You'll change your mind when you fight your first daemon factory list or see a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list.
If you still like it afterwards, sure, whatever floats your boat.
Whether you like something or not is always purely subjective.
Same with 40k. What do you want from 40k? You, for example, are a strictly casual player and for those, the changes aren't half as bad. Maelstrom might certainly be a lot of fun if you like randomness.
If playing in a competitive meta, 7th introduced some smaller good changes but also introduced terrible new things such as Unbound or multiple FOC allowance. Those have to be carefully looked into and, if necessary, be sorted out via a competitive ruleset.
If you like 7th, that's good for you, it's your game after all
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Changes rock, and the maelstrom of war missions rule. I'm glad the sky never fell.
Good thing i took all that salt!
I think it depends on what you mean by "the sky never fell." For some people it did. It was enough to make them quit 40k or at least skip out on this edition. That means less players and less profit for GW which its shareholders won't like.
The sky didn't fall all at once, but no one said it would. Rome didn't fall in a day.
I'm not buying the rules either as I don't want to support a blatant rushed rip-off, but I will play games with 7th rules. I am a competitive dude but 7th is terrible in that regard and since I also am a ref, we will have quite a few rule councils coming up to balance 7th out. Until then, all tournaments will strictly use 6th rules.
On the other hand, I am a player with friends who just want to play 40k while having a drink. 7th might just do that. Objective cards, Unbound etc. is totally random and takes pretty much all skill out of the game. Which is good for some people. Why not? Randomness can be fun. Yahtzee is fun too
It's only fun, though, because I know the guys and nobody of us will bring donkey-cave lists like Riptide or mass summoning spam.
Going into a store to play random people (PUGs) will be horror with 7th.
Sigvatr wrote: I'm not buying the rules either as I don't want to support a blatant rushed rip-off, but I will play games with 7th rules. I am a competitive dude but 7th is terrible in that regard and since I also am a ref, we will have quite a few rule councils coming up to balance 7th out. Until then, all tournaments will strictly use 6th rules.
really 7th edition didn't make a whole lot of changes. the only big differance from 6th to 7th is the psykic phase, unbound armies and the two new psykic disiplines.
that's easy eneugh to handle really.
disallow unbound, and maelfic deamonic powers and you've really removed the only potential trouble spots
Sigvatr wrote: I'm not buying the rules either as I don't want to support a blatant rushed rip-off, but I will play games with 7th rules. I am a competitive dude but 7th is terrible in that regard and since I also am a ref, we will have quite a few rule councils coming up to balance 7th out. Until then, all tournaments will strictly use 6th rules.
really 7th edition didn't make a whole lot of changes. the only big differance from 6th to 7th is the psykic phase, unbound armies and the two new psykic disiplines.
that's easy eneugh to handle really.
disallow unbound, and maelfic deamonic powers and you've really removed the only potential trouble spots
Precisely!
What bothers us, however, is - if you remove those changes, what exactly does 7th bring to the table? It would be 6th with a few FAQ-ish updates. That is what angers us. 7th is a blatant, rushed rip-off.
Kain wrote: You'll change your mind when you fight your first daemon factory list or see a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list.
Kain wrote: You'll change your mind when you fight your first daemon factory list or see a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list.
This is differnt from 6th edition how exactly?
Oh I thought 6e was a crock load of gak with it's wave serpent spam, screamerstars, and reaver titans invalidating entire armies.
Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
As for " a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list. ", what's exacly the problem here?
I'd love to play against that.
Sigvatr wrote: I'm not buying the rules either as I don't want to support a blatant rushed rip-off, but I will play games with 7th rules. I am a competitive dude but 7th is terrible in that regard and since I also am a ref, we will have quite a few rule councils coming up to balance 7th out. Until then, all tournaments will strictly use 6th rules.
really 7th edition didn't make a whole lot of changes. the only big differance from 6th to 7th is the psykic phase, unbound armies and the two new psykic disiplines.
that's easy eneugh to handle really.
disallow unbound, and maelfic deamonic powers and you've really removed the only potential trouble spots
Precisely!
What bothers us, however, is - if you remove those changes, what exactly does 7th bring to the table? It would be 6th with a few FAQ-ish updates. That is what angers us. 7th is a blatant, rushed rip-off.
it also explictly brings super heavies mainstream. something GW's clearly been pushing for awhile now.
A part of me is half expecting to see the gorkonought be a super heavy on par with the Knight
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
As for " a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list. ", what's exacly the problem here? I'd love to play against that.
Given the current GW design team it is always best to assume the worst out of anything they produce rules wise.
And it's a mishappen monstrosity because it's essentially taking a dump on the long abused FOC. Back when allies were fist announced I was actually supportive, recalling the old days of allies in the past, I even liked dual FOC at 2k points. But then they started cramming in all these special detachments and add ons (almost all of them Imperial exclusive) and then said you can have as many FOCs as you can pay for.
At this point, what the hell is the point in the FoC?
Why even have different codexes for Imperial armies and not just lump them all together into a single doorstopper book?
- Edited by insaniak. Dakka's rule #1 applies to everyone, even people who work for GW -
What bothers us, however, is - if you remove those changes, what exactly does 7th bring to the table? It would be 6th with a few FAQ-ish updates. That is what angers us. 7th is a blatant, rushed rip-off.
Every edition since 3rd has been about iterative changes from the previous edition. The core way the game works (the characteristics table, how models move, shoot, fight in combat) hasn't changed much. Basically GW changes the curtain every few years and keeps the same ugly window.
As far as the core rules go they're fine. There really isn't any major issues in the core rules. The issue is in the codexes. Daemon factory being the only possible exception, but that exception still had to deal with the same reduced odds of getting powers off that everyone else does. To borrow Torrent of Fire's math on this:
Chance of Perils of the Warp: 5.5%
Now, some 7th edition odds.
We will assume an infinite dice pool to get a range of probabilities, which you can adjust based on the ML+d6 that you have available each round. Probabilities for WC1, 2, and 3. There are no 4s that we know of.
Chance of successful cast for a 1 Warp Charge spell:
So what does it all mean? Well, a few things. Previously, a Ld 10 Psyker had a 91.67% chance of successfully casting any power they are able. Now, in order to do so, you’ll need to throw 4d6 for a WC1, 7d6 for a WC2, or 9d6 for a WC3 to remain at or around the same level of success. That is a lot of dice, and that means a MUCH higher chance for perils: 6th edition was 5.5%, while on 4d6 you’re at 13.19%, 7d6 is 33.02%, and 9d6 is 45.73%!
Furthermore, all that nonsense about Invisibility being 6 shades of broken all of a sudden are two years too slow. That power remains exactly the same as it did then. Why didn't we notice it? Puppet Master and Divination. 7th didn't make it more broken, it just took away one of the toys we were used to playing with and we suddenly noticed something we hadn't been paying attention to that was staring us in the face the entire time.
As I said, the core mechanics of 7th are serviceable, and on their own are okay. The issue I see isn't with 7th, it's with the codexes that need some beating into submission through FAQs and Erattas to make them fit this new edition and address some of our concerns with them (I'm looking at you Wave Serpents).
What bothers us, however, is - if you remove those changes, what exactly does 7th bring to the table? It would be 6th with a few FAQ-ish updates. That is what angers us. 7th is a blatant, rushed rip-off.
Every edition since 3rd has been about iterative changes from the previous edition. The core way the game works (the characteristics table, how models move, shoot, fight in combat) hasn't changed much. Basically GW changes the curtain every few years and keeps the same ugly window.
As far as the core rules go they're fine. There really isn't any major issues in the core rules. The issue is in the codexes. Daemon factory being the only possible exception, but that exception still had to deal with the same reduced odds of getting powers off that everyone else does. To borrow Torrent of Fire's math on this:
Chance of Perils of the Warp: 5.5%
Now, some 7th edition odds.
We will assume an infinite dice pool to get a range of probabilities, which you can adjust based on the ML+d6 that you have available each round. Probabilities for WC1, 2, and 3. There are no 4s that we know of.
Chance of successful cast for a 1 Warp Charge spell:
So what does it all mean? Well, a few things. Previously, a Ld 10 Psyker had a 91.67% chance of successfully casting any power they are able. Now, in order to do so, you’ll need to throw 4d6 for a WC1, 7d6 for a WC2, or 9d6 for a WC3 to remain at or around the same level of success. That is a lot of dice, and that means a MUCH higher chance for perils: 6th edition was 5.5%, while on 4d6 you’re at 13.19%, 7d6 is 33.02%, and 9d6 is 45.73%!
Furthermore, all that nonsense about Invisibility being 6 shades of broken all of a sudden are two years too slow. That power remains exactly the same as it did then. Why didn't we notice it? Puppet Master and Divination. 7th didn't make it more broken, it just took away one of the toys we were used to playing with and we suddenly noticed something we hadn't been paying attention to that was staring us in the face the entire time.
As I said, the core mechanics of 7th are serviceable, and on their own are okay. The issue I see isn't with 7th, it's with the codexes that need some beating into submission through FAQs and Erattas to make them fit this new edition and address some of our concerns with them (I'm looking at you Wave Serpents).
Invisibility was changed to forcing snap shots (thus meaning you're not allowed to fire blasts at it) and you only ever getting to hit an invisible unit on a 6 in assault.
it also explictly brings super heavies mainstream. something GW's clearly been pushing for awhile now.
A part of me is half expecting to see the gorkonought be a super heavy on par with the Knight
Escalation was released in 6th and made superheavies a core part of the game
Something the Knight codex put the final nail in the coffin in the arguments that Super Heavies not being a part of the core game too. 7th just out a nail in the coffin that Stronghold Assualt isn't part of the core game as well by having it be the only way to take fortifications for your army.
Codex: Fortifications is a go.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kain wrote: Invisibility was changed to forcing snap shots (thus meaning you're not allowed to fire blasts at it) and you only ever getting to hit an invisible unit on a 6 in assault.
Sorry, you're right it did change a little. Before it was Stealth, Shrouded and if you were fighting in close combat against an invisible opponent you were WS1.
Basically it's immune to Ignores Cover, immune to blasts (though I feel Blasts really should be allowed to snap fire, just not Overwatch) now, and slightly harder to hit if you're punching them, but on the flipside you have a chance to deny them as well. And the powers in general are harder to cast and easier to perils on.
