The new FAQ doesn't allow stacking of multiple FNP benefits. This means Iron Hands don't even benefit their Venerable Dreadnoughts.

There was already almost no incentive to play Iron Hands in the first place. Their Strategem is bad, the Warlord Trait is bad, and the Tactic itself was already meh.

There isn't any point to the army whatsoever now.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The new FAQ doesn't allow stacking of multiple FNP benefits. This means Iron Hands don't even benefit their Venerable Dreadnoughts.

There was already almost no incentive to play Iron Hands in the first place. Their Strategem is bad, the Warlord Trait is bad, and the Tactic itself was already meh.

There isn't any point to the army whatsoever now.

Doesn't this FAQ literally only prevent the stacking of FNP on that one unit, and possibly stacking with a warlord trait? It's the slightest of slight nerfs.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The new FAQ doesn't allow stacking of multiple FNP benefits. This means Iron Hands don't even benefit their Venerable Dreadnoughts.

There was already almost no incentive to play Iron Hands in the first place. Their Strategem is bad, the Warlord Trait is bad, and the Tactic itself was already meh.

There isn't any point to the army whatsoever now.

Doesn't this FAQ literally only prevent the stacking of FNP on that one unit, and possibly stacking with a warlord trait? It's the slightest of slight nerfs.

Nope.
"Some units have abilities that allow them to ignore the damage suffered each time it loses a wound (e.g. Disgustingly
Resilient, The Flesh is Weak and Tenacious Survivor). If a model has more than one such ability, you can only use
one of those abilities each time the model loses a wound."

How is this not exactly what Halsey wrote?

Ushtarador wrote:
How is this not exactly what Halsey wrote?

Because it doesn't stack with the Venerable Dreads ability as well, which was the only real thing going for Iron Hands.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ushtarador wrote:
How is this not exactly what Halsey wrote?

Because it doesn't stack with the Venerable Dreads ability as well, which was the only real thing going for Iron Hands.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:Doesn't this FAQ literally only prevent the stacking of FNP on that one unit, and possibly stacking with a warlord trait? It's the slightest of slight nerfs.

The "that one unit" is venerable dreadnoughts.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ushtarador wrote:
How is this not exactly what Halsey wrote?

Because it doesn't stack with the Venerable Dreads ability as well, which was the only real thing going for Iron Hands.

Which is exactly what I wrote...

Except I disagree with the silliness that is 'My Venerable dreads are now 1/6th more likely to take wounds?!' ABANDON FACTION!

Do we need a poll for who got it worst?

Bharring wrote:
Do we need a poll for who got it worst?

Almost certainly.

Well I used to like squats so...

You should switch to Grey Knights. I heard they didn't even get the Smite nerf so it should be a great community to join ....

So the list of options worthy of being in the poll:

GK
BA
Vanilla Marines
Iron Hands (specific chapter)
Chaos Demons
CSM
Celestine
Ynnari
Corsairs
Orkz (because it can't have been good for Orkz - this is 40k!)

Bharring wrote:
So the list of options worthy of being in the poll:

GK
BA
Vanilla Marines
Iron Hands (specific chapter)
Chaos Demons
CSM
Celestine
Ynnari
Corsairs
Orkz (because it can't have been good for Orkz - this is 40k!)

I'm tilting my head at this list, is this sarcasm or?

Orkz being on the list was sarcasm. And pointing out that we just had a bunch of changes that may have actually helped Orkz, and it's not even their codex!

The others, I've seen complaints about how bad that particular thing got nerfed.

(I'm the only one who's complained about Corsairs, but I'm fairly sure they got it worst.)

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ushtarador wrote:
How is this not exactly what Halsey wrote?

Because it doesn't stack with the Venerable Dreads ability as well, which was the only real thing going for Iron Hands.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:Doesn't this FAQ literally only prevent the stacking of FNP on that one unit, and possibly stacking with a warlord trait? It's the slightest of slight nerfs.

The "that one unit" is venerable dreadnoughts.

And Venerable Contemptors and Chaplain Dreads. Who now get 0 benefit from the Chapter Tactics. It was an unnecessary nerf for literally NO good reason.

You might want to move this to the Salt Containment thread. You aren't going to get much sympathy in the general population for something this corner case. I play Iron Hands and don't even consider it a nerf.

Two units lost a 1/6 save.








This makes it an utterly useless Chapter Tactic, I agree. /s

It feels 'unnecessary' until you're hitting things with 2x 5+++ saves, on top of their ordinary saves...

Very necessary change, as they specified this in many of the places they give out a +++, but not all the places.

IH just had 2 units and potentially an HQ that got marginally worse. But a super cheesy and annoying way to run some other factions that impacted the game much more got stopped. Net gain, but I feel bad for IH (but not as bad as I feel for GK or Corsairs).

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Two units lost a 1/6 save.








This makes it an utterly useless Chapter Tactic, I agree. /s

They lost literally an ability for a Chapter Tactic that was meh in the first place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
It feels 'unnecessary' until you're hitting things with 2x 5+++ saves, on top of their ordinary saves...

Very necessary change, as they specified this in many of the places they give out a +++, but not all the places.

IH just had 2 units and potentially an HQ that got marginally worse. But a super cheesy and annoying way to run some other factions that impacted the game much more got stopped. Net gain, but I feel bad for IH (but not as bad as I feel for GK or Corsairs).

And that happened HOW often exactly that they needed to blanket hit everyone?

well that is one army i can remove from my todo list.

the fact that their dreads(venerable from gw and several others from FW) could get multiple wound save rolls was the only reason for me to make a dread heavy SM army.

This may seem like a minor deal to some, but the ven dread and warlord thing were basically the only synergies that existed for IH CTs. When you don't have much to start with, losing that little you do have hurts all the more.

Maybe now they'll change their ability to something a fair bit more useful.

I'd like to see them change the chapter tactic to provide a FNP, or to increase an existing FNP by (i.e. a 6+++ becomes a 5+++).

I'll still use Iron Hands. The chapter tactic in conjunction with techmarines means my dreadnoughts are still quite resilient. Ven dreads are good, but losing a stackable 6+ is not game-breaking.

If you're upset, just play Raven Guard. Strike from the Shadows got amazingly good now.

One of my favorite builds for CSM was an Iron Warriors Daemon Prince with Tenacious Survivor Warlord Trait (+1 Wound, 6+ FNP), the Fleshmetal Relic Armor (2+ Armor, heal a Wound every turn), Delightful Agonies Power (5+ FNP), and the Iron Within, Iron Without Strategem (6+ FNP).

Wish I woulda used that bad boy more often now

Iron Hands have never been competitive.

It’s a small nerf sure. But Iron Hands have very little to begin with. GW has pretty much ruined them this edition.

 Primark G wrote:
Iron Hands have never been competitive.

Did you just kinda forget about 6th and 7th edition? Like, completely?

Multiple FNP saves are just tedious and slow the game (though they are far from the worst culprit.). From a playability purpose I support this change. Obviously, IH need something to compensate. Personally I'd get rid of the FNP and give them +1T on all infantry and leave it at that.

CassianSol wrote:
Multiple FNP saves are just tedious and slow the game (though they are far from the worst culprit.). From a playability purpose I support this change. Obviously, IH need something to compensate. Personally I'd get rid of the FNP and give them +1T on all infantry and leave it at that.

+1 to the FNP. So that ven goes from 6+++ rerolled to 5+++. Bit better than before and also faster to roll.

tneva82 wrote:

CassianSol wrote:
Multiple FNP saves are just tedious and slow the game (though they are far from the worst culprit.). From a playability purpose I support this change. Obviously, IH need something to compensate. Personally I'd get rid of the FNP and give them +1T on all infantry and leave it at that.

+1 to the FNP. So that ven goes from 6+++ rerolled to 5+++. Bit better than before and also faster to roll.

That's also a fine solution!

As a Craftworld Ulthwe player where our 6+++ FNP never stacked with anything, including the Farseer's ghost helm, the Hemlock's (or any other vehicle's) spirit stones, the Fortune psychic power or the Avatar's FNP ability (and thereby technically 'wasting' our faction trait on those units) I think it's fair that this FNP thing doesn't stack and it toned down.

Some units were near invulnerable and I think it takes the fun out of the game when that happens too much - even if you're the one benefitting from it.

A 6+++ FNP ability for your army, even if it 'misses' a couple of units, still makes the whole rest of your army 16.6% tougher than any of their peers.

