vipoid wrote:
To summarise:

- Master of Command now works properly.
- Take Cover only works on Infantry.
- The Dagger of Tu’Sakh can now only be taken by Infantry Officers.
- Ogryn Bodygards can now only take wounds for Infantry.
- Commissars of all types are now utterly worthless.
- It's been clarified that, yes, Send in the Next Wave really is that crap.
- Draconian Discipline is garbage for everything except babysitting Conscripts.

xmbk wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/10/22/new-faqs-and-errata-for-the-astra-militarum-and-beyond-oct-22gw-homepage-post-1/

Really good to see how responsive the new GW is.

 Galas wrote:



Commissars have still a place with Conscripts and Infantry squads. Buffing morale, even without using the Summary Execution, is pretty good.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Conscripts are not gutted, they just changed them around a bit. There are still 4 options to outright ignore morale available to Imperial Guard. That's why the change is alright with me - conscript armies are still viable if that was your playstyle, but they're no longer Plug and Play into a larger army without some issues.

 Galas wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
To summarise:

- Master of Command now works properly.
- Take Cover only works on Infantry.
- The Dagger of Tu’Sakh can now only be taken by Infantry Officers.
- Ogryn Bodygards can now only take wounds for Infantry.
- Commissars of all types are now utterly worthless.
- It's been clarified that, yes, Send in the Next Wave really is that crap.
- Draconian Discipline is garbage for everything except babysitting Conscripts.

Commissars have still a place with Conscripts and Infantry squads. Buffing morale, even without using the Summary Execution, is pretty good.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Conscripts are not gutted, they just changed them around a bit. There are still 4 options to outright ignore morale available to Imperial Guard. That's why the change is alright with me - conscript armies are still viable if that was your playstyle, but they're no longer Plug and Play into a larger army without some issues.

Okay, but now it seems silly to bother with this instead of just running naked Infantry squads.

 Melissia wrote:
Eh, probably an overnerf to commissars. And didn't really fix the biggest problems of the book.

 vipoid wrote:

 Galas wrote:



Commissars have still a place with Conscripts and Infantry squads. Buffing morale, even without using the Summary Execution, is pretty good.

What planet are you on?

Commissars are now garbage for both of those - but especially Conscripts.

 Galas wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Galas wrote:



Commissars have still a place with Conscripts and Infantry squads. Buffing morale, even without using the Summary Execution, is pretty good.

What planet are you on?

Commissars are now garbage for both of those - but especially Conscripts.

Yes, you are right!
For a second I forgot I was in Dakkadakka, where things are only Garbage or OP without a middle ground. I apologize.

 Galas wrote:

Yes, you are right!
For a second I forgot I was in Dakkadakka, where things are only Garbage or OP without a middle ground. I apologize.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm at work. What's the change to Commisars?

 Galas wrote:
For a second I forgot I was in Dakkadakka, where things are only Garbage or OP without a middle ground. I apologize.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm at work. What's the change to Commisars?

Summary execution is now a re-roll rather than auto pass (though it still costs 1 model).

People will have to gear-shift into other methods of keeping their conscripts around (though they certainly can, there's 4 other methods to make a unit immune to morale available to IG) unless they only need them for a turn.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm at work. What's the change to Commisars?

Summary execution is now a re-roll rather than auto pass (though it still costs 1 model).

People will have to gear-shift into other methods of keeping their conscripts around (though they certainly can, there's 4 other methods to make a unit immune to morale available to IG) unless they only need them for a turn.

That's not terrible but I can understand Guard players being peeved.

 tpogs wrote:
People seem to be forgetting that Commissars still grant leadership 8 to infantry.

 Melissia wrote:

 tpogs wrote:
People seem to be forgetting that Commissars still grant leadership 8 to infantry.

No we aren't; if a conscript squad is taking 10 casualties already, having Ld8 doesn't really help that much on the leadership test. If it was "roll twice and take the best" it'd be better, but it's not. It's just a reroll. And with a reroll, you take the second result even if it's a worse result.

So let's say you fail the leadership test by the bare minimum. Sorry, your unit takes another casualty, then rerolls. Now you took the maximum losses possible for that test... plus one more loss because the commissar is an donkey-cave. GOOD JOB COMMISSAR.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think Valhallans are still badass for conscripts for more reasons than that - remember, their relic is still unchanged as well, so their regiment still has one Oldissar hanging around somewhere with Pietrov's Mk .45

 vipoid wrote:
It's weird that a Valhallan Company Commander can now be far better Commissar than an actual Commissar.

 Melissia wrote:
No, I did not miss their point. I think their point was garbage. Disagreement is not the same as a lack of understanding.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
It's weird that a Valhallan Company Commander can now be far better Commissar than an actual Commissar.

I mean, Chenkov (back when he was a thing) was a better commissar than a commissar (his aura was 12").

tneva82 wrote:
GW should have worded it so it's not mandatory. Then it's at least less likely to actually HURT you from having. Kinda silly to have rule that's more likely to hurt you than not. Especially when it's supposed to be advantage rather than disadvantage to balance otherwise too good model.

 Melissia wrote:

 tpogs wrote:
People seem to be forgetting that Commissars still grant leadership 8 to infantry.

No we aren't; if a conscript squad is taking 10 casualties already, having Ld8 doesn't really help that much on the leadership test. If it was "roll twice and take the best" it'd be better, but it's not. It's just a reroll. And with a reroll, you take the second result even if it's a worse result.

So let's say you fail the leadership test by the bare minimum. Sorry, your unit takes another casualty, then rerolls. Now you took the maximum losses possible for that test... plus one more loss because the commissar is an donkey-cave. GOOD JOB COMMISSAR.

In before someone says"anyone who complains is a whiny guard player who just wants to be OP and walk over everyone else" again, even though I haven't owned any Guard models for years.

 Blacksails wrote:
Solid FAQ. Clears up some stuff for sure. Never been fond of conscripts myself, so I'm not bothered by the nerf.

xmbk wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Galas wrote:



Commissars have still a place with Conscripts and Infantry squads. Buffing morale, even without using the Summary Execution, is pretty good.

What planet are you on?

Commissars are now garbage for both of those - but especially Conscripts.

Yes, you are right!
For a second I forgot I was in Dakkadakka, where things are only Garbage or OP without a middle ground. I apologize.

Can you suggest a reasonable use for them now?

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
My 2c?

They adjusted the Commissar-Conscript interaction, which I don't really appreciate because it's a concession and it's attempting to address a problem without actually fixing the source thereof, and instead fixing a symptom.

They've failed to adjust Baneblades, particularly the Shadowsword. A 40-point cost reduction was not warranted on a platform that has 10 Heavy Bolters, 4 Lascannons, and is immune to melee.

They've also failed to adjust Manticores, which will continue to strictly outperform Leman Russes in most circumstances.

Certain Leman Russ variants are definitely still terrible, and fail to conform to expectations.

Otherwise, most of it makes sense.

 Elbows wrote:
Read the bottom portion regarding Tallarn...you can still take a "unit" of vehicles, meaning three Russes etc. Not quite as mix-n-match friendly but still pretty damn good.

grouchoben wrote:
Really? A nerf to Krieg? thank the lord they finally reigned us in, I was beginning to feel bad! (Krieg can no longer take any traits or relics from the codex, despite being <AM>.)

Seriously, this heavy nerfing of Commissars does actually leave Krieg in an enviable position in terms of morale resistance.

grouchoben wrote:
Really? A nerf to Krieg? thank the lord they finally reigned us in, I was beginning to feel bad! (Krieg can no longer take any traits or relics from the codex, despite being <AM>.)

Seriously, this heavy nerfing of Commissars does actually leave Krieg in an enviable position in terms of morale resistance.

 Aenarian wrote:

grouchoben wrote:
Really? A nerf to Krieg? thank the lord they finally reigned us in, I was beginning to feel bad! (Krieg can no longer take any traits or relics from the codex, despite being <AM>.)

Seriously, this heavy nerfing of Commissars does actually leave Krieg in an enviable position in terms of morale resistance.

We are not allowed to take any of the regiment-specific traits and stuff, but nothing about the general case, which I guess is still up in the air.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Aenarian wrote:

grouchoben wrote:
Really? A nerf to Krieg? thank the lord they finally reigned us in, I was beginning to feel bad! (Krieg can no longer take any traits or relics from the codex, despite being <AM>.)

Seriously, this heavy nerfing of Commissars does actually leave Krieg in an enviable position in terms of morale resistance.

We are not allowed to take any of the regiment-specific traits and stuff, but nothing about the general case, which I guess is still up in the air.

Actually, I would say it's less up in the air than before, as GW now had the opportunity to say it was allowed, and then didn't say it wasn't. Either this is a missed opportunity for them to spell out intent, or it is intended that any of the generic AM stratagems are permitted.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
So.. the beautiful times of over-correction are back!
Meanwhile, see what Iyanden got. An unkillable old-style commissar.

 Aenarian wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
So.. the beautiful times of over-correction are back!
Meanwhile, see what Iyanden got. An unkillable old-style commissar.

They might be changed as well if the community revolts against it like they did now.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
So.. the beautiful times of over-correction are back!
Meanwhile, see what Iyanden got. An unkillable old-style commissar.

 daedalus wrote:

 Aenarian wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
So.. the beautiful times of over-correction are back!
Meanwhile, see what Iyanden got. An unkillable old-style commissar.