I think the reason some people are upset with 40k lately is because the game has been taken too seriously. It says in the book, "it's just a game, you're free to play how you want, these are just guidelines", but so many people are used to the less than stellar wargaming communities in many areas that they are on the lookout for rules lawyer WAAC players who run netlists.
I suspect GW is trying to do two things:
1) sell models, obviously
2) shift the paradigm from games of "super strict RAW interpretations" to "loosely played games where fun is most important", i.e., they are trying to make 40k more like pnp games like Dungeons and Dragons in this sense
In D&D, the rules aren't something anybody typically spends time arguing over, in decent groups anyway. The goal of the game is to have fun, so that every single game of D&D is houseruled to some extent. Of course the difference between D&D and 40k in this context is that 40k actually has a clear winner, but I would like to see a shift in 40k where this kind of play is normal. Instead of going by the book Judge Dredd style, both players agree on certain houserules if necessary. The problem is that 40k players aren't nearly as open to houseruling as roleplayers.
Am I excusing GW for writing crap rules? No, games are always better with well-written rules. But I think a more casual approach to the rules would save several people a lot of butthurt.
Now that I have realized this, I care a lot less about 7th edition making assault suck, because everybody and their grandmother knows that assault sucks, so before the game is started you can just houserule assault to suck less. Experiment with things, make up stuff, see what works, and most importantly have fun. This really hurts those who only play pickup games, which honestly are most of my games, but with time I hope more people stop being so anal about technicalities in the game.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
As for " a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list. ", what's exacly the problem here?
I'd love to play against that.
Given the current GW design team it is always best to assume the worst out of anything they produce rules wise.
That's a very immature approach "assume the worst because I don't trust them, then bash them basing on my assumptions alone"
BoomWolf wrote: And it's a mishappen monstrosity because it's essentially taking a dump on the long abused FOC. Back when allies were fist announced I was actually supportive, recalling the old days of allies in the past, I even liked dual FOC at 2k points. But then they started cramming in all these special detachments and add ons (almost all of them Imperial exclusive) and then said you can have as many FOCs as you can pay for.
At this point, what the hell is the point in the FoC?
Why even have different codexes for Imperial armies and not just lump them all together into a single doorstopper book?
Because you quickly run into the problem of needing HQs and troops to fuel every one of said allied forces, then realize you can't cherry pick 3 HS from one army, and 3 FA from another, and so forth.
The FOC chart was always intended as nothing more then giving a base structure to an army, and making it follow the base constrains of "not too many elite/FA/HS compared to troops and HQs" and it still fills that goal, if you ally you either tax yourself HQ and troops, or get some that you can properly work with.
The FOC is NOT meant to limit your army, just to give it a skeleton of the bare minimum required.
And you know as well as I do there is no reason that the IoM WONT work like that, and that's exactly how the work in fluff as well, a ragtag bunch of mixed forces that each has his own command structure and nobody is really sure who is in charge, if anyone, and will likely brake apart or turn on each other the moment all xenos/traitors are destroyed.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
As for " a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list. ", what's exacly the problem here?
I'd love to play against that.
Given the current GW design team it is always best to assume the worst out of anything they produce rules wise.
That's a very immature approach "assume the worst because I don't trust them, then bash them basing on my assumptions alone"
Those aren't assumptions though. 7th has not seen any playtesting, there are blatant rule loopholes, FAQs to solve problems with older codices have not been released. GW has shown a severe lack of interest in releasing balanced rules in the past and is not interested in contructive player feedback either.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
Based on the fact heralds can summon-a fact that is not grounded by anything except the "what armies got what disciplines" list.
And everyone that even READ the daemon codex knows that different demons got different psyker disciplines.
Heck, you quote me, then link to something using the very thing I said probably isnt legal as a proof its unbalanced x_x did you even read?
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
As for " a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list. ", what's exacly the problem here?
I'd love to play against that.
Given the current GW design team it is always best to assume the worst out of anything they produce rules wise.
That's a very immature approach "assume the worst because I don't trust them, then bash them basing on my assumptions alone"
BoomWolf wrote: And it's a mishappen monstrosity because it's essentially taking a dump on the long abused FOC. Back when allies were fist announced I was actually supportive, recalling the old days of allies in the past, I even liked dual FOC at 2k points. But then they started cramming in all these special detachments and add ons (almost all of them Imperial exclusive) and then said you can have as many FOCs as you can pay for.
At this point, what the hell is the point in the FoC?
Why even have different codexes for Imperial armies and not just lump them all together into a single doorstopper book?
Because you quickly run into the problem of needing HQs and troops to fuel every one of said allied forces, then realize you can't cherry pick 3 HS from one army, and 3 FA from another, and so forth.
The FOC chart was always intended as nothing more then giving a base structure to an army, and making it follow the base constrains of "not too many elite/FA/HS compared to troops and HQs" and it still fills that goal, if you ally you either tax yourself HQ and troops, or get some that you can properly work with.
The FOC is NOT meant to limit your army, just to give it a skeleton of the bare minimum required.
And you know as well as I do there is no reason that the IoM WONT work like that, and that's exactly how the work in fluff as well, a ragtag bunch of mixed forces that each has his own command structure and nobody is really sure who is in charge, if anyone, and will likely brake apart or turn on each other the moment all xenos/traitors are destroyed.
A competent design team does not let things like 2++ rerollable death stars get by them. A competent design team does not rely on a billion and a half charts that slow down the game and call it "balance." A competent design team does not take a look at a unit like a rough rider or a pyrovore that was already widely known to be crap and say "yeah this doesn't need fixing." A competent design team doesn't completely lock out the fanbase out of the playtesting phase or create nebulously written rules that have to be argued over constantly rather than simply being workable as written.
These are all hallmarks of an incompetent design team, and given what passes for game theory among GW, it's quite easy to assume that they are in fact, completely idiotic as far as designing games go.
And what tax? I can pay the bare minimum for dirt cheap HQs and troops as either the GKs or AM to spam all the better units.
And you know what else can do that? And do that much better and more realistically than stacking special rules all willy nilly?
7th is far from a "cleaned up version of 6th". The game is not even remotely viable in a competitive setting anymore. It's quite ridiculous.
A lot of people are completely ignoring the fact that you can have as many detachments as you want in a battle forged list. That doesn't make it very restrictive at all.
40K is a game where you take your Tyranids against your buddy's Ultramarines and reenact the Battle for Maccrage. Not one where you should get into an idiotic arms race to see who can be the "best" in a competitive setting (Hint: it will be the one who can scour the internet the most for the most abusive list).
Competitve 6th was getting pretty horrible by virtue of terrible combos and the community splitting itself apart due to some people actually thinking Escalation/Stronghold Assault was good for the game and should be allowed in a competitive setting.
Then they release an entire army that many builds and even 2 whole armies cannot even kill with the new rules.
I've played competitive 40K exclusively for a while but I am done with it now. I've always been against the naysayers but now this is just beyond stupid. Hopefully I will be able to actually find casual games in my area (everybody just wants to play tournaments). I'm going to wait this one out for at least a couple months to see how it pans out or if any fixes get introduced (which I doubt). I have bought next to nothing as far as 40K goes since Esclation/SA came out because I could sense a storm brewing.
A competent design team does not let things like 2++ rerollable death stars get by them. A competent design team does not rely on a billion and a half charts that slow down the game and call it "balance." A competent design team does not take a look at a unit like a rough rider or a pyrovore that was already widely known to be crap and say "yeah this doesn't need fixing." A competent design team doesn't completely lock out the fanbase out of the playtesting phase or create nebulously written rules that have to be argued over constantly rather than simply being workable as written.
I doubt they actually know any kind of game design theory; probably just rely on "We've been doing this 30 years, so we're experts". Their idea that lots of randomness makes a game fun though is outright laughable. Sure, nearly all games have some randomness (especially if you roll dice) but the game didn't need Deck of Many Things-esque random charts for everything, and to think that balances things out is proof enough that they are complete idiots who don't have a clue.
You shouldn't have to have a gentleman's agreement before every game to fix broken rules and loopholes just so you don't make the game unfun.
BoomWolf wrote: Based on the fact heralds can summon-a fact that is not grounded by anything except the "what armies got what disciplines" list.
And everyone that even READ the daemon codex knows that different demons got different psyker disciplines.
Heck, you quote me, then link to something using the very thing I said probably isnt legal as a proof its unbalanced x_x did you even read?
If heralds aren't getting daemonology then who the heck in the codex is going to get it??
A simple read through the codex reveals the except daemon princes, most of them have a VERY limited selection of psyker disciplines to choose from, and each god has his signature few that he's got (biomancy is usually nurgle, divination is tzench only, telepaty is mostly slaneesh)
A competent design team does not let things like 2++ rerollable death stars get by them. A competent design team does not rely on a billion and a half charts that slow down the game and call it "balance." A competent design team does not take a look at a unit like a rough rider or a pyrovore that was already widely known to be crap and say "yeah this doesn't need fixing." A competent design team doesn't completely lock out the fanbase out of the playtesting phase or create nebulously written rules that have to be argued over constantly rather than simply being workable as written.
I doubt they actually know any kind of game design theory; probably just rely on "We've been doing this 30 years, so we're experts". Their idea that lots of randomness makes a game fun though is outright laughable. Sure, nearly all games have some randomness (especially if you roll dice) but the game didn't need Deck of Many Things-esque random charts for everything, and to think that balances things out is proof enough that they are complete idiots who don't have a clue.
You shouldn't have to have a gentleman's agreement before every game to fix broken rules and loopholes just so you don't make the game unfun.
Oh god the fething deck of many things. Even suggesting that be used at my game table earns an instant death glare.
A competent design team does not let things like 2++ rerollable death stars get by them. A competent design team does not rely on a billion and a half charts that slow down the game and call it "balance." A competent design team does not take a look at a unit like a rough rider or a pyrovore that was already widely known to be crap and say "yeah this doesn't need fixing." A competent design team doesn't completely lock out the fanbase out of the playtesting phase or create nebulously written rules that have to be argued over constantly rather than simply being workable as written.