 Bhazakhain wrote:
As a Craftworld Ulthwe player where our 6+++ FNP never stacked with anything, including the Farseer's ghost helm, the Hemlock's (or any other vehicle's) spirit stones, the Fortune psychic power or the Avatar's FNP ability (and thereby technically 'wasting' our faction trait on those units) I think it's fair that this FNP thing doesn't stack and it toned down.

Some units were near invulnerable and I think it takes the fun out of the game when that happens too much - even if you're the one benefitting from it.

Rerollable 6+++ on one model is HARDLY invulnerable. Or if it is what death guard are? They have army wide BETTER save. 5+++ > rerollable 6+++.

Remember when the benefit for selecting a chapter was solely the paint scheme?

Bharring wrote:
Orkz being on the list was sarcasm. And pointing out that we just had a bunch of changes that may have actually helped Orkz, and it's not even their codex!

The others, I've seen complaints about how bad that particular thing got nerfed.

(I'm the only one who's complained about Corsairs, but I'm fairly sure they got it worst.)

Orks with a 3 Weirdboy-cap are even more boned vs hitmods than before.

 Just Tony wrote:
Remember when the benefit for selecting a chapter was solely the paint scheme?

Good times, good times.

Bharring wrote:
Orkz being on the list was sarcasm. And pointing out that we just had a bunch of changes that may have actually helped Orkz, and it's not even their codex!

The others, I've seen complaints about how bad that particular thing got nerfed.

(I'm the only one who's complained about Corsairs, but I'm fairly sure they got it worst.)

Odks lost the ability to.do anything meaningful turn 1.

Well we still have KMK's that actually do something. 18 of those would at least give some ability to shoot some holes to the enemy.

CassianSol wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

CassianSol wrote:
Multiple FNP saves are just tedious and slow the game (though they are far from the worst culprit.). From a playability purpose I support this change. Obviously, IH need something to compensate. Personally I'd get rid of the FNP and give them +1T on all infantry and leave it at that.

+1 to the FNP. So that ven goes from 6+++ rerolled to 5+++. Bit better than before and also faster to roll.

That's also a fine solution!

good idea but not good enugh compensation.
an IH dread army uses mainly ven dreads and FW dreads and they all comes whit 1 or 2 wound saves before the chapter save, and we all know that it only takes 1-2 lascannons whot non saved wounds to make a dread usless in turn 1.

if IH dont get a free pass from this stupid rule then the chapter trait needs to be a 4+ wound save. whit 2-3 rolls of 6+ the odds of actualy saving the wound was real. whit 1 single roll of 5+ the odds are too low.

It isn't just one roll per hit, it's one roll per wound. That's how FNP saves work.

 FrozenDwarf wrote:

good idea but not good enugh compensation.
an IH dread army uses mainly ven dreads and FW dreads and they all comes whit 1 or 2 wound saves before the chapter save, and we all know that it only takes 1-2 lascannons whot non saved wounds to make a dread usless in turn 1.

if IH dont get a free pass from this stupid rule then the chapter trait needs to be a 4+ wound save. whit 2-3 rolls of 6+ the odds of actualy saving the wound was real. whit 1 single roll of 5+ the odds are too low.

Does the iron hand thingie work differently from other FNP? Because with other FNP's with lascannon hit it causes say 4 wounds, you roll 4 dice. If 6 no problem, if not it goes through. If you had another 6+++ FNP you would repeat. Basically 6+ rerollable. Which is worse odds than simply rolling 5+++.

Primark G wrote:Iron Hands have never been competitive.

*excluding 6th and 7th editions when they were.

Oh yeah, that's 2/3rds of the editions Iron Hands have had their own rules.
They're not competitive now, but that's common amongst most Space Marines this edition. At least you're always 16.66 more resilient than other Space Marines - if no-one gets in cover or uses buildings, the Imperial Fists are getting absolutely nothing at all.

I've never understood why the +++ rolls got to be used separately anyway. No other types of armor saves ever got separate rolls you always just chose the best and that was it.

Because the rules did not explicitly prevent you from using multiple rules, and each +++ was it's own rule.

The intent certainly seemed to be you only get one.

As for stacking - 2x6+++ becomes 5+++. In theory, 3x6+++ becomes a 4+++. That'd make stacking +++s even more powerful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
IH are still the "We have more durability" Chapter. Crunch-wise, RG's trait does it better most of the time, while also adding other pluses, which is too bad. A flat 6-up to ignore a wound on any of your infantry isn't bad. It's just that RG is better than IH. And AL is better than RG. And Alaitoc is better than AL.

From competive perspective most chapter traits have not been viable from the get go.

So what makes IH bad is no Infiltrate and no Guilleman?

How would you rate them vs Sallies, Scars, or Fists?

CassianSol wrote:
Multiple FNP saves are just tedious and slow the game (though they are far from the worst culprit.). From a playability purpose I support this change. Obviously, IH need something to compensate. Personally I'd get rid of the FNP and give them +1T on all infantry and leave it at that.

It isn't that slow. Roll for 6. Roll for 6 again. It being "slow" is no excuse unless you just can't count. You don't have to do any adjusting or anything.

Bharring wrote:
So what makes IH bad is no Infiltrate and no Guilleman?

How would you rate them vs Sallies, Scars, or Fists?

Mostly they suffer from having no special characters (and are the only first founding chapter where this is the case), a bad relic, a meh stratagem and warlord trait. They also dont have any other kind of uniqueness like they used to. Back in the day, they were led by tougher techmarines, squad sergeants wore terminator armour, and their whole organisation was actually less codex compliant than BA. Its always been weird to me how come GW didnt iterate on that, rather than vanillafy them as they did... :/

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

CassianSol wrote:
Multiple FNP saves are just tedious and slow the game (though they are far from the worst culprit.). From a playability purpose I support this change. Obviously, IH need something to compensate. Personally I'd get rid of the FNP and give them +1T on all infantry and leave it at that.

It isn't that slow. Roll for 6. Roll for 6 again. It being "slow" is no excuse unless you just can't count. You don't have to do any adjusting or anything.

Adjustimg target takes zero time. It's picking up dozens of dices and rerolls.

Thanks to rerolls etc 8th is slower than 7th was...

Bharring wrote:
So what makes IH bad is no Infiltrate and no Guilleman?

How would you rate them vs Sallies, Scars, or Fists?

Imperial Fists and Salamanders are better. Only White Scars I'd say are worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tyr13 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
So what makes IH bad is no Infiltrate and no Guilleman?

How would you rate them vs Sallies, Scars, or Fists?

Mostly they suffer from having no special characters (and are the only first founding chapter where this is the case), a bad relic, a meh stratagem and warlord trait. They also dont have any other kind of uniqueness like they used to. Back in the day, they were led by tougher techmarines, squad sergeants wore terminator armour, and their whole organisation was actually less codex compliant than BA. Its always been weird to me how come GW didnt iterate on that, rather than vanillafy them as they did... :/

Eh the Relic ain't bad at least.

All the Chapter-Specific rules did was dilute the availability of good rules. Also, I think all the special characters including Bobby G should be available to every Chapter in the SM Codex. If Bobby G wasn’t Chapter-Specific or there were no Chapters, I would have bought the model already. I am sure I am not the only one as well. GW’s loss.

It wouldnt be that bad if it wasnt for the feature that was promoted by GW itself as a selling point of the chapter!

Yay for false advertising.

Why should iron hands get a special pass?
Quite frankly iron hands should be lucky they got anything at all
As a chaos player my marks don't do anything anymore. Heck Nurgle marines who are supposed to be tougher are just as durable as any other marine unless they are death guard or a plague marine. Please quit yo complaining

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
Why should iron hands get a special pass?
Quite frankly iron hands should be lucky they got anything at all
As a chaos player my marks don't do anything anymore. Heck Nurgle marines who are supposed to be tougher are just as durable as any other marine unless they are death guard or a plague marine. Please quit yo complaining

Marks do something now, they let you have Daemons in your detachment.

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
Why should iron hands get a special pass?
Quite frankly iron hands should be lucky they got anything at all
As a chaos player my marks don't do anything anymore. Heck Nurgle marines who are supposed to be tougher are just as durable as any other marine unless they are death guard or a plague marine. Please quit yo complaining

That's a problem with the 4 God Legions not being well written but you are already getting those later. You still at least get Legion rules. Iron Hands literally lost the best gimmick they had from a frickin Community article!

Sub faction rules were just a bad idea to begin with. Some always end up being much better than others, and then you will be punished for your chapter/regiment/craftworld/etc choice or have to play counts as.

 Crimson wrote:
Sub faction rules were just a bad idea to begin with. Some always end up being much better than others, and then you will be punished for your chapter/regiment/craftworld/etc choice or have to play counts as.

