you are WAY too biased to contribute anything even resembling an honest opinion here.
“Wait and see instead of knee jerking about Marines being OP”, declares same poster who made a thread demanding everyone BOYCOTT the genestealer cult dex weeks before release, because he just knew that handflamers and the Kelermorph would be too powerful and meta warping.
Do you.... do you realise how transparent you are to literally every neutral poster who doesn’t share your particular Marine bias? You’re like a parody of yourself at this point. Please stop weighing in on these threads you are WAY too biased to contribute anything even resembling an honest opinion here.
I'm so tired of your ham-fisted posts. Yes, I went over the top on GSC. And guess what I did? I listened to other people, debated, and appreciated their point of view and then changed mine. I can't say the same for almost any of you.
alextroy wrote: Note that the fact that RP for multi-wounds models is not very good when you lose a single model, it gets much better when you lose multiple models. For 2 wound model your recover rate is:
1 Model = 11% for 1 Model (vs 33% for 1 Wound Models)
2 Models = 30% for 1 Model, 1% for 2 Models (vs 55/11% for 1 Wound Models)
3 Models = 65% for 1 Model, 10% for 2 Models (vs 70/26/4% for 1 Wound Models)
4 Models = 80% for 1 Model, 25% for 2 Models, 2% for 3 Models (vs 80/41/11% for 1 Wound Models)
Sure that isn't as good as for 1 Wound Models, but 2 wound models are harder to kill and indications are they will also have Living Metal to increase overall durability.
Thats true but in order to see those higher returns you've got to lose more than one and less than all of your squad. Not much wiggle room there particularly in a squad of 3.
“Wait and see instead of knee jerking about Marines being OP”, declares same poster who made a thread demanding everyone BOYCOTT the genestealer cult dex weeks before release, because he just knew that handflamers and the Kelermorph would be too powerful and meta warping.
Do you.... do you realise how transparent you are to literally every neutral poster who doesn’t share your particular Marine bias? You’re like a parody of yourself at this point. Please stop weighing in on these threads you are WAY too biased to contribute anything even resembling an honest opinion here.
I'm so tired of your ham-fisted posts. Yes, I went over the top on GSC. And guess what I did? I listened to other people, debated, and appreciated their point of view and then changed mine. I can't say the same for almost any of you.
I can admit mistakes. Can you?
And neutral? GTFO of here with your bs.
The pattern seems to be pro-Astartes and not anti-alarmist.
^ exactly. I’m all for “wait and see”. It’s funny that certain posters are also suddenly of the same mindset when it’s the army they CONSTANTLY downplay in question, but yet will literally ask for boycotts weeks before other’s dexes are even released over rules they couldn’t even recall correctly in their justification for it. It’s called hypocrisy, but I don’t think those people even have the self-awareness to grasp that as a possibility.
And Yes Daedulus. I can admit my mistakes and have done so many times in the past. However, can YOU? I read that entire thread, and at no point did you admit any mistake concerning kneejerk statements other than “I probably shouldn’t have framed this so aggressively”. Three months after GSC came out and had mild success instead of dominance (and for nearly none of the reasons you were whining about), you were STILL holding firm to your stance that they are the most busted army in the game and we just need more time to see that (and I can link to the quote if you need me to), so please don’t act like you recanted on your initial knee jerking in the slightest slightest - merely your ridiculously over the top delivery of it. Insectum7 wasn’t asking for boycotts, so what exactly distinguishes his early “kneejerking” from yours? His was far more moderate than yours, why does he have to wait and see but you do not? Could it be *gasp* your overwhelmingly pro-Space Marine bias that yet another neutral poster just pointed out? There’s nothing ham-fisted about my posts, there’s a different reason you’re sick of my honesty, and I think maybe it’s time to take some time for self reflection here.
alextroy wrote: Note that the fact that RP for multi-wounds models is not very good when you lose a single model, it gets much better when you lose multiple models. For 2 wound model your recover rate is:
1 Model = 11% for 1 Model (vs 33% for 1 Wound Models)
2 Models = 30% for 1 Model, 1% for 2 Models (vs 55/11% for 1 Wound Models)
3 Models = 65% for 1 Model, 10% for 2 Models (vs 70/26/4% for 1 Wound Models)
4 Models = 80% for 1 Model, 25% for 2 Models, 2% for 3 Models (vs 80/41/11% for 1 Wound Models)
Sure that isn't as good as for 1 Wound Models, but 2 wound models are harder to kill and indications are they will also have Living Metal to increase overall durability.
Thats true but in order to see those higher returns you've got to lose more than one and less than all of your squad. Not much wiggle room there particularly in a squad of 3.