I doubt they actually know any kind of game design theory; probably just rely on "We've been doing this 30 years, so we're experts". Their idea that lots of randomness makes a game fun though is outright laughable. Sure, nearly all games have some randomness (especially if you roll dice) but the game didn't need Deck of Many Things-esque random charts for everything, and to think that balances things out is proof enough that they are complete idiots who don't have a clue.
You shouldn't have to have a gentleman's agreement before every game to fix broken rules and loopholes just so you don't make the game unfun.
Oh god the fething deck of many things. Even suggesting that be used at my game table earns an instant death glare.
I am fairly certain the DoMT was the inspiration for the Chaos boon table
OP is probably playing friendly games. In that sense, the game is pretty good. I dont like the 2nd tactical objectives mission in the SLIGHTEST but other than that its pretty good.
Its when you break away from the friendly game scene it gets insane. Nobody is going to bring a daemon factory to a friendly game unless he/she wants to lose friends and future opponents. Nobody is going to bring the Imperial Legion of 5 different codices at once unless they want to lose friends. Same goes for any spamming of 1 unit (except boyz, i could see that for a fluff haha mission since its entirely possible to face nothing but boyz lol)
Vineheart01 wrote: OP is probably playing friendly games. In that sense, the game is pretty good. I dont like the 2nd tactical objectives mission in the SLIGHTEST but other than that its pretty good.
Its when you break away from the friendly game scene it gets insane. Nobody is going to bring a daemon factory to a friendly game unless he/she wants to lose friends and future opponents. Nobody is going to bring the Imperial Legion of 5 different codices at once unless they want to lose friends. Same goes for any spamming of 1 unit (except boyz, i could see that for a fluff haha mission since its entirely possible to face nothing but boyz lol)
Yet for all GW's imagination that only friendly games are played, I'd wager there are more pickup games that go on, which the rules are not conducive to.
TheKbob wrote: Because basing the outcome of a game on the draw of cards is fun...
... Works for Malifaux...
The core rulebook artifacts in D&D are generally speaking quite unimpressive and lame, but the Deck? That thing can completely derail a campaign far worse than a dozen staff of the magis.
TheKbob wrote: Because basing the outcome of a game on the draw of cards is fun...
... Works for Malifaux...
The core rulebook artifacts in D&D are generally speaking quite unimpressive and lame, but the Deck? That thing can completely derail a campaign far worse than a dozen staff of the magis.
The Deck is a relic of a bygone era. It no longer serves its original function. Back in the day when you needed millions of XP and potentially months or years of real time to gain a level, the Deck provided DMs with a very lethal trap for high level characters. The best part was that the danger was RIGHT there; the players new they were risking their lives in order to get one of the XP cards and speed their progression, but it was such a huge boon it was worth it. Inevitably they draw too many cards and the party dies horribly. (Or they wind up getting Wishes that end up killing the party horribly...with enough card draws a Deck experience always turns bad...) But in the days of 3rd ed and up, the Deck no longer serves that function. Levels are easy to get, and players can just draw one or two cards, which keeps the odds of drawing lethal or character ruining cards to a minimum. (Not dogging on 3rd edition mind you, it's just that the Deck was one of the casualties of the times.)
As far as this edition of 40k goes, I think it's a mixed bag. I got some changes I like (Daemonology), I got some changes I didn't (templates on open topped vehicles, Jink), they left some things in that I feared might go away (throwing grenades) and they didn't give me some things I wanted (shooting into melee). All in all, I'm pretty neutral with what I've seen so far.
If D&D teaches us anything, it's that no matter how good OR bad a new edition of a game is, some people are going to love it and some gamers are going to hate it. I'm trying not to let the 'that's it, I'm quitting 40k' threads or the 'this edition is the best thing since sliced bread' threads influence my opinion. I'd like to get a hold of the new rules, read them carefully, and play a few games before coming to a decision.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon princes, MAYBE londs of change, etc...
A simple read through the codex reveals the except daemon princes, most of them have a VERY limited selection of psyker disciplines to choose from, and each god has his signature few that he's got (biomancy is usually nurgle, divination is tzench only, telepaty is mostly slaneesh)
Since there's no FAQ, and there's no timetable on when there will be one. It is currently legal and will be until the rules change.
Didn't the psyker cards say that Daemons get Daemonology?
How are you unsure if something is legal? All of the rules are printed. Just check.
So, as the psyker card says daemons gets biomancy, slannesh heralds gets biomancy? no. the fact the ARMY as a whole has it, means nothing for each individual psyker in the army.
How am I unsure? still going over things, and there are many things to go over, and it takes time to really GET everything. the book is not in my hands for a long time.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon princes, MAYBE londs of change, etc...
A simple read through the codex reveals the except daemon princes, most of them have a VERY limited selection of psyker disciplines to choose from, and each god has his signature few that he's got (biomancy is usually nurgle, divination is tzench only, telepaty is mostly slaneesh)
Since there's no FAQ, and there's no timetable on when there will be one. It is currently legal and will be until the rules change.
Didn't the psyker cards say that Daemons get Daemonology?
How are you unsure if something is legal? All of the rules are printed. Just check.
I think the argument here is that he's saying Codex>Rulebook, and specific>general, so when in the Codex Daemons book, specific psychic disciplines are referred to as options for the various GDs, Heralds etc, that as they don't mention Daemonology (because it didn't exist at time of writing) then they don't have permission to take it.
I find this somewhat...tenuous in face of the new BRB and Psychic cards giving permission to everyone but Tyranids.
I'm loving every change in 7th edition. Primarily because I play with people who are not complete Norbert's i'm guessing. I can certainly see the little abusable things, but i'm safe in the knowledge that no-one in the groups of folks I play with want to be TFG who abuses it, and if someone came in and tried we would simply tell them we won't play if someone is that focussed on the win that they forget the fun.
BoomWolf wrote: So, as the psyker card says daemons gets biomancy, slannesh heralds gets biomancy? no. the fact the ARMY as a whole has it, means nothing for each individual psyker in the army.
How am I unsure? still going over things, and there are many things to go over, and it takes time to really GET everything. the book is not in my hands for a long time.
BoomWolf wrote: So, as the psyker card says daemons gets biomancy, slannesh heralds gets biomancy? no. the fact the ARMY as a whole has it, means nothing for each individual psyker in the army.
How am I unsure? still going over things, and there are many things to go over, and it takes time to really GET everything. the book is not in my hands for a long time.
If the BRB says that Daemons get Daemonology (an entirely new power that doesn't exist in any codex) then all the Daemons get it. Simple.
If you are saying that it must be in the codex or written in the BRB which specific units get the power, then Daemonology and Sanctic powers wouldn't be usable by any unit. Neither would Force for that matter.
Edit: You may not want to use the word "we". When it is specifically you that doesn't know.
BoomWolf wrote: So, as the psyker card says daemons gets biomancy, slannesh heralds gets biomancy? no. the fact the ARMY as a whole has it, means nothing for each individual psyker in the army.
How am I unsure? still going over things, and there are many things to go over, and it takes time to really GET everything. the book is not in my hands for a long time.
Quoth the Rulebook:
"Unless otherwise noted, all Psykers, other than those belonging in the Tyranids Faction (p.118) can generate powers from the Daemonology Discipline"
"Psykers wit the Daemon special rule can manifest Malefic powers as they would any other psychic power, but they cannot generate Sanctic powers at all.
All other Psykers that attempt to manifest Malefic powers suffer Perils of the Warp (p.25) on a Psychic test that includes any double, whether the Psychic test was successful or not."
humhum, yes, upon further reading this definitely requires an FAQ to give the "unless otherwise stated" part to several demons, if only to make it clear (as currently they are worded as having only several highly specific disciplines, and that counts as "otherwise stated" at some level.)
Have you ever considered the possibility that 'the competitive gaming scene' is not the largest demographic of 40k players? Or even that some changes are introduced without you in mind? Maybe- just maybe- the sense of entitlement which accompanies your sentiment is not the centre of Warhammer 40,000 around which the whole of GW revolves.
For your own fun and well-being, I strongly recommend playing Warmachine exclusively, clearly 40k is not the game for you.
God In Action wrote: Have you ever considered the possibility that 'the competitive gaming scene' is not the largest demographic of 40k players? Or even that some changes are introduced without you in mind? Maybe- just maybe- the sense of entitlement which accompanies your sentiment is not the centre of Warhammer 40,000 around which the whole of GW revolves.
For your own fun and well-being, I strongly recommend playing Warmachine exclusively, clearly 40k is not the game for you.
Me and my friends "forged a narrative" right into making our own set of rules still recognizable as 40k that don't let silliness like putting invisibility and the grimoire on be'lakor or a screamerstar fly.
I love 40k, I think the entire design team is a bunch of incompetent ninnies who should be working in an office cubicle organizing order forms, not writing rules.
I've enjoyed my games so far. Very refreshing and I like the cards very much. No more of me just hiding my Jetbikes and letting my Jetseer do all the heavy lifting.
Have you ever considered the possibility that 'the competitive gaming scene' is not the largest demographic of 40k players? Or even that some changes are introduced without you in mind? Maybe- just maybe- the sense of entitlement which accompanies your sentiment is not the centre of Warhammer 40,000 around which the whole of GW revolves.
For your own fun and well-being, I strongly recommend playing Warmachine exclusively, clearly 40k is not the game for you.
Me and my friends "forged a narrative" right into making our own set of rules still recognizable as 40k that don't let silliness like putting invisibility and the grimoire on be'lakor or a screamerstar fly.
I love 40k, I think the entire design team is a bunch of incompetent ninnies who should be working in an office cubicle organizing order forms, not writing rules.
Well you've just solved your own problem. If you and your friends are capable of house ruling, you're capable of not putting inivisibility and the Grimoire on Be'lakor in the first place, likewise you're capable of not playing with 15 Heralds and summoning 2000 points of demons to the table.
(I agree the GW design team shouldn't miss these OP combinations, but I also thought it incredibly silly to think that the design team should consider all changes with the competitive tournament demographic as the heart of every decision. It's cool to introduce some options which make for a fun game, but could be abused to hell and back by a WAACer, because most players will never abuse them that far).
Have you ever considered the possibility that 'the competitive gaming scene' is not the largest demographic of 40k players? Or even that some changes are introduced without you in mind? Maybe- just maybe- the sense of entitlement which accompanies your sentiment is not the centre of Warhammer 40,000 around which the whole of GW revolves.