By that logic all faction rules are a bad idea, Some always end up being much better than others, and then you will be punished for your faction choice or have to play counts as.

This isn't Chess.

Then again, Grey Knights players would agree.

Marine chapter tactics as a whole are just awful. Why should Iron Hands be any different?

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Sub faction rules were just a bad idea to begin with. Some always end up being much better than others, and then you will be punished for your chapter/regiment/craftworld/etc choice or have to play counts as. By that logic all faction rules are a bad idea, Some always end up being much better than others, and then you will be punished for your faction choice or have to play counts as.

This isn't Chess.

I knew someone would say that. It's different though, with different factions there are completely different units. Do these extra rules actually add something worthwhile in the game? I really preferred the time when Space Marines (outside the snowflake chapters) were just Space Marines and you could use all special characters for any chapter. This just leads the players of the subfactions who do not get the best rules (and that is always most of them) being bitter. All Eldar players use Alaitoc anyway, whats the point of even having the rules for other craftworlds? Besides, these rules often do not even reflect the fluff of the subfactions; Ravenguard favours Dread gunlines and if you want to bring a lot of IG tanks then Catachans are one of the best choices. Just scrap this unnecessary nonsense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
Marine chapter tactics as a whole are just awful. Why should Iron Hands be any different?

Ravenguard tactic is good, though that is exactly the sort of armywide rule that should have never existed.

 Marmatag wrote:
Marine chapter tactics as a whole are just awful. Why should Iron Hands be any different?

They were already second to worst, right above White Scars. Now they're solidly worse than White Scars!

 Crimson wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Sub faction rules were just a bad idea to begin with. Some always end up being much better than others, and then you will be punished for your chapter/regiment/craftworld/etc choice or have to play counts as. By that logic all faction rules are a bad idea, Some always end up being much better than others, and then you will be punished for your faction choice or have to play counts as.

This isn't Chess.

I knew someone would say that. It's different though, with different factions there are completely different units. Do these extra rules actually add something worthwhile in the game? I really preferred the time when Space Marines (outside the snowflake chapters) were just Space Marines and you could use all special characters for any chapter. This just leads the players of the subfactions who do not get the best rules (and that is always most of them) being bitter. All Eldar players use Alaitoc anyway, whats the point of even having the rules for other craftworlds? Besides, these rules often do not even reflect the fluff of the subfactions; Ravenguard favours Dread gunlines and if you want to bring a lot of IG tanks then Catachans are one of the best choices. Just scrap this unnecessary nonsense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
Marine chapter tactics as a whole are just awful. Why should Iron Hands be any different?

Ravenguard tactic is good, though that is exactly the sort of armywide rule that should have never existed.

Except it's not army wide, none of the marine traits are, it only applies to infantry and dreadnaughts.

Ice_can wrote:

Except it's not army wide, none of the marine traits are, it only applies to infantry and dreadnaughts.

Sure. Almost army wide. Still shouldn't exist.

 Crimson wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Except it's not army wide, none of the marine traits are, it only applies to infantry and dreadnaughts.

Sure. Almost army wide. Still shouldn't exist.

Why not?

If only we could somehow use internet salt and hyperbole as a power source.

 Insectum7 wrote:
If only we could somehow use internet salt and hyperbole as a power source.

Then please by all means defend the move and tell Iron Hands players they lost nothing of value. I insist.

Sucks how Iron hands went from the best tactic in 7th to the worst one in 8th as they lost IWND and the 6+ save is less impressive compared to other options,

It is funny how a Ravenguard Venerable Dreadnought is now more durable than an Iron Hands one.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Except it's not army wide, none of the marine traits are, it only applies to infantry and dreadnaughts.

Sure. Almost army wide. Still shouldn't exist.

Why not?

Kills balance, makes unfluffy armies, encourages just chapter hopping so you have same models being used as blood angels, dark angels, ultramarines, grey knights, chaos marines(and no I have even seen that sort of usage so not just theory) etc whatever happens to suit your model collection best at each game.

tneva82 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Except it's not army wide, none of the marine traits are, it only applies to infantry and dreadnaughts.

Sure. Almost army wide. Still shouldn't exist.

Why not?

Kills balance, makes unfluffy armies, encourages just chapter hopping so you have same models being used as blood angels, dark angels, ultramarines, grey knights, chaos marines(and no I have even seen that sort of usage so not just theory) etc whatever happens to suit your model collection best at each game.

Special Characters are doing that for the Marine army right now. It works pretty well for CSM and they're not great with internal balance!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also...unfluffy armies. Pray tell.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
If only we could somehow use internet salt and hyperbole as a power source.

Then please by all means defend the move and tell Iron Hands players they lost nothing of value. I insist.

I don't have to, even losing something of (little) value =/= "RIP Iron hands".

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
If only we could somehow use internet salt and hyperbole as a power source.

Then please by all means defend the move and tell Iron Hands players they lost nothing of value. I insist.

I don't have to, even losing something of (little) value =/= "RIP Iron hands".

YES it does. It's literally the only thing they really had going for them. Now Raven Guard Venerable Dreads are more durable. Think about that.

Wow, really? The "only thing they had going"?

Here's a thought.... spend the extra 8 points for the Contemptor Dred and get +2 wounds and a 5+ invul save.
Yeah, it does have the drawback of the damage chart, but will be on the board a lot longer than pretty much any other Dred.
This would be a seriously tough Dred to take down.

But if you would rather try rolling for 6s for an hour.... feel free to whine about it to GW. K?

 helgrenze wrote:
Wow, really? The "only thing they had going"?

Here's a thought.... spend the extra 8 points for the Contemptor Dred and get +2 wounds and a 5+ invul save.
Yeah, it does have the drawback of the damage chart, but will be on the board a lot longer than pretty much any other Dred.
This would be a seriously tough Dred to take down.

But if you would rather try rolling for 6s for an hour.... feel free to whine about it to GW. K?

...and the Raven Guard one is more durable still? What's the point if this post?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 helgrenze wrote:
Wow, really? The "only thing they had going"?

Here's a thought.... spend the extra 8 points for the Contemptor Dred and get +2 wounds and a 5+ invul save.
Yeah, it does have the drawback of the damage chart, but will be on the board a lot longer than pretty much any other Dred.
This would be a seriously tough Dred to take down.

But if you would rather try rolling for 6s for an hour.... feel free to whine about it to GW. K?

...and the Raven Guard one is more durable still? What's the point if this post?

You could argue they are about as durable outside of 12 inches. The one thing this change does mean is that the Contemptor is the better choice now most of the time. I won’t be bringing Venerable Dreads anymore.

Slayer-fan123, Not really, it is just harder to hit.
Imagine either being hit by a Lascannon for 4 wounds.
The RG eats those 4 wounds, the IH maybe avoids one or two.
Which one is likely to last longer?
Even getting into a straight shootout between the two, (someone could probably Mathhammer this.) the IH Dred has a better survival chance due to the IH tactic.

 helgrenze wrote:
Slayer-fan123, Not really, it is just harder to hit.
Imagine either being hit by a Lascannon for 4 wounds.
The RG eats those 4 wounds, the IH maybe avoids one or two.
Which one is likely to last longer?
Even getting into a straight shootout between the two, (someone could probably Mathhammer this.) the IH Dred has a better survival chance due to the IH tactic.

-1 to hit + 6+++ > 6+++

Did you read the thread at all?

Now I get that faction specific abilities don't always effect every unit evenly and some not at all. A good example would be any faction with some kind of improved shooting would offer no benefit to a strictly melee unit.

The big problem is that this had to effect the venerable dreadnought of all things. Dreadnoughts, shocker, are a big deal to Ironhands. This is the equivalent of if White Scare tactics working on everything but bikes.

 helgrenze wrote:
Slayer-fan123, Not really, it is just harder to hit.
Imagine either being hit by a Lascannon for 4 wounds.
The RG eats those 4 wounds, the IH maybe avoids one or two.
Which one is likely to last longer?
Even getting into a straight shootout between the two, (someone could probably Mathhammer this.) the IH Dred has a better survival chance due to the IH tactic.

Eh really?

6 lascannons shoots at IH. 4 hits, 2.6 wounds, 2.2 goes through save, multiplied to 7.77, 6.48 after IH trait.

RG. 6 lascannons, 3 hits, 2 wounds, 1.66 past save, 5.83 after damage.