They might be changed as well if the community revolts against it like they did now.

Well, I can certainly agree that the community is revolting.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
I will say I'm not a fan of how laurels of command works. Basically means you now resolve the first order entirely before doing the second. This means if you use a shooting order like "Take Aim", you would need to fire and then issue another order, which I guess would be something like move!move!move! I can already see someone trying to argue that now it'll let you shoot twice by using something like FRFSRF then issuing take aim! After FRFSRF has resolved

 Trickstick wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
I will say I'm not a fan of how laurels of command works. Basically means you now resolve the first order entirely before doing the second. This means if you use a shooting order like "Take Aim", you would need to fire and then issue another order, which I guess would be something like move!move!move! I can already see someone trying to argue that now it'll let you shoot twice by using something like FRFSRF then issuing take aim! After FRFSRF has resolved

Take aim doesn't actually tell you to fire, so "resolving" it doesn't actually shoot. Very few of the orders actually tell you to resolve an action, most of them are just "can reroll this phase" or "change weapon profile" or something.

 Kanluwen wrote:

But how else were we to know that moving zero inches means you moved less than half of your Movement value? THESE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT!

 Galas wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
So.. the beautiful times of over-correction are back!
Meanwhile, see what Iyanden got. An unkillable old-style commissar.

The difference is that over-corrections are now in a weekly or monthly fasion, instead of every 4-5 years (And thats a good thing. Not the over-correction part, but that at least now they are trying to balance in a regular basis)

And the problem with commisar wasn't the commisar itself, but his objetive. Eldars don't have conscripts. Making your 20-man Guardian Squad inmune to morale isn't as powerfull as a 30 man conscript blob.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
So.. the beautiful times of over-correction are back!
Meanwhile, see what Iyanden got. An unkillable old-style commissar.

The difference is that over-corrections are now in a weekly or monthly fasion, instead of every 4-5 years (And thats a good thing. Not the over-correction part, but that at least now they are trying to balance in a regular basis)

And the problem with commisar wasn't the commisar itself, but his objetive. Eldars don't have conscripts. Making your 20-man Guardian Squad inmune to morale isn't as powerfull as a 30 man conscript blob.

I found that there are details that show they are still quite sloppy. If I got it right, the reroll is enforced.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
GW should have worded it so it's not mandatory. Then it's at least less likely to actually HURT you from having. Kinda silly to have rule that's more likely to hurt you than not. Especially when it's supposed to be advantage rather than disadvantage to balance otherwise too good model.

But that's not how commissars work in the background though. Unless command tells them to fall back they're going to make you stick around whether you like it or not. Aside from very rare exceptions they don't really go "oh wow Bob you're right, that IS a really scary carnifex! You are excused private, feel free to retire to the rear."

It is annoying that the guardsmen still take an additional casualty for 0 gain but it does give an actual trade off to how they work now.

I think it would've been a good rule for just conscripts getting it personally, and everything else staying the same, but here we are.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Guard needed a weakness - now they have one.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Sad that they didnt fix any of the Russ variants like Vanquishers or Exterminators so they might actually see a table. Thanks GW

 Galas wrote:
Now Night Lords will be usable agaisn't Imperial Guard!

kurhanik wrote:
So...Commissars are now basically dead. 31 points minimum for +1 leadership and the ability to kill more members of your squad than you would have lost in the first place. They should have left that rule for Conscripts only and kept regular Infantry Squads with the old rules, or at the least provide a leadership buff after blamming someone due to "inspiration".

And Send in the Next Wave costs reinforcement points? Do other codices with respawn abilities cost reinforcement points? I think that would be Chaos and Admech?

Other than that, the faq seems fine to me, and cleared up a few issues and clarified some abusive mechanics like Ogryn conga lines.

Oh well, at least with the speed of clarifications here, it means that anything they overnerfed might get fixed sooner rather than later, and anything undernerfed will get adjusted as well.

 Aenarian wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Sad that they didnt fix any of the Russ variants like Vanquishers or Exterminators so they might actually see a table. Thanks GW

Would anyone actually take a Vanquisher or Exterminator if the weapon itself was free? I'm not sure I would.

 Galas wrote:
Yeah, you can pay 31 to give 2-3 30-man conscripts squads +4 leadership. For me thats pretty damm good.

fe40k wrote:

kurhanik wrote:
So...Commissars are now basically dead. 31 points minimum for +1 leadership and the ability to kill more members of your squad than you would have lost in the first place. They should have left that rule for Conscripts only and kept regular Infantry Squads with the old rules, or at the least provide a leadership buff after blamming someone due to "inspiration".

And Send in the Next Wave costs reinforcement points? Do other codices with respawn abilities cost reinforcement points? I think that would be Chaos and Admech?

Other than that, the faq seems fine to me, and cleared up a few issues and clarified some abusive mechanics like Ogryn conga lines.

Oh well, at least with the speed of clarifications here, it means that anything they overnerfed might get fixed sooner rather than later, and anything undernerfed will get adjusted as well.

31 points is still a cheap elite slot - plus the +1 can matter; it's spread across multiple squads. Not saying it's the greatest thing ever, but it's 31 points; so it works.

Regarding reinforcement points; If it's adding an entirely new squad to the table, it costs points. If it's adding previously dead models to an existing squad, it does not.

It's consistent across other factions, at least from the rules I've seen.

 Galas wrote:
Yeah, you can pay 31 to give 2-3 30-man conscripts squads +4 leadership. For me thats pretty damm good.

 ross-128 wrote:
On a 30 man unit, it's pretty borderline worthless because of how easily they can overshoot 8 casualties. I suppose if their test was a 6 blamming someone is highly likely to break even (you're looking at -1 if you get a 6 again, 0 if you get a 5, +1/2/3/4 for 4/3/2/1 respectively).

In general though, it means at most the commissar can only ever save up to 4 models. That is a massive, gargantuan, colossal nerf for a 31 point model that literally has no other purpose (what's he going to do, kill an *enemy* with his BS4+ bolt pistol? That'll sure be worth the 31 points!)

On 10 man units it would be a little more worthwhile for the LD8 alone, since a 10 man squad at LD8 can only take 5 morale casualties at most (5 normal casualties, roll 6 to get a 13, take out 8, the other 5 die to morale) except that an infantry/vet squad with the sergeant alive is already at LD7. So you actually get +1LD, woooo. You can get that from a banner, or just by painting your models the right color.

And can you imagine how much it would suck to blam a guy to re-roll a 4-5 and get a 6?

Conscripts are basically dead with this FAQ. RIP. Time to replace all your conscripts with infantry squads, and if you want them to have LD8 just make them Mordian or Catachan to get it for free.

 ross-128 wrote:
On a 30 man unit, it's pretty borderline worthless because of how easily they can overshoot 8 casualties. I suppose if their test was a 6 blamming someone is highly likely to break even (you're looking at -1 if you get a 6 again, 0 if you get a 5, +1/2/3/4 for 4/3/2/1 respectively).

In general though, it means at most the commissar can only ever save up to 4 models. That is a massive, gargantuan, colossal nerf for a 31 point model that literally has no other purpose (what's he going to do, kill an *enemy* with his BS4+ bolt pistol? That'll sure be worth the 31 points!)

On 10 man units it would be a little more worthwhile for the LD8 alone, since a 10 man squad at LD8 can only take 5 morale casualties at most (5 normal casualties, roll 6 to get a 13, take out 8, the other 5 die to morale) except that an infantry/vet squad with the sergeant alive is already at LD7. So you actually get +1LD, woooo. You can get that from a banner, or just by painting your models the right color.

And can you imagine how much it would suck to blam a guy to re-roll a 4-5 and get a 6?

Conscripts are basically dead with this FAQ. RIP. Time to replace all your conscripts with infantry squads, and if you want them to have LD8 just make them Mordian or Catachan to get it for free.

Martel732 wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
On a 30 man unit, it's pretty borderline worthless because of how easily they can overshoot 8 casualties. I suppose if their test was a 6 blamming someone is highly likely to break even (you're looking at -1 if you get a 6 again, 0 if you get a 5, +1/2/3/4 for 4/3/2/1 respectively).

In general though, it means at most the commissar can only ever save up to 4 models. That is a massive, gargantuan, colossal nerf for a 31 point model that literally has no other purpose (what's he going to do, kill an *enemy* with his BS4+ bolt pistol? That'll sure be worth the 31 points!)

On 10 man units it would be a little more worthwhile for the LD8 alone, since a 10 man squad at LD8 can only take 5 morale casualties at most (5 normal casualties, roll 6 to get a 13, take out 8, the other 5 die to morale) except that an infantry/vet squad with the sergeant alive is already at LD7. So you actually get +1LD, woooo. You can get that from a banner, or just by painting your models the right color.

And can you imagine how much it would suck to blam a guy to re-roll a 4-5 and get a 6?

Conscripts are basically dead with this FAQ. RIP. Time to replace all your conscripts with infantry squads, and if you want them to have LD8 just make them Mordian or Catachan to get it for free.

Good riddace. If only they had done this to scatterbikes. Sacrifice one unit so 30 others can play.