For your own fun and well-being, I strongly recommend playing Warmachine exclusively, clearly 40k is not the game for you.
And nor is the game designed around you and your enjoyment. For someone who called someone out for their sense of entitlement, maybe you should avoid telling people what game they should or shouldn't be playing.
Objectively speaking, there is a lot of just outright poor game design in 40k. That bothers some people more than others, but it doesn't take away from the validity of the criticism just because you happen to like the current iteration of the game.
Maybe instead of telling people what games to play, you should read what other people have to say and refute their points.
Fact is, if the game were better designed and more balanced, we wouldn't be having this discussion, or at least not this level of polarization in the 40k community. That alone should speak volumes to the issues of the game.
BoomWolf wrote: humhum, yes, upon further reading this definitely requires an FAQ to give the "unless otherwise stated" part to several demons, if only to make it clear (as currently they are worded as having only several highly specific disciplines, and that counts as "otherwise stated" at some level.)
Not really. Having only "some" disciplines is how every faction's psykers already work. Chaos Sorcerers "only" have access to Biomancy, Pyromancy, and Telepathy. If the rules were actually intended to be your way, then there isn't a single faction in the game that can use Daemonology powers because none of them permit it on their list. They must all choose between X, Y, and Z.
The confusion you seem to have comes from the cards that came in the psyker pack, where they have a card listing the tables of every available power. That card only shows the potential power sets that each faction currently has access to, but those powers are spread across multiple different types of units. Chaos Sorcerers don't have Divination, yet the card makes it seem like all of Chaos Space Marine's psykers have it. In fact no one in the Chaos Space Marines book has divination, they're getting that from the Crimson Slaughter book which is a supplement.
We all know Sorcerers can generate a power from their gods if they take a Mark, yet the entry for them says they generate Biomancy, Pyromancy, or Divination powers. It's the Mark that is ADDING Tzeentch to their list of disciplines, just as the Crimson Slaughter is ADDING Divination to their list of disciplines, just as the 7th edition rulebook is ADDING Daemonology to every Psyker's discipline list. The part about "otherwise stated" is referring to Grey Knights not getting access to Daemonology - Malefic and Daemons not getting access to Daemonology - Sanctic.
I'm sorry that you take it personally when I call the likes of Jervis and Kelly dribbling morons who should be quietly shuffled away from the rules department to some place where they can do less harm to the competitive gaming scene
Have you ever considered the possibility that 'the competitive gaming scene' is not the largest demographic of 40k players? Or even that some changes are introduced without you in mind? Maybe- just maybe- the sense of entitlement which accompanies your sentiment is not the centre of Warhammer 40,000 around which the whole of GW revolves.
For your own fun and well-being, I strongly recommend playing Warmachine exclusively, clearly 40k is not the game for you.
Me and my friends "forged a narrative" right into making our own set of rules still recognizable as 40k that don't let silliness like putting invisibility and the grimoire on be'lakor or a screamerstar fly.
I love 40k, I think the entire design team is a bunch of incompetent ninnies who should be working in an office cubicle organizing order forms, not writing rules.
Well you've just solved your own problem. If you and your friends are capable of house ruling, you're capable of not putting inivisibility and the Grimoire on Be'lakor in the first place, likewise you're capable of not playing with 15 Heralds and summoning 2000 points of demons to the table.
(I agree the GW design team shouldn't miss these OP combinations, but I also thought it incredibly silly to think that the design team should consider all changes with the competitive tournament demographic as the heart of every decision. It's cool to introduce some options which make for a fun game, but could be abused to hell and back by a WAACer, because most players will never abuse them that far).
House ruling and homebrew is also needed to resolve the deep problems of internal and external codex imbalance that plagues 40k. The latter is particularly baffling as Warhammer Fantasy can manage to have relatively good external balance, with even low tier armies such as the Tomb Kings being mostly within arm's reach of the likes of the High Elves. Meanwhile in 40k, it is very clear that the likes of the Tyranids or Orks are in for unhappy unfuntimes against the Space Elf Bash Brothers or the Imperial supercodex without subscribing to a single monobuild and praying for the best.
Especially when on one hand, you can have books like the Necron codex which is still going strong and has rested in the high tiers throughout it's entire lifetime, or books like the Tyranid codex that immediately crashed and burned and need to limp along with dataslates and spamming a few core units to reasonably compete.
Only problem I am running into is if I am going to run psykers or not. Either I run 3-4 levels or not even going to bother. Its a tough call and its making it difficult to make lists. In all honesty making lists is half the fun so being stuck trying to come up with ideas is pretty cool. I really need more practice before I will be able to come up with good lists. Also the variety of missions right now make it too hard to come up with a list so I will need to see what major tournament organizers decide on for missions before I can make a tournament list.
I fully agree with everything said about the overall poor balance of 40k, which was the the crux of my point that for those who feel it has tipped too far from just 'imbalanced' to 'not enjoyable broken' more fun will be had by just playing something different. Of course it hasn't been designed around my fun specifically- the only point I've made here is that nor was it ever made specifically for competitive tournament play and it's pretty obvious from the broken rules loopholes that the design team never tried to make it be.
Maybe it's even deliberately not intended to be. After all, it's not like GW is obliged to make it tournament compatible. (Would be nice if I didn't have to rely on my opponent's willingness to play fair though, I'm not at all disputing that).
God In Action wrote: I fully agree with everything said about the overall poor balance of 40k, which was the the crux of my point that for those who feel it has tipped too far from just 'imbalanced' to 'not enjoyable broken' more fun will be had by just playing something different. Of course it hasn't been designed around my fun specifically- the only point I've made here is that nor was it ever made specifically for competitive tournament play and it's pretty obvious from the broken rules loopholes that the design team never tried to make it be.
Maybe it's even deliberately not intended to be. After all, it's not like GW is obliged to make it tournament compatible. (Would be nice if I didn't have to rely on my opponent's willingness to play fair though, I'm not at all disputing that).
Why even have factions like the Orks, Tyranids, Chaos Space marines, and Sisters of Battle around if they're going to be intentionally crippled? Just so that little timmy can feel good as he sweeps them off the table?
If they're going to be intentionally bad, you may as well strike the Chaos Space marines, Blood Angels, Orks, Tyranids, and Sisters completely out of the lore and game and consign them to the same hell as the squats and save their fanbases the constant heartache of seeing their army screwed over repeatedly. It'd at least tell them in no uncertain terms that no one on the design team likes them enough to make playing them fun for non-masochists.
Evileyes wrote: I'm loving every change in 7th edition. Primarily because I play with people who are not complete Norbert's i'm guessing. I can certainly see the little abusable things, but i'm safe in the knowledge that no-one in the groups of folks I play with want to be TFG who abuses it, and if someone came in and tried we would simply tell them we won't play if someone is that focussed on the win that they forget the fun.
I am enjoying it myself. As many have mentioned, this edition will have a big impact on competitive play and pick-up games...if no ground rules are set, which I find it hard to believe that there won't be very quickly, especially in the tournament scene. In every edition there has been broken lists adopted by d-bags solely with the intention of winning at the expense of fun. 7th will definitely not fix this issue unless some limitations are set. People playing like a-holes can be weeded out if no one plays them. They will either fall in line with community expectations or not play. Take the fun back! This is a game after all and not a job.
Evileyes wrote: I'm loving every change in 7th edition. Primarily because I play with people who are not complete Norbert's i'm guessing. I can certainly see the little abusable things, but i'm safe in the knowledge that no-one in the groups of folks I play with want to be TFG who abuses it, and if someone came in and tried we would simply tell them we won't play if someone is that focussed on the win that they forget the fun.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
There it is. Guy made a list for 2000 points, summoned another 2000 points. For a total of 4000 points worth of models in a 2000 point game.
How can anyone actually believe this. 3 psykers each successfully casting a wc3 summoning each turn for 6 turns cannot generate 2000 points of daemons. Factor in the variable warp charge dice each turn, potw, deny the witch, and the fact that your opponent wouldn't target the psykers for the game, and I call massive amounts of bs (not ballistic skill)
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
There it is. Guy made a list for 2000 points, summoned another 2000 points. For a total of 4000 points worth of models in a 2000 point game.
How can anyone actually believe this. 3 psykers each successfully casting a wc3 summoning each turn for 6 turns cannot generate 2000 points of daemons. Factor in the variable warp charge dice each turn, potw, deny the witch, and the fact that your opponent wouldn't target the psykers for the game, and I call massive amounts of bs (not ballistic skill)
Way more than just three psykers were summoning, not only that but you can summon in more daemons to summon in even more daemons. You should have read the linkedthread before leaping to conclusions.
Evileyes wrote: I'm loving every change in 7th edition. Primarily because I play with people who are not complete Norbert's i'm guessing. I can certainly see the little abusable things, but i'm safe in the knowledge that no-one in the groups of folks I play with want to be TFG who abuses it, and if someone came in and tried we would simply tell them we won't play if someone is that focussed on the win that they forget the fun.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
There it is. Guy made a list for 2000 points, summoned another 2000 points. For a total of 4000 points worth of models in a 2000 point game.
How can anyone actually believe this. 3 psykers each successfully casting a wc3 summoning each turn for 6 turns cannot generate 2000 points of daemons. Factor in the variable warp charge dice each turn, potw, deny the witch, and the fact that your opponent wouldn't target the psykers for the game, and I call massive amounts of bs (not ballistic skill)
Way more than just three psykers were summoning, not only that but you can summon in more daemons to summon in even more daemons. You should have read the linkedthread before leaping to conclusions.
Again, assumes no perils, no failed casting, no deny the witch, illegal invul saves (they don't stack). A unit of ten paladins kills half the heralds first turn. Let's see this actually work an real game.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
There it is. Guy made a list for 2000 points, summoned another 2000 points. For a total of 4000 points worth of models in a 2000 point game.
How can anyone actually believe this. 3 psykers each successfully casting a wc3 summoning each turn for 6 turns cannot generate 2000 points of daemons. Factor in the variable warp charge dice each turn, potw, deny the witch, and the fact that your opponent wouldn't target the psykers for the game, and I call massive amounts of bs (not ballistic skill)
Way more than just three psykers were summoning, not only that but you can summon in more daemons to summon in even more daemons. You should have read the linkedthread before leaping to conclusions.