Since when 6.48 is less than 5.83?

tneva82 wrote:

 helgrenze wrote:
Slayer-fan123, Not really, it is just harder to hit.
Imagine either being hit by a Lascannon for 4 wounds.
The RG eats those 4 wounds, the IH maybe avoids one or two.
Which one is likely to last longer?
Even getting into a straight shootout between the two, (someone could probably Mathhammer this.) the IH Dred has a better survival chance due to the IH tactic.

Eh really?

6 lascannons shoots at IH. 4 hits, 2.6 wounds, 2.2 goes through save, multiplied to 7.77, 6.48 after IH trait.

RG. 6 lascannons, 3 hits, 2 wounds, 1.66 past save, 5.83 after damage.

Since when 6.48 is less than 5.83?

Rounding it out +/- at the .50 mark, they both take 6 in damage, making them equal. It is a .65 difference and lets face it, mathhamer doesn't account for luck, it just works the averages.

 helgrenze wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 helgrenze wrote:
Slayer-fan123, Not really, it is just harder to hit.
Imagine either being hit by a Lascannon for 4 wounds.
The RG eats those 4 wounds, the IH maybe avoids one or two.
Which one is likely to last longer?
Even getting into a straight shootout between the two, (someone could probably Mathhammer this.) the IH Dred has a better survival chance due to the IH tactic.

Eh really?

6 lascannons shoots at IH. 4 hits, 2.6 wounds, 2.2 goes through save, multiplied to 7.77, 6.48 after IH trait.

RG. 6 lascannons, 3 hits, 2 wounds, 1.66 past save, 5.83 after damage.

Since when 6.48 is less than 5.83?

Rounding it out +/- at the .50 mark, they both take 6 in damage, making them equal. It is a .65 difference and lets face it, mathhamer doesn't account for luck, it just works the averages.

You realize right that this effect keeps going up? Both don't take 6 damage.

And luck? LUCK? You seriously brought LUCK into arqument about BALANCE?

You lost your arqument. If you bring luck into arqument your arquments lost all validity.

 helgrenze wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 helgrenze wrote:
Slayer-fan123, Not really, it is just harder to hit.
Imagine either being hit by a Lascannon for 4 wounds.
The RG eats those 4 wounds, the IH maybe avoids one or two.
Which one is likely to last longer?
Even getting into a straight shootout between the two, (someone could probably Mathhammer this.) the IH Dred has a better survival chance due to the IH tactic.

Eh really?

6 lascannons shoots at IH. 4 hits, 2.6 wounds, 2.2 goes through save, multiplied to 7.77, 6.48 after IH trait.

RG. 6 lascannons, 3 hits, 2 wounds, 1.66 past save, 5.83 after damage.

Since when 6.48 is less than 5.83?

Rounding it out +/- at the .50 mark, they both take 6 in damage, making them equal. It is a .65 difference and lets face it, mathhamer doesn't account for luck, it just works the averages.

You can't just round when you feel like it. That's not how math works...

I still think this is being way overblown. Yes technically every variant of the venerable dread is now better than the IH version and that sucks, but to proclaim it as the death of iron hands is ridiculous.

Your warlord trait, stratagem and relic are meh, however...

You still have a 20% increase in durability against non-overkill damage for all your infantry and non-venerable dreads (of which there are lots: regular, mortis, contemptor etc.).

You still have the one thing that few of the other chapter tactics have really, a non-situational buff.
RGs bonus is useless up close or in melee
IF is frequently useless depending on terrain/tactics
UM doesn't really help against ranged stuff and marines running is rare if you use MSU.
BT only helps melee and now I think of it was only tempting for turn 1 deepstrike charges which...
WS basically only synergises with a few units, specifically those that can fly.

Salamanders is the closest contender to a non-situational buff and even then ironically the weapons it helps the least are flamers.

The IH buff is a tactic you don't have to think about, its just a straight up buff in almost all situations to your durability. The only time it doesnt really help is when your units are being overkilled (e.g. picking your marines of with 2 damage weapons) but mostly inefficiency on your opponents part. As of the FAQ this includes you have one less unit this synergises with. My personal chapter has a hazy history and I play counts as IF, IH or RG depending on the scenario/what I fancy trying that day. Sure RG is what I'd prefer in most situations, but I definitely prefer IH to IF.

Just switch up your dreads. Drop them down to normal dreads and keep the venerable FNP bonus. If you can get hit rerolls the difference in shooting output is negligible, and I dont know about you but chapter master strategem became a bit more tempting with +5 pt batallions. Or just stick any forgeworld chapter master in there.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
Why should iron hands get a special pass?
Quite frankly iron hands should be lucky they got anything at all
As a chaos player my marks don't do anything anymore. Heck Nurgle marines who are supposed to be tougher are just as durable as any other marine unless they are death guard or a plague marine. Please quit yo complaining

That's a problem with the 4 God Legions not being well written but you are already getting those later. You still at least get Legion rules. Iron Hands literally lost the best gimmick they had from a frickin Community article!

Well no im not on about the 4 god specific legions im on about marked chaos marines in general

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You can't just round when you feel like it. That's not how math works...

No, but this game works with round numbers not parts of numbers. Rounding for clarity becomes necessary.

Also, the RG tactic is very dependent on range, the IH one isn't. Close the range and the RG take more damage than IH due to the IH tactic.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
If only we could somehow use internet salt and hyperbole as a power source.

Then please by all means defend the move and tell Iron Hands players they lost nothing of value. I insist.

I don't have to, even losing something of (little) value =/= "RIP Iron hands".

YES it does. It's literally the only thing they really had going for them. Now Raven Guard Venerable Dreads are more durable. Think about that.

So you've lost the flat-out 16.666% buff to all your infantry, bikes, and other Dreads, except those two? And that 16.666% buff wasn't important on anyone except those two units?




Wait, you haven't? It wasn't?
Ah well. Best not let facts get in the way of hyperbole.

 helgrenze wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You can't just round when you feel like it. That's not how math works...

No, but this game works with round numbers not parts of numbers. Rounding for clarity becomes necessary.

Also, the RG tactic is very dependent on range, the IH one isn't. Close the range and the RG take more damage than IH due to the IH tactic.

Once again, not how math works. You have to add up how it goes over time, and you ruin statistics with that train of thought.
Gunlines were improved with the FAQ as well, which once again makes Raven Guard the superior choice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
If only we could somehow use internet salt and hyperbole as a power source.

Then please by all means defend the move and tell Iron Hands players they lost nothing of value. I insist.

I don't have to, even losing something of (little) value =/= "RIP Iron hands".

YES it does. It's literally the only thing they really had going for them. Now Raven Guard Venerable Dreads are more durable. Think about that.

So you've lost the flat-out 16.666% buff to all your infantry, bikes, and other Dreads, except those two? And that 16.666% buff wasn't important on anyone except those two units?




Wait, you haven't? It wasn't?
Ah well. Best not let facts get in the way of hyperbole.

You're deliberately missing the point. They lost an additional buff to a unit that's frickin fluffy for them on top of not sucking. Now that unit is 100% worse compared to the same choice with every other chapter.

That was the thing they had going for them. Better Ven Dreadnoughts. Give a reason to run the army now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
Why should iron hands get a special pass?
Quite frankly iron hands should be lucky they got anything at all
As a chaos player my marks don't do anything anymore. Heck Nurgle marines who are supposed to be tougher are just as durable as any other marine unless they are death guard or a plague marine. Please quit yo complaining

That's a problem with the 4 God Legions not being well written but you are already getting those later. You still at least get Legion rules. Iron Hands literally lost the best gimmick they had from a frickin Community article!

Well no im not on about the 4 god specific legions im on about marked chaos marines in general

I understand ya. The Chaos Lord entry in the Death Guard codex probably irks 100% of players. At least they HAVE a bonus of some kind (though the bonus is mostly lost on them let's be honest).

My main issue is that they literally lost an ability that was a selling point in the Community Article, and honestly it was one of the only selling points of the Iron Hands army.

This kills what little competitiveness the army has for me. Yes the army has a durability buff and largely what drew me to the army besides the fluff. However, I feel tactically the one thing that kept us in the running was double FNP ven dreads and warlord captain Smashf****r or even triple FNP with the ven chappie dread warlord. Big distraction carnifexes. We've lost that now. With no special rules characters to pull on we dont have anything TACTICAL. It just takes longer to shoot us off the board.

I wont stop playing IH, I still have hope they will return to GW's good graces at a later date. But I'm probably going to pick up Necrons for tournaments until then.

Yeah, GW made a big mistake with Flesh is Weak and the new wound save ruling. The least they could have done was to specifically errata Flesh is Weak to provide a +1 to the roll or some other benefit when stacked to allow the signature Iron Hand Ven Dreads to still be a thing while also keeping it to being just one die roll. I do not even play Iron Hands, but I still think what GW did to them with this ruling was absurd.