 Aenarian wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Sad that they didnt fix any of the Russ variants like Vanquishers or Exterminators so they might actually see a table. Thanks GW

Would anyone actually take a Vanquisher or Exterminator if the weapon itself was free? I'm not sure I would.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
I will say I'm not a fan of how laurels of command works. Basically means you now resolve the first order entirely before doing the second. This means if you use a shooting order like "Take Aim", you would need to fire and then issue another order, which I guess would be something like move!move!move! I can already see someone trying to argue that now it'll let you shoot twice by using something like FRFSRF then issuing take aim! After FRFSRF has resolved

Take aim doesn't actually tell you to fire, so "resolving" it doesn't actually shoot. Very few of the orders actually tell you to resolve an action, most of them are just "can reroll this phase" or "change weapon profile" or something.

Yup--that was a Good Change from the previous iterations.

fe40k wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
On a 30 man unit, it's pretty borderline worthless because of how easily they can overshoot 8 casualties. I suppose if their test was a 6 blamming someone is highly likely to break even (you're looking at -1 if you get a 6 again, 0 if you get a 5, +1/2/3/4 for 4/3/2/1 respectively).

In general though, it means at most the commissar can only ever save up to 4 models. That is a massive, gargantuan, colossal nerf for a 31 point model that literally has no other purpose (what's he going to do, kill an *enemy* with his BS4+ bolt pistol? That'll sure be worth the 31 points!)

On 10 man units it would be a little more worthwhile for the LD8 alone, since a 10 man squad at LD8 can only take 5 morale casualties at most (5 normal casualties, roll 6 to get a 13, take out 8, the other 5 die to morale) except that an infantry/vet squad with the sergeant alive is already at LD7. So you actually get +1LD, woooo. You can get that from a banner, or just by painting your models the right color.

And can you imagine how much it would suck to blam a guy to re-roll a 4-5 and get a 6?

Conscripts are basically dead with this FAQ. RIP. Time to replace all your conscripts with infantry squads, and if you want them to have LD8 just make them Mordian or Catachan to get it for free.

He can save 4 models, per squad.

Conscripts are not dead, you're being hyperbolic. Commissars aren't either, they're just not a "get out of jail free" card - they still boost morale, which is great; and they're still a 31 point elite for the purposes of building detachments.

They're a 90 point wall that needs to be dealt with; it's not likely they'll all be wiped out in one attack, morale rolls or not - plus, there are stratagems, warlord traits, and other abilities that can help them. They WILL shield your tanks, gunners, etc, for at least 1-2 turns - that's far more then enough for the rest of the army to make up the 90 "dead" points that you lose.

A 3ppm model, with those stats, and that large squad number, NEEDS to be able to be dealt with through Morale - it's the entire point of the mechanic.

 ross-128 wrote:

fe40k wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
On a 30 man unit, it's pretty borderline worthless because of how easily they can overshoot 8 casualties. I suppose if their test was a 6 blamming someone is highly likely to break even (you're looking at -1 if you get a 6 again, 0 if you get a 5, +1/2/3/4 for 4/3/2/1 respectively).

In general though, it means at most the commissar can only ever save up to 4 models. That is a massive, gargantuan, colossal nerf for a 31 point model that literally has no other purpose (what's he going to do, kill an *enemy* with his BS4+ bolt pistol? That'll sure be worth the 31 points!)

On 10 man units it would be a little more worthwhile for the LD8 alone, since a 10 man squad at LD8 can only take 5 morale casualties at most (5 normal casualties, roll 6 to get a 13, take out 8, the other 5 die to morale) except that an infantry/vet squad with the sergeant alive is already at LD7. So you actually get +1LD, woooo. You can get that from a banner, or just by painting your models the right color.

And can you imagine how much it would suck to blam a guy to re-roll a 4-5 and get a 6?

Conscripts are basically dead with this FAQ. RIP. Time to replace all your conscripts with infantry squads, and if you want them to have LD8 just make them Mordian or Catachan to get it for free.

He can save 4 models, per squad.

Conscripts are not dead, you're being hyperbolic. Commissars aren't either, they're just not a "get out of jail free" card - they still boost morale, which is great; and they're still a 31 point elite for the purposes of building detachments.

They're a 90 point wall that needs to be dealt with; it's not likely they'll all be wiped out in one attack, morale rolls or not - plus, there are stratagems, warlord traits, and other abilities that can help them. They WILL shield your tanks, gunners, etc, for at least 1-2 turns - that's far more then enough for the rest of the army to make up the 90 "dead" points that you lose.

A 3ppm model, with those stats, and that large squad number, NEEDS to be able to be dealt with through Morale - it's the entire point of the mechanic.

Well look at it this way: if I replace 30 conscripts with 30 infantry, it will cost me 30 points. But I get to take out the commissar, saving me 31 points, and those infantry squads will stay on the board better than the conscripts would have just because their squad size and native LD will limit their casualties.

Also, they're BS4+, auto-pass orders, and open up slots for special/heavy weapons.

Conscripts pretty much just don't do their job now, with such a weak commissar they're not any more durable than infantry squads.

IG as a whole will manage to keep doing pretty well because infantry squads are fairly competitive themselves, though I wonder how long it will be before the same people are screaming for infantry squads to get nuked from orbit once the IG players are done re-structuring their lists to adapt.

fe40k wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:

fe40k wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
On a 30 man unit, it's pretty borderline worthless because of how easily they can overshoot 8 casualties. I suppose if their test was a 6 blamming someone is highly likely to break even (you're looking at -1 if you get a 6 again, 0 if you get a 5, +1/2/3/4 for 4/3/2/1 respectively).

In general though, it means at most the commissar can only ever save up to 4 models. That is a massive, gargantuan, colossal nerf for a 31 point model that literally has no other purpose (what's he going to do, kill an *enemy* with his BS4+ bolt pistol? That'll sure be worth the 31 points!)

On 10 man units it would be a little more worthwhile for the LD8 alone, since a 10 man squad at LD8 can only take 5 morale casualties at most (5 normal casualties, roll 6 to get a 13, take out 8, the other 5 die to morale) except that an infantry/vet squad with the sergeant alive is already at LD7. So you actually get +1LD, woooo. You can get that from a banner, or just by painting your models the right color.

And can you imagine how much it would suck to blam a guy to re-roll a 4-5 and get a 6?

Conscripts are basically dead with this FAQ. RIP. Time to replace all your conscripts with infantry squads, and if you want them to have LD8 just make them Mordian or Catachan to get it for free.

He can save 4 models, per squad.

Conscripts are not dead, you're being hyperbolic. Commissars aren't either, they're just not a "get out of jail free" card - they still boost morale, which is great; and they're still a 31 point elite for the purposes of building detachments.

They're a 90 point wall that needs to be dealt with; it's not likely they'll all be wiped out in one attack, morale rolls or not - plus, there are stratagems, warlord traits, and other abilities that can help them. They WILL shield your tanks, gunners, etc, for at least 1-2 turns - that's far more then enough for the rest of the army to make up the 90 "dead" points that you lose.

A 3ppm model, with those stats, and that large squad number, NEEDS to be able to be dealt with through Morale - it's the entire point of the mechanic.

Well look at it this way: if I replace 30 conscripts with 30 infantry, it will cost me 30 points. But I get to take out the commissar, saving me 31 points, and those infantry squads will stay on the board better than the conscripts would have just because their squad size and native LD will limit their casualties.

Also, they're BS4+, auto-pass orders, and open up slots for special/heavy weapons.

Conscripts pretty much just don't do their job now, with such a weak commissar they're not any more durable than infantry squads.

IG as a whole will manage to keep doing pretty well because infantry squads are fairly competitive themselves, though I wonder how long it will be before the same people are screaming for infantry squads to get nuked from orbit once the IG players are done re-structuring their lists to adapt.

So what you're saying is, you have options now?

Don't forget that although it's on a 4+ (which you can spend a cp to rr); Orders are 3x as effective on a Conscript squad as an Infantry squad - or, orders on infantry squads are 1/3 as effective. You also need to take that many more commanders/items, which increases points. Plus, in your example, the Commissar is only effecting one squad - he can affect multiples, which matters.

So; it looks like overall, this nerf was a buff, in terms of providing you list building options (as well as soup players).

Also; 3 Infantry squads is 3 drops; this can matter for the purposes of going first.

 Melissia wrote:

 tpogs wrote:
People seem to be forgetting that Commissars still grant leadership 8 to infantry.

No we aren't; if a conscript squad is taking 10 casualties already, having Ld8 doesn't really help that much on the leadership test. If it was "roll twice and take the best" it'd be better, but it's not. It's just a reroll. And with a reroll, you take the second result even if it's a worse result.

So let's say you fail the leadership test by the bare minimum. Sorry, your unit takes another casualty, then rerolls. Now you took the maximum losses possible for that test... plus one more loss because the commissar is an donkey-cave. GOOD JOB COMMISSAR.

In before someone says"anyone who complains is a whiny guard player who just wants to be OP and walk over everyone else" again, even though I haven't owned any Guard models for years.

Martel732 wrote:
IG players are the new Eldar players. A 3 pt conscript that's immune to morale is no more reasonable than a 27 pt scatterbike.

tneva82 wrote:
GW should have worded it so it's not mandatory. Then it's at least less likely to actually HURT you from having. Kinda silly to have rule that's more likely to hurt you than not. Especially when it's supposed to be advantage rather than disadvantage to balance otherwise too good model.