Again, assumes no perils, no failed casting, no deny the witch, illegal invul saves (they don't stack). A unit of ten paladins kills half the heralds first turn. Let's see this actually work an real game.
I was just pointing out that the list can be made. The effectiveness will vary. How would a ten man unit kill half of the heralds on the first turn? I wouldn't think that he would deploy them all in one place and within 1st turn assault range.
I know one of the dudes in that video, they wouldn't fake that for fake's sake.
And daemons only peril on double 6s for Malefic.
Also, not everyone has a gaming group and relies on pick up games and tournaments. Hence folks are a little distraught. And once again, "casual" lists aren't balanced as a mono-tzeentch list, all fluffy as can be, can be game breaking as we've seen where as an all Khorne list can now fail 1" charges. Yay!
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
There it is. Guy made a list for 2000 points, summoned another 2000 points. For a total of 4000 points worth of models in a 2000 point game.
How can anyone actually believe this. 3 psykers each successfully casting a wc3 summoning each turn for 6 turns cannot generate 2000 points of daemons. Factor in the variable warp charge dice each turn, potw, deny the witch, and the fact that your opponent wouldn't target the psykers for the game, and I call massive amounts of bs (not ballistic skill)
Way more than just three psykers were summoning, not only that but you can summon in more daemons to summon in even more daemons. You should have read the linkedthread before leaping to conclusions.
Again, assumes no perils, no failed casting, no deny the witch, illegal invul saves (they don't stack). A unit of ten paladins kills half the heralds first turn. Let's see this actually work an real game.
I was just pointing out that the list can be made. The effectiveness will vary. How would a ten man unit kill half of the heralds on the first turn? I wouldn't think that he would deploy them all in one place and within 1st turn assault range.
Since this is an unbound army, each paladin runs solo, generating an additional warp charge each. They can then each target a unique enemy. As I mention in another thread, 30 paladins is 1650 points. Two hundreds points for extras, an inquisitor, a librarian, upgrades, etc. So you field 17 heralds - I field 30 paladins firing 2 shots a piece at 24 in range at any target they see fit. I also generate 30 plus D6 warp charges to attempt to deny any successful casting. And as the daemons are casting to create more daemons, I'm using my 30 plus D6 warp charges to kill daemons. Tabled in 3 turns, I would guess.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
There it is. Guy made a list for 2000 points, summoned another 2000 points. For a total of 4000 points worth of models in a 2000 point game.
How can anyone actually believe this. 3 psykers each successfully casting a wc3 summoning each turn for 6 turns cannot generate 2000 points of daemons. Factor in the variable warp charge dice each turn, potw, deny the witch, and the fact that your opponent wouldn't target the psykers for the game, and I call massive amounts of bs (not ballistic skill)
Way more than just three psykers were summoning, not only that but you can summon in more daemons to summon in even more daemons. You should have read the linkedthread before leaping to conclusions.
Again, assumes no perils, no failed casting, no deny the witch, illegal invul saves (they don't stack). A unit of ten paladins kills half the heralds first turn. Let's see this actually work an real game.
I was just pointing out that the list can be made. The effectiveness will vary. How would a ten man unit kill half of the heralds on the first turn? I wouldn't think that he would deploy them all in one place and within 1st turn assault range.
Since this is an unbound army, each paladin runs solo, generating an additional warp charge each. They can then each target a unique enemy. As I mention in another thread, 30 paladins is 1650 points. Two hundreds points for extras, an inquisitor, a librarian, upgrades, etc. So you field 17 heralds - I field 30 paladins firing 2 shots a piece at 24 in range at any target they see fit. I also generate 30 plus D6 warp charges to attempt to deny any successful casting. And as the daemons are casting to create more daemons, I'm using my 30 plus D6 warp charges to kill daemons. Tabled in 3 turns, I would guess.
Each of those is a far cry from a "ten man unit of paladins" but I do see where you're going with it. It also highlights the problems of the current rules. You need this in order to counter that. Otherwise, you're screwed.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
There it is. Guy made a list for 2000 points, summoned another 2000 points. For a total of 4000 points worth of models in a 2000 point game.
How can anyone actually believe this. 3 psykers each successfully casting a wc3 summoning each turn for 6 turns cannot generate 2000 points of daemons. Factor in the variable warp charge dice each turn, potw, deny the witch, and the fact that your opponent wouldn't target the psykers for the game, and I call massive amounts of bs (not ballistic skill)
Way more than just three psykers were summoning, not only that but you can summon in more daemons to summon in even more daemons. You should have read the linkedthread before leaping to conclusions.
Again, assumes no perils, no failed casting, no deny the witch, illegal invul saves (they don't stack). A unit of ten paladins kills half the heralds first turn. Let's see this actually work an real game.
I was just pointing out that the list can be made. The effectiveness will vary. How would a ten man unit kill half of the heralds on the first turn? I wouldn't think that he would deploy them all in one place and within 1st turn assault range.
Since this is an unbound army, each paladin runs solo, generating an additional warp charge each. They can then each target a unique enemy. As I mention in another thread, 30 paladins is 1650 points. Two hundreds points for extras, an inquisitor, a librarian, upgrades, etc. So you field 17 heralds - I field 30 paladins firing 2 shots a piece at 24 in range at any target they see fit. I also generate 30 plus D6 warp charges to attempt to deny any successful casting. And as the daemons are casting to create more daemons, I'm using my 30 plus D6 warp charges to kill daemons. Tabled in 3 turns, I would guess.
Each of those is a far cry from a "ten man unit of paladins" but I do see where you're going with it. It also highlights the problems of the current rules. You need this in order to counter that. Otherwise, you're screwed.
Battle points will stop that army in its tracks. It will take too long to play and games will end on turn 2-3 and they wont be able to get many points.
But that being said I think that the psyker spam army will be interesting to say the least to play against.
We dont have enough data and I kinda wish I knew someone who played it so I could try against it.
I think the money spot for investment to returns is gonna be 6-8 mastery levels.
I'm liking 7th, it's 6th with extra stuff and better charts. Maybe its not eighty bucks better, but I don't have any problems with the rules themselves.
Since this is an unbound army, each paladin runs solo, generating an additional warp charge each. They can then each target a unique enemy. As I mention in another thread, 30 paladins is 1650 points. Two hundreds points for extras, an inquisitor, a librarian, upgrades, etc. So you field 17 heralds - I field 30 paladins firing 2 shots a piece at 24 in range at any target they see fit. I also generate 30 plus D6 warp charges to attempt to deny any successful casting. And as the daemons are casting to create more daemons, I'm using my 30 plus D6 warp charges to kill daemons. Tabled in 3 turns, I would guess.
You don't need an unbound army. Even the pink horrors can apparently summon the daemons needed, which summons more pink horrors to summon more pink horrors. It's an infinite cycle unless you can table them faster than they hit the table. Daemons don't get perils except on double 6s and Deny the Witch receives NO bonuses against summoning, so only 6s count whereas they only need 4+ to score. Additionally, you don't need thousands of points to hit the table, only a few troops at a time is already a huge advantage.
As for anyone who wants to test this out, you don't need daemon units for that. Just proxy any units you have as the lists given, get their stats off the codex or Army Builder, then go to town with your friendly neighborhood Space Marines. Watch the carnage yourself.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
There it is. Guy made a list for 2000 points, summoned another 2000 points. For a total of 4000 points worth of models in a 2000 point game.
How can anyone actually believe this. 3 psykers each successfully casting a wc3 summoning each turn for 6 turns cannot generate 2000 points of daemons. Factor in the variable warp charge dice each turn, potw, deny the witch, and the fact that your opponent wouldn't target the psykers for the game, and I call massive amounts of bs (not ballistic skill)
Way more than just three psykers were summoning, not only that but you can summon in more daemons to summon in even more daemons. You should have read the linkedthread before leaping to conclusions.
Again, assumes no perils, no failed casting, no deny the witch, illegal invul saves (they don't stack). A unit of ten paladins kills half the heralds first turn. Let's see this actually work an real game.
I was just pointing out that the list can be made. The effectiveness will vary. How would a ten man unit kill half of the heralds on the first turn? I wouldn't think that he would deploy them all in one place and within 1st turn assault range.
Since this is an unbound army, each paladin runs solo, generating an additional warp charge each. They can then each target a unique enemy. As I mention in another thread, 30 paladins is 1650 points. Two hundreds points for extras, an inquisitor, a librarian, upgrades, etc. So you field 17 heralds - I field 30 paladins firing 2 shots a piece at 24 in range at any target they see fit. I also generate 30 plus D6 warp charges to attempt to deny any successful casting. And as the daemons are casting to create more daemons, I'm using my 30 plus D6 warp charges to kill daemons. Tabled in 3 turns, I would guess.
Each of those is a far cry from a "ten man unit of paladins" but I do see where you're going with it. It also highlights the problems of the current rules. You need this in order to counter that. Otherwise, you're screwed.
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
There it is. Guy made a list for 2000 points, summoned another 2000 points. For a total of 4000 points worth of models in a 2000 point game.
How can anyone actually believe this. 3 psykers each successfully casting a wc3 summoning each turn for 6 turns cannot generate 2000 points of daemons. Factor in the variable warp charge dice each turn, potw, deny the witch, and the fact that your opponent wouldn't target the psykers for the game, and I call massive amounts of bs (not ballistic skill)
Way more than just three psykers were summoning, not only that but you can summon in more daemons to summon in even more daemons. You should have read the linkedthread before leaping to conclusions.
Again, assumes no perils, no failed casting, no deny the witch, illegal invul saves (they don't stack). A unit of ten paladins kills half the heralds first turn. Let's see this actually work an real game.
I was just pointing out that the list can be made. The effectiveness will vary. How would a ten man unit kill half of the heralds on the first turn? I wouldn't think that he would deploy them all in one place and within 1st turn assault range.
Since this is an unbound army, each paladin runs solo, generating an additional warp charge each. They can then each target a unique enemy. As I mention in another thread, 30 paladins is 1650 points. Two hundreds points for extras, an inquisitor, a librarian, upgrades, etc. So you field 17 heralds - I field 30 paladins firing 2 shots a piece at 24 in range at any target they see fit. I also generate 30 plus D6 warp charges to attempt to deny any successful casting. And as the daemons are casting to create more daemons, I'm using my 30 plus D6 warp charges to kill daemons. Tabled in 3 turns, I would guess.