Most 2W models are either min size 5 or going to be taken in larger squads than 3. You really don't see the squad of 3 except with the 3W+ units.
They could have easily made it so a multi-wound model can return with less than full wounds. I was actually pretty surprised they did not way; make it so RP rolls heal wounds, and over healing brings back models with however many left. That is how it works in AoS.
Pretty sure GW's not going to spend a year updating, revamping, and retooling any non-Marine faction, CSM included. Pretty sure that should indicate all you need to know about how balance will play out in the game. Happy to be wrong.
NinthMusketeer wrote: They could have easily made it so a multi-wound model can return with less than full wounds. I was actually pretty surprised they did not way; make it so RP rolls heal wounds, and over healing brings back models with however many left. That is how it works in AoS.
alextroy wrote: Note that the fact that RP for multi-wounds models is not very good when you lose a single model, it gets much better when you lose multiple models. For 2 wound model your recover rate is:
1 Model = 11% for 1 Model (vs 33% for 1 Wound Models)
2 Models = 30% for 1 Model, 1% for 2 Models (vs 55/11% for 1 Wound Models)
3 Models = 65% for 1 Model, 10% for 2 Models (vs 70/26/4% for 1 Wound Models)
4 Models = 80% for 1 Model, 25% for 2 Models, 2% for 3 Models (vs 80/41/11% for 1 Wound Models)
Sure that isn't as good as for 1 Wound Models, but 2 wound models are harder to kill and indications are they will also have Living Metal to increase overall durability.
Living Metal only works on models that don't die. You think Lychguard and Praetorians are at all durable?
Denegaar wrote: So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?
Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?
Universally better than before, even on multiwound units.
Oh sure, on paper the old rule was better for those types of units. But in actual practice, in the real world in real games, you never made ANY RP rolls for units like Destroyers and this is what comparisons and stats of the two miss out on. It's pointless to posit that old RP would have let you resurrect one more Destroyer when the sad reality is you were never rolling for it in the first place.
Denegaar wrote: So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?
Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?
Universally better than before, even on multiwound units.
Oh sure, on paper the old rule was better for those types of units. But in actual practice, in the real world in real games, you never made ANY RP rolls for units like Destroyers and this is what comparisons and stats of the two miss out on. It's pointless to posit that old RP would have let you resurrect one more Destroyer when the sad reality is you were never rolling for it in the first place.
And in 9e you get to roll but you don't bring multiwound models.
It's non-existant rule for multi wound, for 20 warrior blop you get maybe 4-5 back and then you die and no RP.
Either way if you pay like 2 pts for warrior it's more of nerf by tax than boon.
tneva82 wrote: In that case they would be rolling RP in 8e as well. Except you don't need to roll 3 5+ for every recovery.
That's not what you said, you claimed the new RP does nothing for multi-wound models, which clearly is incorrect.
IMO it's a good thing that RP became better for single-wound models and worse for multi-wounds. It was just too swingy, 4-5 destroyers getting back up could be just as game deciding as failing those same rolls. I play against necrons rather commonly and more than a few games have been decided by a destroyer unit's RP rolls.
Now they can properly balance them around not reanimating, similar to how flash gits are balanced around not shooting twice. The chance to reanimate a single destroyer is still higher than rolling or , which happens often enough.
tneva82 wrote: In that case they would be rolling RP in 8e as well. Except you don't need to roll 3 5+ for every recovery.
Actually no. As there would be the rest of the turn still left to destroy the stragglers in 8e. If they are still alive at end of turn then yes what you say is true.
Consider this. Lychguard have 2 wounds each. A unit of 10 has to have 20 damage done to them in a single ATTACK, because they roll RP after each attack.
So if you kill half the unit (a difficult thing to do) you are rolling 10 dice. Chances are at least 2 of the 5 lychguard are coming back. Every ATTACK gets a RP roll. While yeah, getting a unit back to full strength becomes harder, each additional model down is a much better chance to bring a model back.
Lance845 wrote: Consider this. Lychguard have 2 wounds each. A unit of 10 has to have 20 damage done to them in a single ATTACK, because they roll RP after each attack.
So if you kill half the unit (a difficult thing to do) you are rolling 10 dice. Chances are at least 2 of the 5 lychguard are coming back. Every ATTACK gets a RP roll. While yeah, getting a unit back to full strength becomes harder, each additional model down is a much better chance to bring a model back.
Yes, in 1 round of shooting. 2 of the 5 get up, the other 3 are permanently dead. You will not get back to full strength beyond rolling 10 5+ after the first attacks.
You seem to be trying to suggest that as each shot is an attack you get to roll per shot, which is incorrect here.
Lance845 wrote: Consider this. Lychguard have 2 wounds each. A unit of 10 has to have 20 damage done to them in a single ATTACK, because they roll RP after each attack.