Alcibiades wrote:
It can't possibly be mandatory, as there is no difference between a mandatory reroll and no reroll.

 combatcotton wrote:
No commisar would think "Oh only 3 dudes run, that's fine. If I shoot one of them it could get worse so I better not."

That is basically what an optional use of the rule would boil down to.

"If a unit fails a morale test while rolling a 2+ for that test, the commisar executes one model of that unit. Threat the role as having a result of 1."

Would be my scatch of a better rule. Wording obv. subject to improvement.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Aenarian wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Sad that they didnt fix any of the Russ variants like Vanquishers or Exterminators so they might actually see a table. Thanks GW

Would anyone actually take a Vanquisher or Exterminator if the weapon itself was free? I'm not sure I would.

The Exterminator maybe, it's not awful, just clearly inferior to the battlecannon in Strenght, AP and range (while being more expensive), if it were free it'd probably be worth taking. Not sure about the Vanquisher, it's just fundamentally broken as an MBT specialized anti-tank weapon.

 ross-128 wrote:
Well the good news about that is I'm pretty sure you can choose to not blam anyone, so if you roll a 1 on the morale test, just take it because it won't get any better.

Blamming on a 4 and rolling a 6 would be some bad feels though.

Alcibiades wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Aenarian wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Sad that they didnt fix any of the Russ variants like Vanquishers or Exterminators so they might actually see a table. Thanks GW

Would anyone actually take a Vanquisher or Exterminator if the weapon itself was free? I'm not sure I would.

The Exterminator maybe, it's not awful, just clearly inferior to the battlecannon in Strenght, AP and range (while being more expensive), if it were free it'd probably be worth taking. Not sure about the Vanquisher, it's just fundamentally broken as an MBT specialized anti-tank weapon.

The Exterminator has a slightly higher number of shots than the average for the BC and is arguably better against 2-wound infantry (depending on its Toughness and save)..

drbored wrote:
I just want to remind everyone that GW put out this FAQ and Errata based on community feedback. They took in a lot of the suggestions that people were giving them out of actual playtesting, seeing that playing against certain combos wasn't fun, and also fixing holes that had been made by their writing.

If people are really upset that they blew 500 dollars to make two 90 point squads of Conscripts to fit with the competitive meta, I'm sure there are lots of people on Ebay that would love to help you recoup that.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
Well the good news about that is I'm pretty sure you can choose to not blam anyone, so if you roll a 1 on the morale test, just take it because it won't get any better.

Blamming on a 4 and rolling a 6 would be some bad feels though.

I mean, that's just the same level of screwed loyalist marines are with ATSKNF.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:
Somewhat off-topic: I liked the old Commissar rule from way back where he would execute the commanding officer of the unit he was attached to in order to get a re-roll on a Leadership test, but if the second test also failed the unit would kill the Commissar and then break and run anyway.

I'm not saying it was the best rule in terms of gameplay and I'm not saying that it should be ported over to 8th, just that I think it was amusing and flavorful.

 dracpanzer wrote:
I like the commissar fix. Makes them fit the fluff better. Commissars are there to stiffen up the morale of your less passionate troops. Conscripts need them, regulars don't, but would still see a slight improvement in morale. That being said, a Commisar mght just have to make more than one example to convince his charges to stay in the fight. They will save four conscripts just by the morale increase, if you fail a morale check theres a chance that the Commisar will save a few that would have run off anyways, sometimes maybe their trigger finger gets a little more zealous, sometimes extra zealous.

Its not like its ideal to send newly minted conscripts to the front anyways. I am more worried about the FAQ not clarifying the Crusader unit AoF question.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Didn't read the 5 pages, but here's my 2 cents about the commissar thing:

It's a little drastic, but honestly it fits. It's what they did in previous editions and it restores Morale as being a useful tool against the enemy, rather than all-or-nothing. Smart Guard players will learn to use LD boosts and other mitigation and work with the low LD, not try to avoid it.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Didn't read the 5 pages, but here's my 2 cents about the commissar thing:

It's a little drastic, but honestly it fits. It's what they did in previous editions and it restores Morale as being a useful tool against the enemy, rather than all-or-nothing. Smart Guard players will learn to use LD boosts and other mitigation and work with the low LD, not try to avoid it.

grouchoben wrote:
Really? A nerf to Krieg? thank the lord they finally reigned us in, I was beginning to feel bad! (Krieg can no longer take any traits or relics from the codex, despite being <AM>.)

Seriously, this heavy nerfing of Commissars does actually leave Krieg in an enviable position in terms of morale resistance.

Niiru wrote:

Because a guy in a furry hat with a pistol, is scarier than 5 units of Chaos-warped monstrosities SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED to be as terrifying as possible.

It was stupid.

nateprati wrote:Why didnt they adress missing wargear like demo charges and riugh riders. Or am i missing somthing? Im going to end up using the index over this

MarsNZ wrote:
Most marine mouthbreathers take that for granted.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

nateprati wrote:Why didnt they adress missing wargear like demo charges and riugh riders. Or am i missing somthing? Im going to end up using the index over this

GW has already stated we can use the index for missing units/options. The codexes represent the current model range and the indexes cover the legacy units/models. Use the most recent points value for the unit and gear.

Glinch wrote:
Mkay.. SO some things to point out.

<Snip>

Also on another point, i don't recall regular infantry being more than 10 man squads. if they lose enough men that the commissar makes it worthless then the squad would be dead without him anyways. So what if the reroll can get worse. Plasma guns do have same chance to do that just as much. One moment could be a missed shot then on the reroll it turns into a 1 and your model dies. Point of rerolling is the chance to be better but also chance that it could get worse or sta just as bad, granted I do agree might be better if it was optional if it's a low roll, but it's nice to see some of the old 4th-5th rules and prices coming back into order on a lot of choices and model.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Either way "one size fits all" fits nobody.

Niiru wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

nateprati wrote:Why didnt they adress missing wargear like demo charges and riugh riders. Or am i missing somthing? Im going to end up using the index over this

GW has already stated we can use the index for missing units/options. The codexes represent the current model range and the indexes cover the legacy units/models. Use the most recent points value for the unit and gear.

While this is true, I suspect it will be changed at some point, as it is starting to cause conflicts (and it will only get worse as more codices and FAQ's are released).

For example, the new codex Eldar Autarch has lost the ability to take any weapon options, so he has lost the reaper launcher, fusion pistol, mandiblaster and banshee mask as options. So, you say, just use the index version instead! However, the index Autarch banshee mask has a rule written in his datasheet. And the codex howling banshee masks have a -new rule-, that's completely different. So if you're using the Index Autarch, do you use his rule from the index, or the new banshees rule for their masks? Common sense says the new rule, but RAW... well, no idea.

Also, there's a new ability in the Codex for the Autarch to be able to snipe characters. Which is fine and not overpowered, because he only gets a pistol anyway. Except if you can use the Index Autarch, you can give him a 48" missile launcher instead. That can snipe characters. Which is clearly not intended.

This is just two examples I've come up with, from -one single model- in an army. There's bound to be more, especially as more books come out.

So I wouldn't be surprised if GW put an end to it by just saying Codex trumps Index. Though they may wait until all the codices come out, and then retire the indexes then. Just wanted to point out that, while you're meant to use the most recent points, there's no rule in place regarding gear options or rules options.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Niiru wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

nateprati wrote:Why didnt they adress missing wargear like demo charges and riugh riders. Or am i missing somthing? Im going to end up using the index over this

GW has already stated we can use the index for missing units/options. The codexes represent the current model range and the indexes cover the legacy units/models. Use the most recent points value for the unit and gear.

While this is true, I suspect it will be changed at some point, as it is starting to cause conflicts (and it will only get worse as more codices and FAQ's are released).

For example, the new codex Eldar Autarch has lost the ability to take any weapon options, so he has lost the reaper launcher, fusion pistol, mandiblaster and banshee mask as options. So, you say, just use the index version instead! However, the index Autarch banshee mask has a rule written in his datasheet. And the codex howling banshee masks have a -new rule-, that's completely different. So if you're using the Index Autarch, do you use his rule from the index, or the new banshees rule for their masks? Common sense says the new rule, but RAW... well, no idea.

Also, there's a new ability in the Codex for the Autarch to be able to snipe characters. Which is fine and not overpowered, because he only gets a pistol anyway. Except if you can use the Index Autarch, you can give him a 48" missile launcher instead. That can snipe characters. Which is clearly not intended.

This is just two examples I've come up with, from -one single model- in an army. There's bound to be more, especially as more books come out.

So I wouldn't be surprised if GW put an end to it by just saying Codex trumps Index. Though they may wait until all the codices come out, and then retire the indexes then. Just wanted to point out that, while you're meant to use the most recent points, there's no rule in place regarding gear options or rules options.

There is no conflict with the Autarch.

The codex Autarch is the rules for Autarch-you can't use the index one.
Especially not mix the index wargear with the codex special abilities. you might as well been using 5th S10 broadsides in 7th.
You use index rules only for units that have NO codex rules, not if you want wargear that is no longer there.