The rule should change to give tou a 6+++ or improve your FNP save if you already have one by +1. Is a very simple solution.

 Galas wrote:
The rule should change to give tou a 6+++ or improve your FNP save if you already have one by +1. Is a very simple solution.

Except they didn't do that and won't for a while if they choose to.

So, in a game with rerolls for failed hits and failed wounds, making a unit slightly harder to hit is somehow better than giving a unit the ability to shrug off any wounds it takes?

And the IH are somehow broken as an army because ONE unit loses a second chance to shrug off the wounds?

Good to know.

At least you can still play your army as what they are.

 helgrenze wrote:
So, in a game with rerolls for failed hits and failed wounds, making a unit slightly harder to hit is somehow better than giving a unit the ability to shrug off any wounds it takes?

And the IH are somehow broken as an army because ONE unit loses a second chance to shrug off the wounds?

Good to know.

At least you can still play your army as what they are.

Are you deliberately missing posts here?

Yeah making those units harder to hit is better. The math was shown to you here, even though you choose to deny it because you don't like decimals. Now the Ven Dreads that Iron Hands have literally lost an ability.

So -1 to hit > 6+++
-1 to hit + 6+++ > 6+++

Does this click yet?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 helgrenze wrote:
So, in a game with rerolls for failed hits and failed wounds, making a unit slightly harder to hit is somehow better than giving a unit the ability to shrug off any wounds it takes?

And the IH are somehow broken as an army because ONE unit loses a second chance to shrug off the wounds?

Good to know.

At least you can still play your army as what they are.

Are you deliberately missing posts here?

Yeah making those units harder to hit is better. The math was shown to you here, even though you choose to deny it because you don't like decimals. Now the Ven Dreads that Iron Hands have literally lost an ability.

So -1 to hit > 6+++
-1 to hit + 6+++ > 6+++


Does this click yet?

Actually, no. Mathhammer it all you want, the difference is actually negligible, since dice do not roll partial numbers, anything less than 1 does not really matter. Averaging only shows a likely trend based on median possibilities.
And, as I stated there are ways around the minus to hit, such as rerolls for both Hit and Wounds.
Run that math with Dark Reapers’ Inescapable Accuracy factored in. They always hit on a 3+ "irrespective of their Ballistic Skill characteristic or any modifiers." (FAQ'd).
This eliminates the -1 to hit and does nothing on the 'ignore wounds'.

And that -1 is based on range as well so the benefit can be removed by positioning and movement.
AFAIK there is no way to remove the "ignore wounds" roll other than Mortal Wounds.
These things factor into survivability but not into the math.
Removing, or adding, a second roll to ignore wounds does not change the averages all that much. The difference will still be less than 1, though the actual number will be lower than the shown .65.

Maybe you don't understand the math here?

 helgrenze wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 helgrenze wrote:
So, in a game with rerolls for failed hits and failed wounds, making a unit slightly harder to hit is somehow better than giving a unit the ability to shrug off any wounds it takes?

And the IH are somehow broken as an army because ONE unit loses a second chance to shrug off the wounds?

Good to know.

At least you can still play your army as what they are.

Are you deliberately missing posts here?

Yeah making those units harder to hit is better. The math was shown to you here, even though you choose to deny it because you don't like decimals. Now the Ven Dreads that Iron Hands have literally lost an ability.

So -1 to hit > 6+++
-1 to hit + 6+++ > 6+++


Does this click yet?

Actually, no. Mathhammer it all you want, the difference is actually negligible, since dice do not roll partial numbers,

Maybe you don't understand the math here?

Do you understand how averages work or anything?

When they both apply, the -1-to-hit will almost always be better than a 6+++.

But they don't apply uniformly.

You never get the -1-to-hit benefit against anything shooting within 12" - such as RF Guard, Marines, Scions, or Kalabites, or Guardians. Lots of things shoot you from within 12".

You never get the -1-to-hit benefit against anything in CC.

You never get the -1-to-hit benefit against anythign that doesn't roll to hit.

I think the -1-to-hit trait is better, but it's not always better. For instance, my favorite army doesn't do a lot of shooting from outside 12".

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 helgrenze wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 helgrenze wrote:
So, in a game with rerolls for failed hits and failed wounds, making a unit slightly harder to hit is somehow better than giving a unit the ability to shrug off any wounds it takes?

And the IH are somehow broken as an army because ONE unit loses a second chance to shrug off the wounds?

Good to know.

At least you can still play your army as what they are.

Are you deliberately missing posts here?

Yeah making those units harder to hit is better. The math was shown to you here, even though you choose to deny it because you don't like decimals. Now the Ven Dreads that Iron Hands have literally lost an ability.

So -1 to hit > 6+++
-1 to hit + 6+++ > 6+++


Does this click yet?

Actually, no. Mathhammer it all you want, the difference is actually negligible, since dice do not roll partial numbers,

Maybe you don't understand the math here?

Do you understand how averages work or anything?

Yup.. even said so if you read the whole post.

Averaging only shows a likely trend based on median possibilities.

What you are looking for is a way to make the additional .1666667% appear to be more than it actually is. You only want the extra roll because "it's one more" (like the speaker from Spinal Tap).
It actually make very little difference to the Averages produced by Mathhammer. The Averages change by so little that the final resulting difference is still less than 1.

All the extra roll gives you is a second chance at rolling a 6 on a single die... 1/6 or .1666667%. which changes the average by less than 1/2 a percent. So you still wind up taking more damage ON AVERAGE than the RG.

Bharring wrote:
When they both apply, the -1-to-hit will almost always be better than a 6+++.

But they don't apply uniformly.

You never get the -1-to-hit benefit against anything shooting within 12" - such as RF Guard, Marines, Scions, or Kalabites, or Guardians. Lots of things shoot you from within 12".

You never get the -1-to-hit benefit against anything in CC.

You never get the -1-to-hit benefit against anythign that doesn't roll to hit.

I think the -1-to-hit trait is better, but it's not always better. For instance, my favorite army doesn't do a lot of shooting from outside 12".

Scions and Guardians were hit with the Deep Strike nerf and the shooting wasn't that dangerous to begin with. All the dangerous shooting is from outside those 12", and honestly you're likely blocking with screens.

For the non rolling to hit...whats doing that at the moment that we care about?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 helgrenze wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 helgrenze wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 helgrenze wrote:
So, in a game with rerolls for failed hits and failed wounds, making a unit slightly harder to hit is somehow better than giving a unit the ability to shrug off any wounds it takes?

And the IH are somehow broken as an army because ONE unit loses a second chance to shrug off the wounds?

Good to know.

At least you can still play your army as what they are.

Are you deliberately missing posts here?

Yeah making those units harder to hit is better. The math was shown to you here, even though you choose to deny it because you don't like decimals. Now the Ven Dreads that Iron Hands have literally lost an ability.

So -1 to hit > 6+++
-1 to hit + 6+++ > 6+++


Does this click yet?

Actually, no. Mathhammer it all you want, the difference is actually negligible, since dice do not roll partial numbers,

Maybe you don't understand the math here?

Do you understand how averages work or anything?

Yup.. even said so if you read the whole post.

Averaging only shows a likely trend based on median possibilities.

What you are looking for is a way to make the additional .1666667% appear to be more than it actually is. You only want the extra roll because "it's one more" (like the speaker from Spinal Tap).
It actually make very little difference to the Averages produced by Mathhammer. The Averages change by so little that the final resulting difference is still less than 1.

All the extra roll gives you is a second chance at rolling a 6 on a single die... 1/6 or .1666667%. which changes the average by less than 1/2 a percent. So you still wind up taking more damage ON AVERAGE than the RG.

The actual average still stands though when you add it over time. You aren't allowed to ignore those numbers out because they disagree with you. 3.5 + 3.5 is 7 on a large wound model, but under your logic just rounding nilly-willy it's 8.

There was little reason to run Iron Hands. Now there's 0 reasons as they have Ven Dreads with less benefits than any other Chapter, and this is supposed to be the Chapter obsessed with Dreads and then being important and stuff.

That's nice and all with the adding of averages, but averages don't convert directly to actual die rolls.

Go ahead and try to roll .5 on a D6. I'll wait... maybe I'll go watch the Ironman movies while you roll.

Averages are good at general prediction of possible results, but if what you are predicting is based solely on whole numbers, like die rolls, then the results of the averaging are less than accurate.
Since the arithmetic median of a D6 is 3.5, (Its geometric average is 3.), any averaging based on it is going to be inaccurate at best.
Yes, the math "works" but not when applied in context of the game which is based on the geometrics of a D6 and not the averages you can math out.