Each of those is a far cry from a "ten man unit of paladins" but I do see where you're going with it. It also highlights the problems of the current rules. You need this in order to counter that. Otherwise, you're screwed.
Fair enough. My larger point is that people declaring they've been able to break the game a day after the book comes out with an army that could just as easily be countered with an unbound list (and I bet there are many others) doesn't help the conversation. I'm willing to give the rules a try. That means playing actual games, not rofl-mathhammering an idea and then declaring a ruleset dead. I think unbound will create some crazy fun games, while standard force org will make more balanced battles as before. And yes, I'm sure it is only days until some stupid list becomes the new meta douchebaggery.
Kain wrote: You'll change your mind when you fight your first daemon factory list or see a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list.
If you still like it afterwards, sure, whatever floats your boat.
*Sigh.* The "Daemon Factory List" isn't as effective in practice as you think it will be. I know how to make that army cry... without using psychic powers.
The "misshapen monstrosity" lists won't be any different from what we have now... unless you mean Unbound, and if you're looking at that on the table, you AGREED to play against it, so you shouldn't really be complaining.
Since this is an unbound army, each paladin runs solo, generating an additional warp charge each. They can then each target a unique enemy. As I mention in another thread, 30 paladins is 1650 points. Two hundreds points for extras, an inquisitor, a librarian, upgrades, etc. So you field 17 heralds - I field 30 paladins firing 2 shots a piece at 24 in range at any target they see fit. I also generate 30 plus D6 warp charges to attempt to deny any successful casting. And as the daemons are casting to create more daemons, I'm using my 30 plus D6 warp charges to kill daemons. Tabled in 3 turns, I would guess.
You don't need an unbound army. Even the pink horrors can apparently summon the daemons needed, which summons more pink horrors to summon more pink horrors. It's an infinite cycle unless you can table them faster than they hit the table. Daemons don't get perils except on double 6s and Deny the Witch receives NO bonuses against summoning, so only 6s count whereas they only need 4+ to score. Additionally, you don't need thousands of points to hit the table, only a few troops at a time is already a huge advantage.
As for anyone who wants to test this out, you don't need daemon units for that. Just proxy any units you have as the lists given, get their stats off the codex or Army Builder, then go to town with your friendly neighborhood Space Marines. Watch the carnage yourself.
Since you need three 4+ to cast, you'd want to roll 5 to 7 die to "guarentee" success. A certain amount will fail. Another amount will perils. And some could be denied. Since any opponent would most likely be using unbound as well, the odds of generating some type of infinite daemon loop are zero to none. Tzneetch Heralds would be popping all over the battlefield against any competent counter force.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Changes rock, and the maelstrom of war missions rule. I'm glad the sky never fell.
Good thing i took all that salt!
Okay, I mean this not as a "hater" (hilarious term), but... have you played it yet?
I have, I enjoyed the games, still think it needs help in the assault department but it's improved. I like it so far (thankfully have had some fun people to play against). But I like it because of what I've experienced firsthand.
Reading the rules is one thing. Play some games with it, then make up your mind. Maybe you'll still feel the same, and fair game to you if you do. But maybe you change your mind a bit and temper "love" down to "like" (or somehow completely flip your opinion).
This point really applies to all the people making an opinion either way about the new edition. Try playing some games, then make an opinion.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Changes rock, and the maelstrom of war missions rule. I'm glad the sky never fell.
Good thing i took all that salt!
Okay, I mean this not as a "hater" (hilarious term), but... have you played it yet?
I have, I enjoyed the games, still think it needs help in the assault department but it's improved. I like it so far (thankfully have had some fun people to play against). But I like it because of what I've experienced firsthand.
Reading the rules is one thing. Play some games with it, then make up your mind. Maybe you'll still feel the same, and fair game to you if you do. But maybe you change your mind a bit and temper "love" down to "like" (or somehow completely flip your opinion).
This point really applies to all the people making an opinion either way about the new edition. Try playing some games, then make an opinion.
Not sure why you think challenges rock though. Theyre almost removed with the wound spillover rule. All it does its let the characters of two units duke it out on their own, but once either the challenger dies or the rest of the unit not in the challenge dies, wounds carry over both ways.
My orks love that, thats for sure lol. 3 PKs on nobs + 1 on the boss. Rarely need more than 1 to win the challenge, and he has 6 attacks on the charge. Oooh yeah! lol. Likewise, if the nobs kill the unit and have wounds left over (very, very likely) they finish the challenge for me if i didnt win somehow.
Well, I'm hesitating a bit.
Daemonology worries me a bit since it cries for imbalance.
I'll organize a local tourney for the store owner. Not sure what constraints to put in.
40k losing players is not a good thing for the hobby or for GW.
They've lost me as a player and I don't seem to be the only one. I'm seeing similar things on other forums. I can't say how large this percentage is, but if its even 10%, that's still not good.
Since you need three 4+ to cast, you'd want to roll 5 to 7 die to "guarentee" success. A certain amount will fail. Another amount will perils. And some could be denied. Since any opponent would most likely be using unbound as well, the odds of generating some type of infinite daemon loop are zero to none. Tzneetch Heralds would be popping all over the battlefield against any competent counter force.
I don't think you understand... there's nothing at risk here.
1) Failure is impossible because you just throw more dice at it, or try again with a different unit if you're going for the spam approach. You can afford with this army to throw 12 or even 15 dice at the attempt. Try failing that.
2) Perils don't affect this army. You can only peril once per cast and a Brotherhood of Sorcerers (which Pink Horrors are) suffers the wound to a random model in the unit, not the entire unit. Meaning you lose 1 of your 19 Pink Horrors if you peril.
3) In order to Deny the Witch successfully, you must generate a deny for EACH warp charge success the power caster generated. Since it's conjuration, only 6s count as denies. In order to succeed in casting summoning, you had to roll AT LEAST 3 warp charges, meaning the opponent needs THREE DENIES to cancel your power. For most opponents, that means they need to roll 18 dice to have a decent chance of that. No matter how many dice we talk about, your opponent will always need to roll three times as many dice as you do to cancel your power on average. Which goes back to number 2... since Pink Horrors don't care about perils, you can roll 15 dice on your summoning check, lose a single Pink Horror to perils, then watch as your opponent tries to cancel your power with 45 dice.
4) I stated already, this is NOT an unbound list. Pink Horrors are Troop choices and make up the core summoners of any army, as well as generating warp charges. The only reason you would take Heralds at all is if you want to generate MORE charges for low cost. Be'lakor is easily the best HQ for this army as Invisibility is absolutely broken in how invincible it makes your unit.
5) You don't care about Tzeentch Heralds, so let them pop. You can flood the board with daemons JUST using a few squads of Pink Horrors, which generate more warp charges the larger the squad you field.
Again, I'm not certain you understand how this tactic works or is played, that's why you keep decrying it. All of your points are irrelevant to the playstyle, this army doesn't care about perils and can't be denied unless you have God's Luck at rolling 6s. To reliably combat this army, you not only need to be able to kill the starting force, you need to be able to kill the 1, 2, or more units of horrors that they summon each turn. On top of that, at least one of the horrors will eventually roll a Possession on the malefic chart and suddenly you're dealing with BLOODTHIRSTERS!
Heavy Psker armies seem a little powerful but over all it looks like a pretty kick ass edition. Really like the new FOC as it gives me more options for my Necrons, and I can field more things as I have some CSM that'd could add to my force.
Kain wrote: You'll change your mind when you fight your first daemon factory list or see a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list.
If you still like it afterwards, sure, whatever floats your boat.
*Sigh.* The "Daemon Factory List" isn't as effective in practice as you think it will be. I know how to make that army cry... without using psychic powers.
The "misshapen monstrosity" lists won't be any different from what we have now... unless you mean Unbound, and if you're looking at that on the table, you AGREED to play against it, so you shouldn't really be complaining.
The lists I've seen aren't unbound and have cranked out hundreds of points extra in the reports. Would you please share your ability to completely shut down what very may well be the next overpowered build to fear? Or will you just make the statement "I can win against anything" and call it a day. Because I can lift the moon.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Changes rock, and the maelstrom of war missions rule. I'm glad the sky never fell.
Good thing i took all that salt!
Okay, I mean this not as a "hater" (hilarious term), but... have you played it yet?
I have, I enjoyed the games, still think it needs help in the assault department but it's improved. I like it so far (thankfully have had some fun people to play against). But I like it because of what I've experienced firsthand.
Reading the rules is one thing. Play some games with it, then make up your mind. Maybe you'll still feel the same, and fair game to you if you do. But maybe you change your mind a bit and temper "love" down to "like" (or somehow completely flip your opinion).
This point really applies to all the people making an opinion either way about the new edition. Try playing some games, then make an opinion.
Played it all weekend brah.
Good (although you get negative points for using the word "brah").
So give more than a couple lines. Say what you like. What particularly do you feel made the game better?
This isn't a personal thing, I've just seen a lot of very short posts with comments one way or the other, and I'm certain the majority of them haven't actually played. It's hard to sort out the ones who have, because people aren't backing their opinions one way or the other with "evidence" from gameplay.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vineheart01 wrote: Not sure why you think challenges rock though. Theyre almost removed with the wound spillover rule. All it does its let the characters of two units duke it out on their own, but once either the challenger dies or the rest of the unit not in the challenge dies, wounds carry over both ways.
My orks love that, thats for sure lol. 3 PKs on nobs + 1 on the boss. Rarely need more than 1 to win the challenge, and he has 6 attacks on the charge. Oooh yeah! lol. Likewise, if the nobs kill the unit and have wounds left over (very, very likely) they finish the challenge for me if i didnt win somehow.
It was a little odd to see my Chapter Master wipe out an entire squad (there were only four left, to be fair) while fighting a "challenge." The rest of my unit just kind of stood there feeling useless...
Since you need three 4+ to cast, you'd want to roll 5 to 7 die to "guarentee" success. A certain amount will fail. Another amount will perils. And some could be denied. Since any opponent would most likely be using unbound as well, the odds of generating some type of infinite daemon loop are zero to none. Tzneetch Heralds would be popping all over the battlefield against any competent counter force.