I'll save my 62+ points per 2k list and just use a command squad with banner and Lascannon or another squad with a plasma gun and heavy bolter. I never even used conscripts so I'm kind of pissed that my iconic Commissars I painted almost 20 years ago are now going on the shelf because they can cause MORE harm than good. GTFO if you try and tell me I was a bandwagon power gamer sad my conscripts are garbage now. Just give me D3 casualties for a failed morale test and I'm good. But the possibility of wiping a squad AFTER a guy is killed is obnoxious.

fe40k wrote:
@MarNZ: Sorry Imperial factions no longer get a free pass on being overpowered this edition. They get to be balanced and re-balanced, just like every other faction. Also, you're deluding yourself if you think GW won't continue to balance the game, no matter what faction it is (say, Xenos) - as well as if you think the loss of Morale immune Conscripts [a mistake in the first place on a 3ppm model with those stats] will suddenly invalidate all the other top tier options AM has available.

I, for one, and glad Morale actually matters now - the only models that should even consider getting a free immunity would be extremely low (<5) model count, expensive, elite squads.

Morale kill should be a reasonable way of dealing with large, low priced, chaff models.

Niiru wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

Niiru wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

nateprati wrote:Why didnt they adress missing wargear like demo charges and riugh riders. Or am i missing somthing? Im going to end up using the index over this

GW has already stated we can use the index for missing units/options. The codexes represent the current model range and the indexes cover the legacy units/models. Use the most recent points value for the unit and gear.

While this is true, I suspect it will be changed at some point, as it is starting to cause conflicts (and it will only get worse as more codices and FAQ's are released).

For example, the new codex Eldar Autarch has lost the ability to take any weapon options, so he has lost the reaper launcher, fusion pistol, mandiblaster and banshee mask as options. So, you say, just use the index version instead! However, the index Autarch banshee mask has a rule written in his datasheet. And the codex howling banshee masks have a -new rule-, that's completely different. So if you're using the Index Autarch, do you use his rule from the index, or the new banshees rule for their masks? Common sense says the new rule, but RAW... well, no idea.

Also, there's a new ability in the Codex for the Autarch to be able to snipe characters. Which is fine and not overpowered, because he only gets a pistol anyway. Except if you can use the Index Autarch, you can give him a 48" missile launcher instead. That can snipe characters. Which is clearly not intended.

This is just two examples I've come up with, from -one single model- in an army. There's bound to be more, especially as more books come out.

So I wouldn't be surprised if GW put an end to it by just saying Codex trumps Index. Though they may wait until all the codices come out, and then retire the indexes then. Just wanted to point out that, while you're meant to use the most recent points, there's no rule in place regarding gear options or rules options.

There is no conflict with the Autarch.

The codex Autarch is the rules for Autarch-you can't use the index one.
Especially not mix the index wargear with the codex special abilities. you might as well been using 5th S10 broadsides in 7th.
You use index rules only for units that have NO codex rules, not if you want wargear that is no longer there.

Now see Boomwolf, I actually agree with you. I think the intention is to only use index rules for models with no Codex datasheet, such as Chaos Lords on Juggernauts.

However, you'll find lots of people (like earlier) who say that actually you can use the Index version of the model even for wargear options that are missing. I've had people on dakka saying they will be using axes on their sergeants, even though the new IG codex only has power swords now. There's a lot of other examples too.

I agree with you, that it's only for models/units with whole datasheets missing. But we seem to be the only ones. My post was an effort to point out the problems this could cause.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Niiru wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

nateprati wrote:Why didnt they adress missing wargear like demo charges and riugh riders. Or am i missing somthing? Im going to end up using the index over this

GW has already stated we can use the index for missing units/options. The codexes represent the current model range and the indexes cover the legacy units/models. Use the most recent points value for the unit and gear.

While this is true, I suspect it will be changed at some point, as it is starting to cause conflicts (and it will only get worse as more codices and FAQ's are released).

For example, the new codex Eldar Autarch has lost the ability to take any weapon options, so he has lost the reaper launcher, fusion pistol, mandiblaster and banshee mask as options. So, you say, just use the index version instead! However, the index Autarch banshee mask has a rule written in his datasheet. And the codex howling banshee masks have a -new rule-, that's completely different. So if you're using the Index Autarch, do you use his rule from the index, or the new banshees rule for their masks? Common sense says the new rule, but RAW... well, no idea.

Also, there's a new ability in the Codex for the Autarch to be able to snipe characters. Which is fine and not overpowered, because he only gets a pistol anyway. Except if you can use the Index Autarch, you can give him a 48" missile launcher instead. That can snipe characters. Which is clearly not intended.

This is just two examples I've come up with, from -one single model- in an army. There's bound to be more, especially as more books come out.

So I wouldn't be surprised if GW put an end to it by just saying Codex trumps Index. Though they may wait until all the codices come out, and then retire the indexes then. Just wanted to point out that, while you're meant to use the most recent points, there's no rule in place regarding gear options or rules options.

There is no conflict with the Autarch.

The codex Autarch is the rules for Autarch-you can't use the index one.
Especially not mix the index wargear with the codex special abilities. you might as well been using 5th S10 broadsides in 7th.
You use index rules only for units that have NO codex rules, not if you want wargear that is no longer there.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Well, unfortunately for both of you, you will find that GW has told us that this is not the case, and that wargear is a go:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

"There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?

While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army."

Bolded the relevant parts. If you would like to continue to debate the point with regards to datasheets vs wargear, may I remind you that the mention of Dreadnought weapons is significant, as the majority of Dreadnought Weapons are not selected from datasheets, but instead selected from the Dreadnought Heavy Weapon List included on the Wargear page of both the Index and the Codex. A side by side comparison of the index vs the codex reveals that the wargear list in the codex is missing three options available in the index, and the datasheet in the codex only omits mention of a single weapon found in the index version.

Any way you slice it, it seems that your interpretation of GWs ruling would thus be undeniably and undebatably incorrect.

 Stus67 wrote:
I broke my Conscript squads down to mass 10-man units after the codex anyway so this doesn't even effect me, but the amount of salt over this is exactly why I can't take most people on this forum seriously.

It never made sense to make conscripts completely immune to morale by shooting one in the back of the head, and never should have. Shame some people were shortsighted enough to build entire armies around that. Not like there isn't a multitude of other options to make conscripts totally immune or hardly impacted by morale anyway. Two stratagems, a psychic power, the Mk.45, and being Valhallan work pretty well.

Niiru wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Well, unfortunately for both of you, you will find that GW has told us that this is not the case, and that wargear is a go:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

"There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?

While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army."

Bolded the relevant parts. If you would like to continue to debate the point with regards to datasheets vs wargear, may I remind you that the mention of Dreadnought weapons is significant, as the majority of Dreadnought Weapons are not selected from datasheets, but instead selected from the Dreadnought Heavy Weapon List included on the Wargear page of both the Index and the Codex. A side by side comparison of the index vs the codex reveals that the wargear list in the codex is missing three options available in the index, and the datasheet in the codex only omits mention of a single weapon found in the index version.

Any way you slice it, it seems that your interpretation of GWs ruling would thus be undeniably and undebatably incorrect.

Which means that, going from that route, Autarchs can still take Banshee Masks (but no idea if its the old or new version, as old is on Autarch dataslate but new is the update (but only on the Banshees page)).

Also means I can take an Autarch with a Reaper Launcher, and fire rockets at 48" range at any character I like on the board.

I doubt I will, cos it feels super cheesy, but someone's gonna do it.

I haven’t seen any salty conscript users, just us normal ig players annoyed they essentially deleted commissars from usage.

The problem unit is conscripts. That’s the unit that should be nerfed. Not commissars.

 Stus67 wrote:
Shame some people were shortsighted enough to build entire armies around that.

 Stus67 wrote:
If your Commissar is blasting a person from a 10 man unit that's being effected by his aura then that unit was already as close to being dead as it can get.

That one last Scion or Guardsman is literally not going to make a difference.

 daedalus wrote:

 Stus67 wrote:
If your Commissar is blasting a person from a 10 man unit that's being effected by his aura then that unit was already as close to being dead as it can get.

That one last Scion or Guardsman is literally not going to make a difference.

"Affected." The word you're looking for is "affected".

The point of an infantry squad is that not all members of the infantry squad are created equal. The purpose of the commissar protecting the 10 man squad was to salvage the special/heavy weapon and maybe the sarge. Generally speaking, when you can choose casualties, the last model left in a unit is the only one that matters. The list here was literally designed around the concept: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/10/16/the-grand-tournament-heat-1-the-roundup/

 Stus67 wrote:
If your Commissar is blasting a person from a 10 man unit that's being effected by his aura then that unit was already as close to being dead as it can get.

That one last Scion or Guardsman is literally not going to make a difference.

 Commissar Benny wrote:
I think what the take away from all this is that GW has no earthly idea how to balance the IG codex. Which isn't entirely surprising given the last 3 codex's have basically been copy/paste of the previous codex with less options. It also demonstrates they pay more attention to concern trolls than people actually playing the game. What did they hope to accomplish with these changes? I can tell you whats going to happen in the meta, which took me about .5 seconds to figure out.

* Commissars are done, conscripts are done.
* You just freed up hundreds of points, which will instead be used on mass 10 man squads. Higher BS unit, Leadership a non-issue.
* Valhallans obsolete. Absolutely no reason to take them after send in the next wave nerf. Thank the emperor those power gaming Valhallan players that account for not even a fraction of a 1% of the playerbase were dealt with. We might have seen a Valhallan army played once in our life.