Part of your argument is based on inaccurate averages due to the differences between the math and the geometrics involved.

The other part is based on a single unit being "less effective". As previoulsy pointed out, The Contemptor is a better choice. For 8 points, you get the same BS and WS, +2 wounds, an invul, 1 str, +3 move. And now it is even more "effective" than the Ven.
Considering that all you really get from the Ven, as IH, is +1 BS and WS for 20 points, you could save the points and just take the base Dred.

This change only affects ONE unit, the Ven Dred. All the other Dred choices still get to use the "Ignore Wounds" IH rule. So do the Bikes and Troops.

So yeah this one thing, limiting one unit, just kills your whole army.

"All the dangerous shooting is from outside 12".

Shining Spears weren't nerfed. If they're shooting outside 12", they're cheating.

If Alpha Legion Berzerkers are shooting you outside 12", they're cheating and not even trying to be subtle about it.

So, yeah, against Guard artillery, RG's trait is better. But it's not better in all cases. Or even all competitive cases.

 helgrenze wrote:
That's nice and all with the adding of averages, but averages don't convert directly to actual die rolls.

Go ahead and try to roll .5 on a D6. I'll wait... maybe I'll go watch the Ironman movies while you roll.

Averages are good at general prediction of possible results, but if what you are predicting is based solely on whole numbers, like die rolls, then the results of the averaging are less than accurate.
Since the arithmetic median of a D6 is 3.5, (Its geometric average is 3.), any averaging based on it is going to be inaccurate at best.
Yes, the math "works" but not when applied in context of the game which is based on the geometrics of a D6 and not the averages you can math out.

Part of your argument is based on inaccurate averages due to the differences between the math and the geometrics involved.

The other part is based on a single unit being "less effective". As previoulsy pointed out, The Contemptor is a better choice. For 8 points, you get the same BS and WS, +2 wounds, an invul, 1 str, +3 move. And now it is even more "effective" than the Ven.
Considering that all you really get from the Ven, as IH, is +1 BS and WS for 20 points, you could save the points and just take the base Dred.

This change only affects ONE unit, the Ven Dred. All the other Dred choices still get to use the "Ignore Wounds" IH rule. So do the Bikes and Troops.

So yeah this one thing, limiting one unit, just kills your whole army.

Under your logic, just assume Marines hit when shooting? That's a 66% chance, that's rounding up to 1!

Sorry that is ridiculous. You can assume in a vacuum that the dice you are using are evenly created and you can get an average for it, unless you're using weighted dice.

The change doesn't affect just the Venerable Dread (which was one of the only reasons to run Iron Hands in the first place). It affects Relic Contemptors, the Contemptor Mortis, and the Leviathan (think they have it) as well. That's a lot of Dreads affected by that change. It means that, as a whole, they've got less durable Dreadnoughts than Raven Guard in most situations.

Then their main HQ choice, a Captain/Master with the Iron Resolve Warlord Trait, is less durable than Slamguinus. The Chapter known for durability can't create as durable a character as Blood Angels can. Let that sink in.

I know you'll choose not to be bothered by that though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
"All the dangerous shooting is from outside 12".

Shining Spears weren't nerfed. If they're shooting outside 12", they're cheating.

If Alpha Legion Berzerkers are shooting you outside 12", they're cheating and not even trying to be subtle about it.

So, yeah, against Guard artillery, RG's trait is better. But it's not better in all cases. Or even all competitive cases.

Listing just a couple of cases doesn't make your point good. Maybe with Shining Spears you have a point, but Berserker Marines are gonna everything they touch anyway. A 6+++ doesn't make a difference for the price of that many attacks they have.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Under your logic, just assume Marines hit when shooting? That's a 66% chance, that's rounding up to 1!

Sorry that is ridiculous. You can assume in a vacuum that the dice you are using are evenly created and you can get an average for it, unless you're using weighted dice.

The change doesn't affect just the Venerable Dread (which was one of the only reasons to run Iron Hands in the first place). It affects Relic Contemptors, the Contemptor Mortis, and the Leviathan (think they have it) as well. That's a lot of Dreads affected by that change. It means that, as a whole, they've got less durable Dreadnoughts than Raven Guard in most situations.

Then their main HQ choice, a Captain/Master with the Iron Resolve Warlord Trait, is less durable than Slamguinus. The Chapter known for durability can't create as durable a character as Blood Angels can. Let that sink in.

I know you'll choose not to be bothered by that though.

Lets address your third point first, shall we?
Iron Hands have their own WL Trait: Merciless Logic. Extra attack on a 6+ for each Hit. And the rule doesn't specify Shooting or CC. So, unless there are rules that change this somewhere, Iron Resolve should be off the table for your Warlord. OOPS.
As for the Sang comparrison.... No nameless Captain/Master is going to be equal to a Named Chapter Master, just not gonna happen.
OOPS on me, Sang WAS a Primarch.


Working back upwards: The rule change affects Forgeworld models? Really? So an additional 3 units that most don't likely use. Completely ignoring the 4 other Dreads you CAN use, of course.

Finally, on your first point: Dice are dice. I don't use Vegas Dice for anything, if I can help it, so yeah, I can assume the dice I am using are not biased.
Mathing out averages on dice is, as shown, inaccurate. The math only works on paper, not when actually rolling the dice. I have yet to see a die roll 1/2 of a point.
As for rounding, the ingame rule for rolling a D3 is to round up, so half of a 3 becomes a 2 and half of a 5 becomes a 3.

And No, Statistically, the average SM should be hitting 50% of the time, not 66%. Their BS is 3+ not 2+. Since the die only has 6 sides and not 7, The Geometric Average is 3, not 3.5.
This just shows why using averaging math on Dice is inaccurate.
So, Thank you for proving that point for me.

Oh, and ANY unit that gets within 12 inches negates the -1 To Hit..... Which could be anything that Deep Strikes (9+ Inches < 12 Inches.)

Seems like a stacked scenario to only want to compare an RG and IH ven dread.

I get that's the "only reason" to take IH, but feels disingenuous.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Seems like a stacked scenario to only want to compare an RG and IH ven dread.

I get that's the "only reason" to take IH, but feels disingenuous.

It was the only reason to take Iron Hands. -1 To Hit was clutch and forces the opponent to come to you, and then you can block the opponent with a synergistic Strategem with a heavy hitter or a screen.

Iron Hands didn't really have that synergy outside that stacking and the Warlord Trait stacking. They lost the main thing going for them there. Now a Raven Guard Venerable Dreadnought is straight up more durable in any situation or equal at minimum. If that doesn't bother you that the Dreadnought loving chapter has worse off Dreadnoughts as a whole, I don't know what to tell you.

You can argue math all night long but the bottom line is when you are playing a non-competitive army and one of the few unique rules interactions you have gets nerfed, that sucks. It sucks even more when it is getting nerfed because of an entirely different army.

 helgrenze wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Under your logic, just assume Marines hit when shooting? That's a 66% chance, that's rounding up to 1!

Sorry that is ridiculous. You can assume in a vacuum that the dice you are using are evenly created and you can get an average for it, unless you're using weighted dice.

The change doesn't affect just the Venerable Dread (which was one of the only reasons to run Iron Hands in the first place). It affects Relic Contemptors, the Contemptor Mortis, and the Leviathan (think they have it) as well. That's a lot of Dreads affected by that change. It means that, as a whole, they've got less durable Dreadnoughts than Raven Guard in most situations.

Then their main HQ choice, a Captain/Master with the Iron Resolve Warlord Trait, is less durable than Slamguinus. The Chapter known for durability can't create as durable a character as Blood Angels can. Let that sink in.

I know you'll choose not to be bothered by that though.

Lets address your third point first, shall we?
Iron Hands have their own WL Trait: Merciless Logic. Extra attack on a 6+ for each Hit. And the rule doesn't specify Shooting or CC. So, unless there are rules that change this somewhere, Iron Resolve should be off the table for your Warlord. OOPS.
As for the Sang comparrison.... No nameless Captain/Master is going to be equal to a Named Chapter Master, just not gonna happen.
OOPS on me, Sang WAS a Primarch.


Working back upwards: The rule change affects Forgeworld models? Really? So an additional 3 units that most don't likely use. Completely ignoring the 4 other Dreads you CAN use, of course.