I don't think you understand... there's nothing at risk here.
1) Failure is impossible because you just throw more dice at it, or try again with a different unit if you're going for the spam approach. You can afford with this army to throw 12 or even 15 dice at the attempt. Try failing that.
2) Perils don't affect this army. You can only peril once per cast and a Brotherhood of Sorcerers (which Pink Horrors are) suffers the wound to a random model in the unit, not the entire unit. Meaning you lose 1 of your 19 Pink Horrors if you peril.
3) In order to Deny the Witch successfully, you must generate a deny for EACH warp charge success the power caster generated. Since it's conjuration, only 6s count as denies. In order to succeed in casting summoning, you had to roll AT LEAST 3 warp charges, meaning the opponent needs THREE DENIES to cancel your power. For most opponents, that means they need to roll 18 dice to have a decent chance of that. No matter how many dice we talk about, your opponent will always need to roll three times as many dice as you do to cancel your power on average. Which goes back to number 2... since Pink Horrors don't care about perils, you can roll 15 dice on your summoning check, lose a single Pink Horror to perils, then watch as your opponent tries to cancel your power with 45 dice.
4) I stated already, this is NOT an unbound list. Pink Horrors are Troop choices and make up the core summoners of any army, as well as generating warp charges. The only reason you would take Heralds at all is if you want to generate MORE charges for low cost. Be'lakor is easily the best HQ for this army as Invisibility is absolutely broken in how invincible it makes your unit.
5) You don't care about Tzeentch Heralds, so let them pop. You can flood the board with daemons JUST using a few squads of Pink Horrors, which generate more warp charges the larger the squad you field.
Again, I'm not certain you understand how this tactic works or is played, that's why you keep decrying it. All of your points are irrelevant to the playstyle, this army doesn't care about perils and can't be denied unless you have God's Luck at rolling 6s. To reliably combat this army, you not only need to be able to kill the starting force, you need to be able to kill the 1, 2, or more units of horrors that they summon each turn. On top of that, at least one of the horrors will eventually roll a Possession on the malefic chart and suddenly you're dealing with BLOODTHIRSTERS!
It doesn't work. You'd have to throw a good number of dice at each summoning attempt, and that limited your summoning powers to maybe 4-5 a turn, six if you're lucky. You can't guarantee you'll always have the powers you want, and the dice might still be disagreeable.
And what exactly are you summoning? Oh, more T3 5+ save units that just give you charges to generate more. If the Horrors want to actively contribute (and they're your only ranged capability at that point, and assault in such an army is laughable), they have to take dice away from the pool for summoning. So you have an army that keeps generating useless bullet magnets.
Heralds are something you care about. Horrors are only Change psychic powers. You can try pushing RAW until a FAQ tells you to stop trying to be a cheeky jerk, but the idea for Horrors was always that they have a power from the Change spells in order to have a ranged attack in the army and to represent that they're, you know, Daemons of Tzeentch. Heralds are also three dice lost from the pool every time one of them dies.
You're left with FMCs coming down from the skies (say hello to more bullets!) or MCs trying to run across the board attempting to grab objectives, as their opponent whittles them down.
The army really isn't that effective. Theoryhammer makes it sound like that, because people are theorizing the best case scenario for the army and that it's being played against no opponent (or maybe an opponent who's in a coma).
Kain wrote: You'll change your mind when you fight your first daemon factory list or see a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list.
If you still like it afterwards, sure, whatever floats your boat.
*Sigh.* The "Daemon Factory List" isn't as effective in practice as you think it will be. I know how to make that army cry... without using psychic powers.
The "misshapen monstrosity" lists won't be any different from what we have now... unless you mean Unbound, and if you're looking at that on the table, you AGREED to play against it, so you shouldn't really be complaining.
The lists I've seen aren't unbound and have cranked out hundreds of points extra in the reports. Would you please share your ability to completely shut down what very may well be the next overpowered build to fear? Or will you just make the statement "I can win against anything" and call it a day. Because I can lift the moon.
*Yawn.* Stop with the boring attempts at insults. They're so bad they've passed "bad enough to be funny."
You don't have to shut down the psychic phase. It's not as effective as your Theoryhammer makes it out to be, I've already seen that (and heard the lamentations of people who relied too much on psychic powers in the past as they can't get off many of them now). The "Daemon Factory List" is a bunch of Horrors, a crapload of Heralds of Tzeentch, and some Greater Daemons or Monstrous Creatures, all just churning out new daemons. The only real offensive capability of the army is the Horrors' powers, but if they use them, that takes dice from the pool. You have to throw plenty of dice into a power to make sure you get it cast. A standard Space Marine army can stand back and use bolters to shred the Horrors and Heralds (or S6+ to insta-kill Heralds), tearing up the power dice pool while also making it very hard to claim any objectives (and they'll just move to the objectives and assault any Horrors that make it through). So while the list is trying to spam new daemons, those daemons will keep dying (and just pray it's not a mission like Purge the Alien, where you're just feeding VPs to the opposing army as they laugh), and it'll be down to the MCs to try to grab objectives, which they can't contest against Battle-Forged Troops (even if they came down out of the sky), and they'll still be subjected to whatever fire isn't ripping up Horrors and Heralds.
Yeah, it sounds scary, if you don't take the fact you have to roll dice into it, and if it's playing against a comatose opponent who is literally doing nothing.
ErikSetzer wrote: It doesn't work. You'd have to throw a good number of dice at each summoning attempt, and that limited your summoning powers to maybe 4-5 a turn, six if you're lucky. You can't guarantee you'll always have the powers you want, and the dice might still be disagreeable.
And what exactly are you summoning? Oh, more T3 5+ save units that just give you charges to generate more. If the Horrors want to actively contribute (and they're your only ranged capability at that point, and assault in such an army is laughable), they have to take dice away from the pool for summoning. So you have an army that keeps generating useless bullet magnets.
The army really isn't that effective. Theoryhammer makes it sound like that, because people are theorizing the best case scenario for the army and that it's being played against no opponent (or maybe an opponent who's in a coma).
I don't think you realize that's all the summoning you need. Even with just 1 or 2 troops produced each turn, the point advantage proves its effectiveness. We're talking about balanced armies going against each, not armies that have enough firepower to one-shot your army on the first turn. These aren't theories, they're generated from actual gameplay. Rather than exerting your own theories about how ineffective the army is, play the army yourself and watch the madness unfold. It's incredibly easy to proxy your space marines for daemons and play using their stats. I've already played this army against my local meta yesterday and most people surrendered after three turns. If you want a play by play of how this army steamrolls, just look here:
ErikSetzer wrote: Heralds are something you care about. Horrors are only Change psychic powers. You can try pushing RAW until a FAQ tells you to stop trying to be a cheeky jerk, but the idea for Horrors was always that they have a power from the Change spells in order to have a ranged attack in the army and to represent that they're, you know, Daemons of Tzeentch. Heralds are also three dice lost from the pool every time one of them dies.
By that logic, Chaos Sorcerers can only use Biomancy, Pyromancy, and Telepathy. They have no access to Daemonology whatsoever. By the same token, Chaos Sorcerers should have no access to Divination either despite the fact that the Crimson Slaughter book GRANTS them access, just as the 7th edition rulebook is GRANTING Horrors access to Daemonology. Heck, every psyker in the game has a similarly limited list to Horrors so it's illegal for ANYONE to be using Malefic or Sanctic powers.
You have to realize how absurd all of that sounds. By all means, have faith in your FAQ, but it hasn't arrived yet and there's no telling what it will say.
Just so you know, even the Chaos Daemons Codex supports Horrors rolling on Daemonology. The Codex reads, and I quote:
"If the psyker is a Daemon of a particular Chaos God, they may roll up to half of their powers on the chart that corresponds to their patron."
By the rules of the codex, none of the psyker Daemons are required to roll on a specific discipline. This permits other disciplines if they have access to them, which they DO! The only way that you can forbid Pink Horrors from rolling on Daemonology is if they Codex were changed to specify they MUST take a power from Change, which currently it does not.
ErikSetzer wrote: You're left with FMCs coming down from the skies (say hello to more bullets!) or MCs trying to run across the board attempting to grab objectives, as their opponent whittles them down.
How exactly does one whittle down a zerg? The entire point of the Daemon Factory list is that you cannot whittle them down. They grow with every passing turn. As for FMCs and bullets... that's what Be'lakor is for, to grant invisibility to units and make them even more unkillable.
You may think decrying the effectiveness of cheap, squishy swarms will save you from them, but Tyranids once proved the whole world wrong on that note in past editions.
Before you go denouncing a proven strategy using your own Theorycrafting, either play the army/against the army or read up on its reports. What you say all makes great reasonable sense in a vacuum, it just doesn't play out that way in practice. You're trying to argue that fielding a 1500 point army of (insert faction here) is somehow in your favor against a 4000 point army of Daemons.
I think it's funny how someone can claim the Deamon Factory isn't aggressive when every battle report I've seen ends early with deamons completely covering most objectives on the board.
Savageconvoy wrote: I think it's funny how someone can claim the Deamon Factory isn't aggressive when every battle report I've seen ends early with deamons completely covering most objectives on the board.
You wouldn't have happened to see a highly detailed battle report using the Daemon Factory list? So far the ones I've seen are generalized and tends to gloss over most of the game, a link would be greatly appreciated thanks.
I haven't seen many that go into great detail. The majority of things are glossed over because of the length of the psker phase taking one player almost an hour but ended up spawning an additional 60 units.
Since you need three 4+ to cast, you'd want to roll 5 to 7 die to "guarentee" success. A certain amount will fail. Another amount will perils. And some could be denied. Since any opponent would most likely be using unbound as well, the odds of generating some type of infinite daemon loop are zero to none. Tzneetch Heralds would be popping all over the battlefield against any competent counter force.
I don't think you understand... there's nothing at risk here.
1) Failure is impossible because you just throw more dice at it, or try again with a different unit if you're going for the spam approach. You can afford with this army to throw 12 or even 15 dice at the attempt. Try failing that.
2) Perils don't affect this army. You can only peril once per cast and a Brotherhood of Sorcerers (which Pink Horrors are) suffers the wound to a random model in the unit, not the entire unit. Meaning you lose 1 of your 19 Pink Horrors if you peril.