 Stus67 wrote:
If your Commissar is blasting a person from a 10 man unit that's being effected by his aura then that unit was already as close to being dead as it can get.

That one last Scion or Guardsman is literally not going to make a difference.

 Commissar Benny wrote:
I think what the take away from all this is that GW has no earthly idea how to balance the IG codex. Which isn't entirely surprising given the last 3 codex's have basically been copy/paste of the previous codex with less options. It also demonstrates they pay more attention to concern trolls than people actually playing the game. What did they hope to accomplish with these changes? I can tell you whats going to happen in the meta, which took me about .5 seconds to figure out.

* Commissars are done, conscripts are done.
* You just freed up hundreds of points, which will instead be used on mass 10 man squads. Higher BS unit, Leadership a non-issue.
* Valhallans obsolete. Absolutely no reason to take them after send in the next wave nerf. Thank the emperor those power gaming Valhallan players that account for not even a fraction of a 1% of the playerbase were dealt with. We might have seen a Valhallan army played once in our life.

Niiru wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Well, unfortunately for both of you, you will find that GW has told us that this is not the case, and that wargear is a go:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

"There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?

While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army."

Bolded the relevant parts. If you would like to continue to debate the point with regards to datasheets vs wargear, may I remind you that the mention of Dreadnought weapons is significant, as the majority of Dreadnought Weapons are not selected from datasheets, but instead selected from the Dreadnought Heavy Weapon List included on the Wargear page of both the Index and the Codex. A side by side comparison of the index vs the codex reveals that the wargear list in the codex is missing three options available in the index, and the datasheet in the codex only omits mention of a single weapon found in the index version.

Any way you slice it, it seems that your interpretation of GWs ruling would thus be undeniably and undebatably incorrect.

Which means that, going from that route, Autarchs can still take Banshee Masks (but no idea if its the old or new version, as old is on Autarch dataslate but new is the update (but only on the Banshees page)).

Also means I can take an Autarch with a Reaper Launcher, and fire rockets at 48" range at any character I like on the board.

I doubt I will, cos it feels super cheesy, but someone's gonna do it.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:
Somewhat off-topic: I liked the old Commissar rule from way back where he would execute the commanding officer of the unit he was attached to in order to get a re-roll on a Leadership test, but if the second test also failed the unit would kill the Commissar and then break and run anyway.

I'm not saying it was the best rule in terms of gameplay and I'm not saying that it should be ported over to 8th, just that I think it was amusing and flavorful.

 Stus67 wrote:
I broke my Conscript squads down to mass 10-man units after the codex anyway so this doesn't even effect me, but the amount of salt over this is exactly why I can't take most people on this forum seriously.

It never made sense to make conscripts completely immune to morale by shooting one in the back of the head, and never should have. Shame some people were shortsighted enough to build entire armies around that. Not like there isn't a multitude of other options to make conscripts totally immune or hardly impacted by morale anyway. Two stratagems, a psychic power, the Mk.45, and being Valhallan work pretty well.

 Red_Five wrote:

fe40k wrote:
@MarNZ: Sorry Imperial factions no longer get a free pass on being overpowered this edition. They get to be balanced and re-balanced, just like every other faction. Also, you're deluding yourself if you think GW won't continue to balance the game, no matter what faction it is (say, Xenos) - as well as if you think the loss of Morale immune Conscripts [a mistake in the first place on a 3ppm model with those stats] will suddenly invalidate all the other top tier options AM has available.

I, for one, and glad Morale actually matters now - the only models that should even consider getting a free immunity would be extremely low (<5) model count, expensive, elite squads.

Morale kill should be a reasonable way of dealing with large, low priced, chaff models.

So Tyranids need to be reworked then.

Nemesis234 wrote:
So I play catachan, as I understand it, as I only use normal infantry squads are commissar now not worth it for me as I get ld8 as default?

lolman1c wrote:This is the funniest thread to read. The same people who told me to shut up and told me I was a power gamer for suggesting the ig codex is unbalanced are the same people having heart attacks and calling gw out as the worst company ever for at least tempting to do some kind of balance. The very fact so many of these people are angry means gw is on the right path for once!

For those being like "b-but marines get a free reroll!" - well marines don't cost 3 or 4 pts per model. You get 30 guardsmen for every 1 squad of 10 marines. You'll likely kill 3 per turn which is more than they can do back.

"B-but orks get 30 leadership!" - To get 30 leadership after taking damage you need a min of 2 squads at 360 points min (90 guardsmen worth). And they only get a 6+ save. With your 90 guardsmen you're likely to do 24 wounds to a squad making them basically useless and then next turn you can moral the other squad out of existence.

And none of these took i to the account rerolling guard get! Face it, for 30 pts getting auto moral pass on an already cheap and efficient army was really messing witht the balance of the game. Maybe this nerf is too far but it at lesst shows gw is listening for once... now remove commissars or keep them, regardless your army is still effective and efficient so enjoy your 10 seconds of fame like every other faction does because orks haven't had one in a long long time....

BoomWolf wrote:I'm struggling to find the logic behind how you reach the conclusion that ld4 is superior to ld8 with potential blam.

At the very WORST, you save 3 conscripts from running.

There is no "what if the reroll is worse", it cancels itself out by the equal odd of it being better, and that's without the possibility of actually turning a fail to a success.

Jesus the levels of irrational cries here.

grouchoben wrote:
It's a bit of a nerf. Commissars aren't that good now. If you're dedicated to running morale-ignoring blobs of conscripts, you still can, but now you have to work at it. The rest of the IG Codex is still amazing, and IG are still a top-level army with the greatest fluff-reflecting rules - and diversity of lists - in the game.

In short: it's all good.

 argonak wrote:

lolman1c wrote:This is the funniest thread to read. The same people who told me to shut up and told me I was a power gamer for suggesting the ig codex is unbalanced are the same people having heart attacks and calling gw out as the worst company ever for at least tempting to do some kind of balance. The very fact so many of these people are angry means gw is on the right path for once!

For those being like "b-but marines get a free reroll!" - well marines don't cost 3 or 4 pts per model. You get 30 guardsmen for every 1 squad of 10 marines. You'll likely kill 3 per turn which is more than they can do back.

"B-but orks get 30 leadership!" - To get 30 leadership after taking damage you need a min of 2 squads at 360 points min (90 guardsmen worth). And they only get a 6+ save. With your 90 guardsmen you're likely to do 24 wounds to a squad making them basically useless and then next turn you can moral the other squad out of existence.

And none of these took i to the account rerolling guard get! Face it, for 30 pts getting auto moral pass on an already cheap and efficient army was really messing witht the balance of the game. Maybe this nerf is too far but it at lesst shows gw is listening for once... now remove commissars or keep them, regardless your army is still effective and efficient so enjoy your 10 seconds of fame like every other faction does because orks haven't had one in a long long time....

Well aren't you a ray of sunshine. The players who are complaining are the ones who didn't use conscripts because this nerf screws commissars over for normal guardsmen squads completly, while giving conscripts a medium sized nerf they'll all ignore with their choice of either of the two strategems, two pyschic powers, or the relics. But we're obviously the jerk powergamers here for trying to use our basic troop squad. Commissars might as well have been deleted for anyone but conscripts now.

BoomWolf wrote:I'm struggling to find the logic behind how you reach the conclusion that ld4 is superior to ld8 with potential blam.

At the very WORST, you save 3 conscripts from running.

There is no "what if the reroll is worse", it cancels itself out by the equal odd of it being better, and that's without the possibility of actually turning a fail to a success.

Jesus the levels of irrational cries here.

We're complaining because they ruined them for normal guardsmen, not for conscripts. Conscript players will still be able to game themselves into ignoring morale with the other options.

As it stands there's zero reason for a guard player who isn't running conscripts to ever bring a commissar, because they're inarguably worse than the other options.

 BoomWolf wrote:

So, it works properly as an in game tool by not being the automatic answer to everything and actually requiring thought before using.
And it works fluffwise by only bring really useful to control people with lacking discipline.

What's the problem again?

tneva82 wrote:



Coupled that with not actually nerfing conscripts...

Spoletta wrote:

tneva82 wrote:



Coupled that with not actually nerfing conscripts...

Stopped reading there, you clearly have no clue.

tneva82 wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

So, it works properly as an in game tool by not being the automatic answer to everything and actually requiring thought before using.
And it works fluffwise by only bring really useful to control people with lacking discipline.

What's the problem again?

We have special rule that's supposed to be beneficitial at a cost. Instead we have rule that has no benefit and only downsides. Totally illogical unfluffy rule.

Coupled that with not actually nerfing conscripts...When there are ways to fix conscripts that make sense fluffwise they went hit nerfbat elsewhere in an unfluffy rule.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Buffing a hilariously underpowered index=/=power creep.

 BoomWolf wrote:

 argonak wrote:

lolman1c wrote:This is the funniest thread to read. The same people who told me to shut up and told me I was a power gamer for suggesting the ig codex is unbalanced are the same people having heart attacks and calling gw out as the worst company ever for at least tempting to do some kind of balance. The very fact so many of these people are angry means gw is on the right path for once!

For those being like "b-but marines get a free reroll!" - well marines don't cost 3 or 4 pts per model. You get 30 guardsmen for every 1 squad of 10 marines. You'll likely kill 3 per turn which is more than they can do back.