So if you kill half the unit (a difficult thing to do) you are rolling 10 dice. Chances are at least 2 of the 5 lychguard are coming back. Every ATTACK gets a RP roll. While yeah, getting a unit back to full strength becomes harder, each additional model down is a much better chance to bring a model back.
Yes, in 1 round of shooting. 2 of the 5 get up, the other 3 are permanently dead. You will not get back to full strength beyond rolling 10 5+ after the first attacks.
You seem to be trying to suggest that as each shot is an attack you get to roll per shot, which is incorrect here.
Maybe I miss read it. But I did not read it as the other 3 are permanently dead. The next time the unit gets attacked (even in the same round) you roll every wound for each dead model. SO thats 6 dice + any new dead models.
I have a unit with 5 of the same gun. I declare that they are shooting all 5 guns into the lychguards. After that I roll RP. The opposing player picks another unit and shoots at the lychguard again. I roll RP again.
Lance845 wrote: Consider this. Lychguard have 2 wounds each. A unit of 10 has to have 20 damage done to them in a single ATTACK, because they roll RP after each attack.
So if you kill half the unit (a difficult thing to do) you are rolling 10 dice. Chances are at least 2 of the 5 lychguard are coming back. Every ATTACK gets a RP roll. While yeah, getting a unit back to full strength becomes harder, each additional model down is a much better chance to bring a model back.
Yes, in 1 round of shooting. 2 of the 5 get up, the other 3 are permanently dead. You will not get back to full strength beyond rolling 10 5+ after the first attacks.
You seem to be trying to suggest that as each shot is an attack you get to roll per shot, which is incorrect here.
Maybe I miss read it. But I did not read it as the other 3 are permanently dead. The next time the unit gets attacked (even in the same round) you roll every wound for each dead model. SO thats 6 dice + any new dead models.
I have a unit with 5 of the same gun. I declare that they are shooting all 5 guns into the lychguards. After that I roll RP. The opposing player picks another unit and shoots at the lychguard again. I roll RP again.
No. Read the first paragraph again. The rules refer to models that were killed as a result of a single unit's attacks. Once you fail an RP roll, that model is gone.
Its worth pointing out that a model that does reanimate after an attack sequence can keep getting back up. Outside of extreme anti infantry shooting from a single unit, I think you'll almost always get more than 4-5 guys back from a unit of 20 1W Warriors in a real game.
Consider that an MSU unit of Intercessors with Bolt Rifles and rerolls will kill about 3 of them a turn. If an opponent was just using those against your big squad you'd get 9 of them back (they kill 3, you get one back and have 18, next squad shoots and now you have 16 and have gotten 2 back, etc). If you gave them the +1 RP buff, you'd get most of them back in that situation.
On average, in order to only get 4 Warriors back, the unit shooting at them would have to be killing 12 at a time, and they'd have to have two of those units (Kill 12, 4 get back up and now there are 12 Warriors. Next attack sequence wipes them).
The point is, I think the rule is better than the reception its getting. Yes, crazy anti infantry stuff does exist and can wipe them out before you can use the special rule. How much of that will actually be used remains to be seen with hordes and other light troops so heavily discouraged.
Slowroll wrote: Its worth pointing out that a model that does reanimate after an attack sequence can keep getting back up. Outside of extreme anti infantry shooting from a single unit, I think you'll almost always get more than 4-5 guys back from a unit of 20 1W Warriors in a real game.
Consider that an MSU unit of Intercessors with Bolt Rifles and rerolls will kill about 3 of them a turn. If an opponent was just using those against your big squad you'd get 9 of them back (they kill 3, you get one back and have 18, next squad shoots and now you have 16 and have gotten 2 back, etc). If you gave them the +1 RP buff, you'd get most of them back in that situation.
On average, in order to only get 4 Warriors back, the unit shooting at them would have to be killing 12 at a time, and they'd have to have two of those units (Kill 12, 4 get back up and now there are 12 Warriors. Next attack sequence wipes them).
The point is, I think the rule is better than the reception its getting. Yes, crazy anti infantry stuff does exist and can wipe them out before you can use the special rule. How much of that will actually be used remains to be seen with hordes and other light troops so heavily discouraged.
People seem happy with it for the little guys, they're more annoyed their big expensive multi wound models may as well not have the rule in a lot of situations.
Slowroll wrote: Its worth pointing out that a model that does reanimate after an attack sequence can keep getting back up. Outside of extreme anti infantry shooting from a single unit, I think you'll almost always get more than 4-5 guys back from a unit of 20 1W Warriors in a real game.