Finally, on your first point: Dice are dice. I don't use Vegas Dice for anything, if I can help it, so yeah, I can assume the dice I am using are not biased.
Mathing out averages on dice is, as shown, inaccurate. The math only works on paper, not when actually rolling the dice. I have yet to see a die roll 1/2 of a point.
As for rounding, the ingame rule for rolling a D3 is to round up, so half of a 3 becomes a 2 and half of a 5 becomes a 3.

And No, Statistically, the average SM should be hitting 50% of the time, not 66%. Their BS is 3+ not 2+. Since the die only has 6 sides and not 7, The Geometric Average is 3, not 3.5.
This just shows why using averaging math on Dice is inaccurate.
So, Thank you for proving that point for me.

Oh, and ANY unit that gets within 12 inches negates the -1 To Hit..... Which could be anything that Deep Strikes (9+ Inches < 12 Inches.)

You clearly aren't paying attention if you see Slamguinus and say no generic Chapter Master should compare to a named character or a Primarch. Slamguinus is a nickname like Smashbane and Murderwings of last edition. So it'll help to learn those terms.

So lemme just teach you that real quick. Slamguinus is a Blood Angels Captain with a Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield, and a Jump Pack turned into the relic. You then use a single CP to give him Death Visions and give him the Foresight Warlord Trait, which now stacks for a 5+++ rerolling 1's.
At most you can only do a Shield Eternal for an Iron Hands Captain. That's all you can do anymore. He won't be as deadly in combat and isn't as durable.

You're also not understanding how averages work as it works on paper and on the table. So lemme show you that real quick:
1. A unit is BS3+
2. Therefore that unit hits on a 3, 4, 5, 6
3. Therefore that unit misses on a 1, 2
4. That's a 66.6% chance to hit
5. You use the averages to calculate how many Marines you need to kill a specific unit.

So you can say "hurrdurr there's no .5 or .66 on dice", but you can calculate how Infantry of 10 will hit or how many of 5 will hit, as those averages can lead to, shockingly, whole numbers that add up over time!

It isn't just "does it hit or not". I'm wondering how you calculate Orks hitting.

Meh.

So because of this one rule, maybe GW should just SQUAT the Iron Hands and be done with it?

I mean, they have zero Named Characters, and are, according to you, total crap without this tiny advantage on a limited number of models. And no Relics that only they can take ... except for an Axe that is +2 Str, -3 AP, 2 D. Or any IH Only Strats.... oh wait got one of those too that benefits Dreads.

Yup, just erase them.

Time to repaint your models, I guess.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:You're deliberately missing the point. They lost an additional buff to a unit that's frickin fluffy for them on top of not sucking. Now that unit is 100% worse compared to the same choice with every other chapter.

That was the thing they had going for them. Better Ven Dreadnoughts. Give a reason to run the army now.

They still have 6+++ across the rest of their army, which is unchanged. A flat 16.6666% increase of durability is enough reason, no? Sorry, except for two units. Because those two units were the only things that mattered. You could get rid of the 6+++ on EVERY OTHER unit, and they wouldn't be hurt, but it's these two units that need that 6+++.

Yeah, it's fluffy. It's also fluffy for me to take a full Battle Company with ten man squads. Is being fluffy enough reason for it to be buffed? Ideally, but I'm still not being rewarded for taking full Tactical and Devastator Squads.

Yeah, fine, this trait sucks because Venerable Dreadnoughts get no specific buff from being Iron Hands (except their stratagem). But what about Ultramarines units with the Fly keyword, or White Scars with the Fly keyword? They can already disengage from close combat and shoot/charge again - they're missing out on the meat of their Chapter's Tactic! And what's this? There's more than two units with the Fly keyword in the Space Marine codex? That must mean then Ultramarines and White Scars are unplayable too!!

The Imperial Fists get no bonus at all unless their enemy uses cover (which, after they know they're fighting IF, they just won't bother using) or on a fringe case if they take a Building. The Black Templars one is useless on a Devastator Squad which probably won't charge, as is the White Scars Devastators (who won't be Advancing OR charging).

The only three Space Marine Chapters who get their main buff all the time are Salamanders, Raven Guard (because they're usually out of 12", and Iron Hands - except on two units. Oh woe is me.

I understand ya. The Chaos Lord entry in the Death Guard codex probably irks 100% of players. At least they HAVE a bonus of some kind (though the bonus is mostly lost on them let's be honest).

My main issue is that they literally lost an ability that was a selling point in the Community Article, and honestly it was one of the only selling points of the Iron Hands army.

And Conscripts and Commissars working together was one a selling point in the Community Article. Are guardsmen unplayable now that's been removed?

It was ONE unit, a unit that can't be taken more than three times now. Is losing a 6+++ on ONE UNIT enough to make the Iron Hands completely broken?

I think you're overreacting.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:The change doesn't affect just the Venerable Dread (which was one of the only reasons to run Iron Hands in the first place). It affects Relic Contemptors, the Contemptor Mortis, and the Leviathan (think they have it) as well. That's a lot of Dreads affected by that change. It means that, as a whole, they've got less durable Dreadnoughts than Raven Guard in most situations.

Again, saying that the only reason to run Iron Hands for the Dreads simply isn't a fact. It's a fact maybe for you, because you like Dreads and Iron Hands are fluffy for Dreads, but pretending like the ONLY reason someone plays Iron Hands is for the Dreadnoughts is simply not a FACT, and it's not universal.

Maybe I should start an Iron Hands army just to prove to you that you can have Iron Hands armies without Dreadnoughts.

Then their main HQ choice, a Captain/Master with the Iron Resolve Warlord Trait, is less durable than Slamguinus. The Chapter known for durability can't create as durable a character as Blood Angels can. Let that sink in.

If you put it like that, the Chapter known for their zealotous crusades and close-combat prowess (Black Templars) can't be as good in CQC as the Blood Angels can.
The Chapter known for being great at killing xenos (Deathwatch) can't create as good a xenos killing HQ as the Blood Angels can.
The Chapter known for their speed (White Scars) can't create as speedy a character as the Blood Angels (+2 Movement isn't as fast as a Deep Striking reroll-charge Captain)

That's more because the Blood Angels have a really good CQC leader, who is quick, durable and very killy. Slamguinius is better than EVERY Chapter's captains, regardless of their specialty.

Bharring wrote:
"All the dangerous shooting is from outside 12".

Shining Spears weren't nerfed. If they're shooting outside 12", they're cheating.

If Alpha Legion Berzerkers are shooting you outside 12", they're cheating and not even trying to be subtle about it.

So, yeah, against Guard artillery, RG's trait is better. But it's not better in all cases. Or even all competitive cases.

Listing just a couple of cases doesn't make your point good. Maybe with Shining Spears you have a point, but Berserker Marines are gonna everything they touch anyway. A 6+++ doesn't make a difference for the price of that many attacks they have.

It's 16.666% better than the Raven Guard.

If you're saying that "oh, it's just a 6+++, it won't do anything", why does it matter on the Venerable Dreadnought then?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:It was the only reason to take Iron Hands. -1 To Hit was clutch and forces the opponent to come to you, and then you can block the opponent with a synergistic Strategem with a heavy hitter or a screen.

And not, yanno, the flat 16.666% durability buff on the rest of your army?
So you're telling me you'd rather have the 6+++ on the Venerable Dreadnought instead of having it on the rest of your army? You genuinely believe that?

Sorry, did you only take armies of JUST Venerable Dreadnoughts? If so, I think the Rule of Three might have screwed you over more than losing a 6+++.

Iron Hands didn't really have that synergy outside that stacking and the Warlord Trait stacking. They lost the main thing going for them there. Now a Raven Guard Venerable Dreadnought is straight up more durable in any situation or equal at minimum. If that doesn't bother you that the Dreadnought loving chapter has worse off Dreadnoughts as a whole, I don't know what to tell you.

And that's just the Raven Guard. On one unit. Whereas you get a flat out 16.6666% in melee, within 12" and even, if memory serves right, against Mortal Wounds. Unlike the Raven Guard.

So yeah, sure. They're nearly always more durable with one single unit. You're more durable with the rest of your army under certain conditions.

What if I told you that people play fluffy armies...

The nerf isn't great for Iron Hands true, but if people chose them it likely wasn't for hyper competitive play, so those people won't abandon the chapter. And for those that do play hyper competitive with Iron Hands, this isn't a huge nerf. An extra 6+ save wasn't the biggest factor deciding games. Someone I played against used Bjorn as his warlord with Tenacious Survivor. The same rule nerfed him a bit, but it's not going to wildly make him weaker.

War Master Marterix wrote:
What if I told you that people play fluffy armies...

Is this in response to me?