"B-but orks get 30 leadership!" - To get 30 leadership after taking damage you need a min of 2 squads at 360 points min (90 guardsmen worth). And they only get a 6+ save. With your 90 guardsmen you're likely to do 24 wounds to a squad making them basically useless and then next turn you can moral the other squad out of existence.

And none of these took i to the account rerolling guard get! Face it, for 30 pts getting auto moral pass on an already cheap and efficient army was really messing witht the balance of the game. Maybe this nerf is too far but it at lesst shows gw is listening for once... now remove commissars or keep them, regardless your army is still effective and efficient so enjoy your 10 seconds of fame like every other faction does because orks haven't had one in a long long time....

Well aren't you a ray of sunshine. The players who are complaining are the ones who didn't use conscripts because this nerf screws commissars over for normal guardsmen squads completly, while giving conscripts a medium sized nerf they'll all ignore with their choice of either of the two strategems, two pyschic powers, or the relics. But we're obviously the jerk powergamers here for trying to use our basic troop squad. Commissars might as well have been deleted for anyone but conscripts now.

BoomWolf wrote:I'm struggling to find the logic behind how you reach the conclusion that ld4 is superior to ld8 with potential blam.

At the very WORST, you save 3 conscripts from running.

There is no "what if the reroll is worse", it cancels itself out by the equal odd of it being better, and that's without the possibility of actually turning a fail to a success.

Jesus the levels of irrational cries here.

We're complaining because they ruined them for normal guardsmen, not for conscripts. Conscript players will still be able to game themselves into ignoring morale with the other options.

As it stands there's zero reason for a guard player who isn't running conscripts to ever bring a commissar, because they're inarguably worse than the other options.

So, you're complaining your commissar is no longer "one solution fits all" any more and you have to actually use more complicated means than taking an auto-include character that is virtually impossible to get around or kill in order to get your army to totally ignore moral and you have to settle for only mostly ignoring it.
Gotcha.


So, the people who's job is to control unruly masses through intimidation is only useful in controlling... Unruly masses. And he isn't quite as useful when you got trained soldiers running around who are not scared shitless from a stray bullet and collapse when focused fire upon-something no blam should realistically solve.
It seems to me like it's working as intended.


So, it works properly as an in game tool by not being the automatic answer to everything and actually requiring thought before using.
And it works fluffwise by only bring really useful to control people with lacking discipline.

What's the problem again?

the_scotsman wrote:
It does sadden me to see Commissars "balanced" by basically removing them from the game except in a few edge circumstances (using one to make use of Draconian Disciplinarian) because I don't actually think they were problematic for nearly any IG units other than conscripts.

the regular 10-man squads are so fragile that if old Summary Execution comes into play, you very rarely are saving more than 1-2 guys. It was only crazy valuable with Conscripts who would frequently take 10-15 casualties which then would just result in 1 loss thanks to the commissar, who would then immediately pay for himself.

A nerf specifically to his interaction with Conscripts would make more sense in my eyes, given that they would have a higher chance to panic rather than fall in line when he shoots one.

Just feels like lazy game balance. I'm still going to use my one Commissar (who I run as a Lord since hes the powerfist sculpt in fun games) so it's not like I'm bemoaning my own loss of OP options, I welcome stuff that makes my competitive games less difficult. But you hate to see lazy game design. It'd be like if they balanced Guilliman by adding 300 points to his Matched Play cost and saying "he's really only intended for Narrative guys. Sorry."

Like, on one hand yay, no more obnoxious guilliman lists? But on the other hand, couldn't you have tried a little more?

kurhanik wrote:

No, the complaint is that on regular guardsmen, veterans, and scions, the Commissar can actually make matters worse.

 Red_Five wrote:

fe40k wrote:
@MarNZ: Sorry Imperial factions no longer get a free pass on being overpowered this edition. They get to be balanced and re-balanced, just like every other faction. Also, you're deluding yourself if you think GW won't continue to balance the game, no matter what faction it is (say, Xenos) - as well as if you think the loss of Morale immune Conscripts [a mistake in the first place on a 3ppm model with those stats] will suddenly invalidate all the other top tier options AM has available.

I, for one, and glad Morale actually matters now - the only models that should even consider getting a free immunity would be extremely low (<5) model count, expensive, elite squads.

Morale kill should be a reasonable way of dealing with large, low priced, chaff models.

So Tyranids need to be reworked then.

 dracpanzer wrote:

Its not like having a man in a black coat following your squad around waiting to shoot one of you in the head is a fun time.

 vipoid wrote:

 dracpanzer wrote:

Its not like having a man in a black coat following your squad around waiting to shoot one of you in the head is a fun time.

Like it or not that's the core of their fluff though.

if they can't keep units in line then they literally serve no function. They might as well just BLAM themselves.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 dracpanzer wrote:

Its not like having a man in a black coat following your squad around waiting to shoot one of you in the head is a fun time.

Like it or not that's the core of their fluff though.

if they can't keep units in line then they literally serve no function. They might as well just BLAM themselves.

Didn't they do that for a while?

Alcibiades wrote:

 Red_Five wrote:

fe40k wrote:
@MarNZ: Sorry Imperial factions no longer get a free pass on being overpowered this edition. They get to be balanced and re-balanced, just like every other faction. Also, you're deluding yourself if you think GW won't continue to balance the game, no matter what faction it is (say, Xenos) - as well as if you think the loss of Morale immune Conscripts [a mistake in the first place on a 3ppm model with those stats] will suddenly invalidate all the other top tier options AM has available.

I, for one, and glad Morale actually matters now - the only models that should even consider getting a free immunity would be extremely low (<5) model count, expensive, elite squads.

Morale kill should be a reasonable way of dealing with large, low priced, chaff models.

So Tyranids need to be reworked then.

The difference is that the main synapse creatures are The Big Ones with 10+ wounds.

Martel732 wrote:
Can't you still just use the commissar's leadership in general?

Asmodios wrote:
Got to say I'm not a fan of this update. Firstly, the change to "send in the next wave" just seems silly... was anyone even abusing this? To me it seemed like one of the best fluff rules in the game that wasn't broken. I could see them increasing the cost by 1 CP if they were worried it could be abused but with this change I'm struggling to see why you would ever use it and it's a shame to see such a cool rule be ruined.

On the commissar change I wish it would have been worked out differently (maybe D6 wounds to conscripts). I'll still take commissars in many of my games because I feel like they are central to the fluff of the army but funnily enough they now seem only useful on conscripts and actually like a waist on normal guardsman (which just feels weird). Also the "having to use the ability" seems really unessary and hopefully a misprint because rolling a 1 then being forced to re roll is going to be a really big kick in the teeth

Martel732 wrote:
So just don't do that then. Just like I don't bring any BA special units anymore. Every single BA-specific unit is not worth bringing at the moment. Every single one. My current list is a UM list with no chapter tactics.

 Arbitrator wrote:
The rule should only have been implemented for Conscripts like their chance to fail at Orders, not a nerf to Commissars across the board.

Imo.

It was nice to have Commissars finally viable for all of five months. I guess they're going back on the shelf for another fifteen years.

Conscripts are a seething mass of terrified citizens thrust into a nightmare. A lone Commissar might be able to hold the line with them, but the more terrified the Conscripts are the more likely they are to break. Because of this lower ranking Commissars tend to act in concert when overseeing Conscripts.

A squad of Conscripts is immune to the effects of Summary Execution unless there are at least two COMMISSAR models within 6" of them. A LORD COMMISSAR overrides this effect.

Martel732 wrote:
"Scions, for example, could grant bonuses to LD to friendly units within a bubble when they are slaying things."

There's a dozen units in the IG codex that need to cost more before anything gets any better.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:

 Red_Five wrote:

fe40k wrote:
@MarNZ: Sorry Imperial factions no longer get a free pass on being overpowered this edition. They get to be balanced and re-balanced, just like every other faction. Also, you're deluding yourself if you think GW won't continue to balance the game, no matter what faction it is (say, Xenos) - as well as if you think the loss of Morale immune Conscripts [a mistake in the first place on a 3ppm model with those stats] will suddenly invalidate all the other top tier options AM has available.

I, for one, and glad Morale actually matters now - the only models that should even consider getting a free immunity would be extremely low (<5) model count, expensive, elite squads.

Morale kill should be a reasonable way of dealing with large, low priced, chaff models.

So Tyranids need to be reworked then.

The difference is that the main synapse creatures are The Big Ones with 10+ wounds.

The "main synapse creatures" that have 10+ Wounds are Hive Tyrants and Swarmlords (180 to 300 points each)--both of which have access to Tyrant Guards (37 points for 3W 3+ T5 that does NOTHING else), a unit explicitly designed since the early years to mitigate the fact that the Hive Tyrants are Monsters.
Broodlords (160 points) and Tyranid Primes (100 points if completely naked) both are 6W.
Tervigons are 14W and really are the only ones that don't have a special protection. (Probably the worst unit in the codex)
Tyranid Warriors are a Synapse unit, Zoanthropes are a unit, Shrikes are a unit. (Good synapse solution, but nothing even remotely on the level of an old commissar)
Maleceptors and Trygon Primes are solo-Synapse Monsters. (Both on the 200 points mark)

And then you have the Sporocysts' Psychic Resonator ability(if within range of a unit with the Synapse ability, then it gains Synapse). (You will never see one of those on a table, for obvious reasons)

So let's not pretend that there is some kind of innate downside that balances out Synapse, shall we? The same complaints that existed about daisy-chaining Commissars and hiding them behind LOS and what have you can easily be applied to Synapse as well.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
So just don't do that then. Just like I don't bring any BA special units anymore. Every single BA-specific unit is not worth bringing at the moment. Every single one. My current list is a UM list with no chapter tactics.