Consider that an MSU unit of Intercessors with Bolt Rifles and rerolls will kill about 3 of them a turn. If an opponent was just using those against your big squad you'd get 9 of them back (they kill 3, you get one back and have 18, next squad shoots and now you have 16 and have gotten 2 back, etc). If you gave them the +1 RP buff, you'd get most of them back in that situation.
On average, in order to only get 4 Warriors back, the unit shooting at them would have to be killing 12 at a time, and they'd have to have two of those units (Kill 12, 4 get back up and now there are 12 Warriors. Next attack sequence wipes them).
The point is, I think the rule is better than the reception its getting. Yes, crazy anti infantry stuff does exist and can wipe them out before you can use the special rule. How much of that will actually be used remains to be seen with hordes and other light troops so heavily discouraged.
People seem happy with it for the little guys, they're more annoyed their big expensive multi wound models may as well not have the rule in a lot of situations.
At least the Destroyers appear to be costed effectively to not rely on RP that much. 35 pts for the Skorpekh and for the Ophydians are pretty good.
Lance845 wrote: Consider this. Lychguard have 2 wounds each. A unit of 10 has to have 20 damage done to them in a single ATTACK, because they roll RP after each attack.
So if you kill half the unit (a difficult thing to do) you are rolling 10 dice. Chances are at least 2 of the 5 lychguard are coming back. Every ATTACK gets a RP roll. While yeah, getting a unit back to full strength becomes harder, each additional model down is a much better chance to bring a model back.
Yes, in 1 round of shooting. 2 of the 5 get up, the other 3 are permanently dead. You will not get back to full strength beyond rolling 10 5+ after the first attacks.
You seem to be trying to suggest that as each shot is an attack you get to roll per shot, which is incorrect here.
Maybe I miss read it. But I did not read it as the other 3 are permanently dead. The next time the unit gets attacked (even in the same round) you roll every wound for each dead model. SO thats 6 dice + any new dead models.
I have a unit with 5 of the same gun. I declare that they are shooting all 5 guns into the lychguards. After that I roll RP. The opposing player picks another unit and shoots at the lychguard again. I roll RP again.
No. Read the first paragraph again. The rules refer to models that were killed as a result of a single unit's attacks. Once you fail an RP roll, that model is gone.
Gone until one of the 3 or so other abilities in the Codex that returns models goes off, anyway.
Eonfuzz wrote: Games Workshop wouldnt' be buffing one of the strongest units in the game for no reason. Just wait and see, they have a plan.
Oh, they've got a plan alright. A $p€cial P£an.
You believe that GW pushes sales of a single kit - one that was available at a very discounted price in a boxed set before - at the cost of the sales for all remaining large monster and vehicle kits for all 40k factions? Nevermind that they will release several new vehicles between now and the next few weeks?
Didn't one dude that worked for GW studio as designer, tell a story of how the design head honchos made them test some new eldar units and the results were that they were very good at the point costs, but because Sales wanted to push the model hard, they cut the cost by 150pts creating some OP demon from hell?
As far as I remember it was like this:
- Somebody posted on Reddit that they were designing the rules for Eldar Wraithknights.
- Somewhen during the process a superior got shown the rules and was pleased with them.
- For the rules to be more balanced, the Wraithknight's costs needed to increase.
- The superior told the guy not to. Keep the new rules, but leave the old/initial price
In my opinion it would be dishonest not to mention three things:
- The supposed rules designer never got verified in some sorts. It could have been somebody making up a story.
- This is the only "known" instance where it happened.
- It happened years ago (6th or 7th edition IIRC) under a different CEO. Mister Kirby, who was about to crash the company as much as he could.
Karol wrote: Didn't one dude that worked for GW studio as designer, tell a story of how the design head honchos made them test some new eldar units and the results were that they were very good at the point costs, but because Sales wanted to push the model hard, they cut the cost by 150pts creating some OP demon from hell?
this was the 150 dollar wraith knight kit Karol. in this case we're talking about kit that'll likely go for 60 dollars making people less inclined to use the 100 dollar tank kits they make, including the new ones they'll be releasing in a few weeks
But quantity turns in to quality after some time. the 100$ kits may drop in sales, but if every marine player buys 2-3 boxs of erdictors, or even more considering they are 6 models per unit, the sells over all would go up.
Now if erdictors were an eldar unit and would make their sm, and as a bonus other factions, sells go drasticly down, they would probably try to rethink it. But to be honest the meanders of GW group thoughts escape the little comprehansion skills I have.
Ah and they could make it for some time only. Lets say the erdictors become the new castellan, no reason for them not to be. GW mass sells them till next spring, then spring FAQ tries to fix them, but doesn't being a free update, but the CA in winter 2021 does nerf them a bit. Just in time for GW to intreduce something new to the game.
Is that a joke Karol?