3) In order to Deny the Witch successfully, you must generate a deny for EACH warp charge success the power caster generated. Since it's conjuration, only 6s count as denies. In order to succeed in casting summoning, you had to roll AT LEAST 3 warp charges, meaning the opponent needs THREE DENIES to cancel your power. For most opponents, that means they need to roll 18 dice to have a decent chance of that. No matter how many dice we talk about, your opponent will always need to roll three times as many dice as you do to cancel your power on average. Which goes back to number 2... since Pink Horrors don't care about perils, you can roll 15 dice on your summoning check, lose a single Pink Horror to perils, then watch as your opponent tries to cancel your power with 45 dice.
4) I stated already, this is NOT an unbound list. Pink Horrors are Troop choices and make up the core summoners of any army, as well as generating warp charges. The only reason you would take Heralds at all is if you want to generate MORE charges for low cost. Be'lakor is easily the best HQ for this army as Invisibility is absolutely broken in how invincible it makes your unit.
5) You don't care about Tzeentch Heralds, so let them pop. You can flood the board with daemons JUST using a few squads of Pink Horrors, which generate more warp charges the larger the squad you field.
Again, I'm not certain you understand how this tactic works or is played, that's why you keep decrying it. All of your points are irrelevant to the playstyle, this army doesn't care about perils and can't be denied unless you have God's Luck at rolling 6s. To reliably combat this army, you not only need to be able to kill the starting force, you need to be able to kill the 1, 2, or more units of horrors that they summon each turn. On top of that, at least one of the horrors will eventually roll a Possession on the malefic chart and suddenly you're dealing with BLOODTHIRSTERS!
I find the report suspect, as you start with 22 warp charges. You roll a 6. Add +4 for Fatey, +5 for the two heralds (level 3 and 2) +3 for Be'Lakor, and then +2 for the Pink Horrors (1 each per unit). This adds up to 20 total, yet you claim 22. I'm assuming this is coming from the 11 horrors - and counting the extra horror as Iridescent, but that only changes the unit type. They are still part of the unit, which is all that counts for warp charges. So can you please explain where you are getting 22 warp charges.
i dont think there is a single completed daemon factory battle report yet. Theyve all ended by conceding or "this is ridiculous lets just stop" reactions lol
I haven't seen anyone say the changes from 6th to 7th actually required a whole new rulebook. Did it? Thats my big question, because it looks like they made a few rule changes and added two more books of purdy pictures of models and existing artwork.
I'm not dropping another $80 dollars, because there's no guarantee that another rulebook for $85+ won't be announced in 1 1/2 years this time.
GW is never going to satisfy every player. They should really consider a rulebook for "official" tourneys, and a standard rulebook. Maybe the tourney one focuses on being more streamlined (rules) and less randomness (objectives) and a standard rulebook would contain randomness (objectives) and even weaponry, that would be fun for people gaming without a time restraint.
didnt have any sort of issue with daemon factory as they failed a lot of rolls.
As did i just trying to cast lv 2 ish mastery level spells.
i feel (though without mathing it out yet) that psyker phase is blown way out of proportions except for when your opponents have no ability to cast. but it was going to be a one sided psychic battle anyway.
besides from that and allies (which didnt matter to me as much since i was a imperial player anyway (except tau but they dont really need help) it plays similarly to 6th.
we needa try out the new maelstorm type but i wasn't able to get the cards and didn't feel like rolling.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Changes rock, and the maelstrom of war missions rule. I'm glad the sky never fell.
Good thing i took all that salt!
I agree, the changes all seem to be pretty good.
Tried some normal games and an apocalypse game in 7th so far(rolling the exterminates event was interesting).
The psychic phase is good, the new game types are actually fun because it rewards people for building a more balanced list(things to engage the enemy, things to take objectives, things to deny objectives). Getting to actually use my warhound titan(1989 armors cast) in standard games(not all the time and usually with forewarning to my opponent).
Jeff Tracy wrote: I find the report suspect, as you start with 22 warp charges. You roll a 6. Add +4 for Fatey, +5 for the two heralds (level 3 and 2) +3 for Be'Lakor, and then +2 for the Pink Horrors (1 each per unit). This adds up to 20 total, yet you claim 22. I'm assuming this is coming from the 11 horrors - and counting the extra horror as Iridescent, but that only changes the unit type. They are still part of the unit, which is all that counts for warp charges. So can you please explain where you are getting 22 warp charges.
Actually it comes from the rule in the Codex that Pink Horrors have called Magic Made Manifest. A pink horror squad generates a number of warp charges based on the number of pink horrors in the squad.
This is also why some of the lists you will see have squads of 17-19 pink horrors, so they can generate the maximum 3 Warp Charges and still have enough left over to sacrifice to perils.
Jeff Tracy wrote: I find the report suspect, as you start with 22 warp charges. You roll a 6. Add +4 for Fatey, +5 for the two heralds (level 3 and 2) +3 for Be'Lakor, and then +2 for the Pink Horrors (1 each per unit). This adds up to 20 total, yet you claim 22. I'm assuming this is coming from the 11 horrors - and counting the extra horror as Iridescent, but that only changes the unit type. They are still part of the unit, which is all that counts for warp charges. So can you please explain where you are getting 22 warp charges.
Actually it comes from the rule in the Codex that Pink Horrors have called Magic Made Manifest. A pink horror squad generates a number of warp charges based on the number of pink horrors in the squad.
This is also why some of the lists you will see have squads of 17-19 pink horrors, so they can generate the maximum 3 Warp Charges and still have enough left over to sacrifice to perils.
Thanks for the explanation. I look forward to playing a list like this and seeing what happens.
Don't have enough games under my belt to make a concrete opinion yet, and my opinion is that anyone who has is jumping the gun a bit. Book's been out for all of 48-ish hours thus far.
Even the most hardcore 40k player has, what 10 or so games under their belt (if they've been playing all long weekend, as it is here in the states) ?
Hardly enough to judge a new edition of a game on.
Cautiously optimistic. I think it cleaned up some nonsense from 6th, but very rightly shook up the meta a lot. I see a lot of potential, but there's also a lot of questions that need answers. Those questions could color my ultimate final opinion pretty significantly, but the 3 games i've played thus far of it have been a lot of fun.
-- Haight
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vineheart01 wrote: i dont think there is a single completed daemon factory battle report yet. Theyve all ended by conceding or "this is ridiculous lets just stop" reactions lol
THe one that started all the hulaballoo in the first place - the video making the rounds on the web - did complete. The Imperial Knight player, 100% unprepared for what he was going up against, managed to get a draw based on playing to objectives.
Which, if a completely unprepared list can manufacture a draw, i have a sincerely difficult time calling a list OP / BS etc, particularly as it's going to be come everyone's favorite net-list, so it will be something people prepare for.
... also, Summoning is going to get errata'd into next tuesday soon enough. A simple "this power may only be manifested once per psychic phase" pretty much shuts it down hard, and there's more elegant ways of keeping it a powerful ability, but limiting the end result.
Haight, I sure hope they give us errata. I'm not afraid of Malefic stuff in my area, but I would like to GW to give us some attention other than "Buy this" and "Just d6 it"
BoomWolf wrote: Daemon factory is an invented list that we have no reason to assume is even legal (not every daemon psyker gets every table daemons as a whole has, no reason to belive heralds will have daemology)
As for " a mishappen monstrosity of an Imperial Army across the table with Knights, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, and Guardsmen all in the same list. ", what's exacly the problem here?
I'd love to play against that.
Agreed! I would love to play against that as well. Id also love to play against and with the Daemon factory, it would be an awesome game.
I personally don't think the maths for the factory add up enough for it to be a super broken competitive list and it's one trick IMO will easily be taken apart early by competent players. In 6 months time I almost guarantee no one will be talking about it...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Haight wrote: THe one that started all the hulaballoo in the first place - the video making the rounds on the web - did complete. The Imperial Knight player, 100% unprepared for what he was going up against, managed to get a draw based on playing to objectives.
Which, if a completely unprepared list can manufacture a draw, i have a sincerely difficult time calling a list OP / BS etc, particularly as it's going to be come everyone's favorite net-list, so it will be something people prepare for.
... also, Summoning is going to get errata'd into next Tuesday soon enough. A simple "this power may only be manifested once per psychic phase" pretty much shuts it down hard, and there's more elegant ways of keeping it a powerful ability, but limiting the end result.
This get's an exalt!
Everyone focused on the ermagherd 1023828 Daemons and failed to remember that the list drew against someone who was completely newb too it with an army possibly not suited to taking it down. Play it against the big lists of 6th and see how it goes if it is apparently "broken" then it should handle them fine?
Skyblight didn't draw it's first game for instance.. it won that!
bodazoka wrote: Everyone focused on the ermagherd 1023828 Daemons and failed to remember that the list drew against someone who was completely newb too it with an army possibly not suited to taking it down.
To turn that around, how suited was the other list for taking down knights?
The fact that a given list overpowering against an army of super heavy walkers isn't really indicative of much.
slowthar wrote: My favorite thing about this thread so far is how the GW defenders are saying, "it'll be fine, they'll just FAQ/errata it."
You just paid $85 for that, "brah."
I would rather get a 3-4 page document for each individual book, than have 10-20 added into the main rulebook that are invalidated when the codex is updated or that are completely unimportant for me to know.
As to insaniaks point:
With all of his summoning he had the ability to produce things that could take down knights. He chose not to do so. In addition his opponent seemed to be playing with a static more 6th edition list and one of the big things I have seen early from this edition is that being mobile is going to be very important, especially with the maelstrom missions. Second in a tournament it will not become a standard list simply because it takes so much time, and that is the only situation where you are semi-forced to play your opponent. With him taking 1 hour turns you might only get to turn two, resulting in him not being in a position to do anything. So on and so forth. I would wait and see if it even becomes a problem. I am personally not worried about it other than it being annoying to deal with all that book keeping.
I am not saying its not broken, I am just saying that the people who think it is broken are making some rules assumptions, the people who dont think its broken are making different rules assumptions. Its not even been a week, lets play some games and just go from there. Lets see what the FAQ says, which hopefully will be out within the week or two.