It's very spiteful of you to wish that an army's flavour be removed simply because yours has none.

What instead, should happen, is yours should become more flavourful and cool, rather than others becoming less. I believe that would make for a better game.

Martel732 wrote:
"Scions, for example, could grant bonuses to LD to friendly units within a bubble when they are slaying things."

There's a dozen units in the IG codex that need to cost more before anything gets any better.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this is pretty funny. AM players always mention ATSKNF so often - commissars are just ATSKNF bubbles now - for 31 points you can make 3-4 squads have ATSKNF. Yeah...I don't see too many jumping the gun to have that perk.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this is pretty funny. AM players always mention ATSKNF so often - commissars are just ATSKNF bubbles now - for 31 points you can make 3-4 squads have ATSKNF. Yeah...I don't see too many jumping the gun to have that perk.

 vipoid wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this is pretty funny. AM players always mention ATSKNF so often - commissars are just ATSKNF bubbles now - for 31 points you can make 3-4 squads have ATSKNF. Yeah...I don't see too many jumping the gun to have that perk.

A few points here:
- Unlike SMs, IG don't have naturally high Ld to begin with.
- IG tend to have much higher squad sizes than SMs (e.g. most SM squads have a minimum of 5 members, whilst many IG ones have a minimum of 10).
- IG have to specifically pay for their ATSKNF. They don't get it automatically on every unit.
- With SMs, the reroll is optional. IG are forced to reroll it, even if a better result is physically impossible.
- The ATSKNF reroll doesn't cost you a model.

 daedalus wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this is pretty funny. AM players always mention ATSKNF so often - commissars are just ATSKNF bubbles now - for 31 points you can make 3-4 squads have ATSKNF. Yeah...I don't see too many jumping the gun to have that perk.

No. It is worse than ATSKNF, and actually generally worse than not taking a commissar to begin with.

 daedalus wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this is pretty funny. AM players always mention ATSKNF so often - commissars are just ATSKNF bubbles now - for 31 points you can make 3-4 squads have ATSKNF. Yeah...I don't see too many jumping the gun to have that perk.

No. It is worse than ATSKNF, and actually generally worse than not taking a commissar to begin with.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Viewing spite as a victory condition is a whole issue that I'm not going to touch with a 10-foot pole, but...

...well, fair enough I suppose. Your logic is sound, if you really just think being spiteful is a positive thing.

the_scotsman wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"Scions, for example, could grant bonuses to LD to friendly units within a bubble when they are slaying things."

There's a dozen units in the IG codex that need to cost more before anything gets any better.

So, would you also say that nothing in the marine codex should be buffed before Guilliman, Stormravens and assault cannon razorbacks are nerfed? Well, That seems like a bizarre stance, tbh, especially given that you have pretty much no proof at this point that some of the things you're likely complaining about if you're going all the way up to a dozen units have any kind of problematic balance.

At this point, all the units that have been competitive AM staples in tournaments have seen nerfs, and we have not seen any more major events to tell us what, if anything, might be problematic from the codex.

If you asked me to put down money I'd probably bet on a Cadian superheavy list being powerful, but we already saw one getting blown away by Guilliman-backed Tactical Squads, of all things.

So, should we sit tight on buffing anything up until we've nerfed the current Usual Suspects? Or should we be taking the opportunity to give buffs to units that need it regardless if their rules are seeing an update? seems petty to be taking door number one here, and if so, I hope your BA are comfy because I don't expect Guilliman nerfs until chapter approved at the earliest.

Spoletta wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this is pretty funny. AM players always mention ATSKNF so often - commissars are just ATSKNF bubbles now - for 31 points you can make 3-4 squads have ATSKNF. Yeah...I don't see too many jumping the gun to have that perk.

A few points here:
- Unlike SMs, IG don't have naturally high Ld to begin with.
- IG tend to have much higher squad sizes than SMs (e.g. most SM squads have a minimum of 5 members, whilst many IG ones have a minimum of 10).
- IG have to specifically pay for their ATSKNF. They don't get it automatically on every unit.
- With SMs, the reroll is optional. IG are forced to reroll it, even if a better result is physically impossible.
- The ATSKNF reroll doesn't cost you a model.

Please add to that list the following:

- Space marines don't cost 3 points.

Martel732 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Viewing spite as a victory condition is a whole issue that I'm not going to touch with a 10-foot pole, but...

...well, fair enough I suppose. Your logic is sound, if you really just think being spiteful is a positive thing.

Positive or not, it just is at this point. GW didn't give skyhammer of all things to BA. It's quite clear what they think.

the_scotsman wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"Scions, for example, could grant bonuses to LD to friendly units within a bubble when they are slaying things."

There's a dozen units in the IG codex that need to cost more before anything gets any better.

So, would you also say that nothing in the marine codex should be buffed before Guilliman, Stormravens and assault cannon razorbacks are nerfed? Well, That seems like a bizarre stance, tbh, especially given that you have pretty much no proof at this point that some of the things you're likely complaining about if you're going all the way up to a dozen units have any kind of problematic balance.

At this point, all the units that have been competitive AM staples in tournaments have seen nerfs, and we have not seen any more major events to tell us what, if anything, might be problematic from the codex.

If you asked me to put down money I'd probably bet on a Cadian superheavy list being powerful, but we already saw one getting blown away by Guilliman-backed Tactical Squads, of all things.

So, should we sit tight on buffing anything up until we've nerfed the current Usual Suspects? Or should we be taking the opportunity to give buffs to units that need it regardless if their rules are seeing an update? seems petty to be taking door number one here, and if so, I hope your BA are comfy because I don't expect Guilliman nerfs until chapter approved at the earliest.

It doesn't matter either way, since there won't be anything in the BA codex that can beat Rowboat gunline.

Martel732 wrote:
IG still field 10 dudes for 40 pts. You could lose half your list to morale and still be ahead of marines on the table top.

Martel732 wrote:
IG still field 10 dudes for 40 pts. You could lose half your list to morale and still be ahead of marines on the table top.

Martel732 wrote:
Previous editions do matter, though, as a backdrop.

 BoomWolf wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

So, it works properly as an in game tool by not being the automatic answer to everything and actually requiring thought before using.
And it works fluffwise by only bring really useful to control people with lacking discipline.

What's the problem again?

We have special rule that's supposed to be beneficitial at a cost. Instead we have rule that has no benefit and only downsides. Totally illogical unfluffy rule.

Coupled that with not actually nerfing conscripts...When there are ways to fix conscripts that make sense fluffwise they went hit nerfbat elsewhere in an unfluffy rule.

Except it IS beneficial at a cost, when USED PROPERLY.

Use a commisar to rule conscripts, and as noted, you save 3 dudes per moral check at the very worst.
Use a commissar to control ACTUAL SOLDIERS, and it might backfire under certain conditions, or help under different conditions. Counting commissar effect by soldier death count.
2, pure help due to ld8 making you immune.
3, on a 6 you blam one and reroll, maybe losing a second, as opposed to just losing two.
4, it gets worse if you roll 5, blam, than 6. Otherwise either neutral or helps. Mostly helps
5, gets worse on a roll of 4/5 followed by a higher roll. Mostly helps.
6, gets worse on a roll of 3-5 followed by a higher roll, this is STILL more likely to help than hurt, and as long about as likely to change nothing. (long math short, it will come out about 33% to help,hurt, or be irrelevant.)
7/8, your squad is practically gone either way, no meaningful effect. Yes, you are slightly more likely to lose everyone, but that "everyone" is losing one extra dude.
9/10 your squad is actually gone either way.


Can't really find the downside here. At the very worst, you gain little to nothing.

You are not paying for the rules, you are paying for a commissar, his good and his bad rolled into one.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 daedalus wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this is pretty funny. AM players always mention ATSKNF so often - commissars are just ATSKNF bubbles now - for 31 points you can make 3-4 squads have ATSKNF. Yeah...I don't see too many jumping the gun to have that perk.

No. It is worse than ATSKNF, and actually generally worse than not taking a commissar to begin with.

I agree - it is worthless - just like ATSKNF is. Just avoid commissars all together and take a single unit on conscripts with the intent on using 2 command point stratagem to keep them from breaking each turn if needed. Use infantry - which are also great and load up on las cannons.

Spoletta wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this is pretty funny. AM players always mention ATSKNF so often - commissars are just ATSKNF bubbles now - for 31 points you can make 3-4 squads have ATSKNF. Yeah...I don't see too many jumping the gun to have that perk.

A few points here:
- Unlike SMs, IG don't have naturally high Ld to begin with.
- IG tend to have much higher squad sizes than SMs (e.g. most SM squads have a minimum of 5 members, whilst many IG ones have a minimum of 10).
- IG have to specifically pay for their ATSKNF. They don't get it automatically on every unit.
- With SMs, the reroll is optional. IG are forced to reroll it, even if a better result is physically impossible.
- The ATSKNF reroll doesn't cost you a model.

Please add to that list the following:

- Space marines don't cost 3 points.