If so, I'd like you to point out just where it says the Iron Hands only field armies full of Venerable Dreadnoughts?

Yeah, they have more of them than what a "normal" Chapter would have. However, they also have more normal Dreadnoughts, more Ironclads, and STILL have Tactical Marines, Terminators, Assault Marines, Devastators, bikes etc etc.

The Iron Hands have NEVER been about ONLY Dreadnoughts - that's a flanderisation of their character. They like their Dreadnoughts, and certainly have a great deal of dedication to them, but it's not at the exclusion of everything else. And not only that, they still HAVE buffs for their dreadnoughts: just not the Venerable Dreadnought.

The kind of thinking that "oh X Chapter likes Y and only takes Y at the exclusion of everything else" is why people think that White Scars armies with no Devastators or Tactical Marines, or Salamanders who only wield flamers and meltas, or Raven Guard only with jump packs and lightning claws, and no Terminators are all the fluffiest approaches to those Chapters. The Chapter will like to field certain things, and will certainly have preferences, but they still have the majority of their Chapter who are bolter footsloggers. That's not to say they're not fluffy, but Iron Hands have units that they field other than Dreadnoughts.

And really, if fluff was the main concern here, I doubt there'd be this much of an uproar about losing a 6+++ on one model.

Just because it keeps being brought up, its a 20% increase to durability, not a 16.666% increase to durability. (Without taking into account damage over and above remaining wounds).

 helgrenze wrote:
Meh.

So because of this one rule, maybe GW should just SQUAT the Iron Hands and be done with it?

I mean, they have zero Named Characters, and are, according to you, total crap without this tiny advantage on a limited number of models. And no Relics that only they can take ... except for an Axe that is +2 Str, -3 AP, 2 D. Or any IH Only Strats.... oh wait got one of those too that benefits Dreads.

Yup, just erase them.

Time to repaint your models, I guess.

You don't have to repaint. You simply have to not use them as Iron Hands. Its pretty insulting towards Iron Hands players.

I have still yet to see anyone mention what the main benefit to the double FNP.

DISTRACTION AND TARGET PRIORITY.

When you had a Double FNP (DFNP) on a venerable dread of whatever type, it immediately became a cause for concern for your opponent instead of your tanks, dev squads, aggressors or hellblasters, etc.

When capt smashfucker on a bike with a TH and DFNP and a vets on bike squad tearing through their deployment zone they got worried and needed to devote more attention to getting rid of them before it was too late.

I have never thought about having a DFNP as making them survive longer. In fact, due to their threat level they were likely to die sooner. However thanks to my opponents shooting/fighting them first, the rest of my army can gain more board control and better positions.

Distraction Carnifex is the name of the game. Pay no attention to the hellblasters getting into position to snipe your tank or 2+ wound elites. Nevermind my reivers that are assaulting your screens to make room for other assaults and character targeting.

While DFNP means lasting longer overall, that shouldnt be your tactical goal for achieving DFNP. If it is, then you've likely already lost your game. IH are definitely a weak chapter overall, thus you have to be craftier than your opponent. Think a bit outside the box

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Seems like a stacked scenario to only want to compare an RG and IH ven dread.

I get that's the "only reason" to take IH, but feels disingenuous.

It was the only reason to take Iron Hands. -1 To Hit was clutch and forces the opponent to come to you, and then you can block the opponent with a synergistic Strategem with a heavy hitter or a screen.

Iron Hands didn't really have that synergy outside that stacking and the Warlord Trait stacking. They lost the main thing going for them there. Now a Raven Guard Venerable Dreadnought is straight up more durable in any situation or equal at minimum. If that doesn't bother you that the Dreadnought loving chapter has worse off Dreadnoughts as a whole, I don't know what to tell you.

Right you lost Ven dreads. But you're not shoehorned to that type. Here's a probability chart of -1 vs 6+++ vs standard. 6+++ is about 15% more likely to die. Is that good enough to match up to a -1 to hit that isn't always on? I don't know. It depends what you're looking to do with the army.

Is -1 & 6+++ better than just 6+++? Without question, but RG is not likely running around with Ven Dreads.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:You're deliberately missing the point. They lost an additional buff to a unit that's frickin fluffy for them on top of not sucking. Now that unit is 100% worse compared to the same choice with every other chapter.

That was the thing they had going for them. Better Ven Dreadnoughts. Give a reason to run the army now.

They still have 6+++ across the rest of their army, which is unchanged. A flat 16.6666% increase of durability is enough reason, no? Sorry, except for two units. Because those two units were the only things that mattered. You could get rid of the 6+++ on EVERY OTHER unit, and they wouldn't be hurt, but it's these two units that need that 6+++.

Yeah, it's fluffy. It's also fluffy for me to take a full Battle Company with ten man squads. Is being fluffy enough reason for it to be buffed? Ideally, but I'm still not being rewarded for taking full Tactical and Devastator Squads.

Yeah, fine, this trait sucks because Venerable Dreadnoughts get no specific buff from being Iron Hands (except their stratagem). But what about Ultramarines units with the Fly keyword, or White Scars with the Fly keyword? They can already disengage from close combat and shoot/charge again - they're missing out on the meat of their Chapter's Tactic! And what's this? There's more than two units with the Fly keyword in the Space Marine codex? That must mean then Ultramarines and White Scars are unplayable too!!

The Imperial Fists get no bonus at all unless their enemy uses cover (which, after they know they're fighting IF, they just won't bother using) or on a fringe case if they take a Building. The Black Templars one is useless on a Devastator Squad which probably won't charge, as is the White Scars Devastators (who won't be Advancing OR charging).

The only three Space Marine Chapters who get their main buff all the time are Salamanders, Raven Guard (because they're usually out of 12", and Iron Hands - except on two units. Oh woe is me.

I understand ya. The Chaos Lord entry in the Death Guard codex probably irks 100% of players. At least they HAVE a bonus of some kind (though the bonus is mostly lost on them let's be honest).

My main issue is that they literally lost an ability that was a selling point in the Community Article, and honestly it was one of the only selling points of the Iron Hands army.

And Conscripts and Commissars working together was one a selling point in the Community Article. Are guardsmen unplayable now that's been removed?

It was ONE unit, a unit that can't be taken more than three times now. Is losing a 6+++ on ONE UNIT enough to make the Iron Hands completely broken?

I think you're overreacting.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:The change doesn't affect just the Venerable Dread (which was one of the only reasons to run Iron Hands in the first place). It affects Relic Contemptors, the Contemptor Mortis, and the Leviathan (think they have it) as well. That's a lot of Dreads affected by that change. It means that, as a whole, they've got less durable Dreadnoughts than Raven Guard in most situations.

Again, saying that the only reason to run Iron Hands for the Dreads simply isn't a fact. It's a fact maybe for you, because you like Dreads and Iron Hands are fluffy for Dreads, but pretending like the ONLY reason someone plays Iron Hands is for the Dreadnoughts is simply not a FACT, and it's not universal.

Maybe I should start an Iron Hands army just to prove to you that you can have Iron Hands armies without Dreadnoughts.

Then their main HQ choice, a Captain/Master with the Iron Resolve Warlord Trait, is less durable than Slamguinus. The Chapter known for durability can't create as durable a character as Blood Angels can. Let that sink in.

If you put it like that, the Chapter known for their zealotous crusades and close-combat prowess (Black Templars) can't be as good in CQC as the Blood Angels can.
The Chapter known for being great at killing xenos (Deathwatch) can't create as good a xenos killing HQ as the Blood Angels can.
The Chapter known for their speed (White Scars) can't create as speedy a character as the Blood Angels (+2 Movement isn't as fast as a Deep Striking reroll-charge Captain)

That's more because the Blood Angels have a really good CQC leader, who is quick, durable and very killy. Slamguinius is better than EVERY Chapter's captains, regardless of their specialty.

Bharring wrote:
"All the dangerous shooting is from outside 12".

Shining Spears weren't nerfed. If they're shooting outside 12", they're cheating.

If Alpha Legion Berzerkers are shooting you outside 12", they're cheating and not even trying to be subtle about it.

So, yeah, against Guard artillery, RG's trait is better. But it's not better in all cases. Or even all competitive cases.

Listing just a couple of cases doesn't make your point good. Maybe with Shining Spears you have a point, but Berserker Marines are gonna everything they touch anyway. A 6+++ doesn't make a difference for the price of that many attacks they have.

It's 16.666% better than the Raven Guard.

If you're saying that "oh, it's just a 6+++, it won't do anything", why does it matter on the Venerable Dreadnought then?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:It was the only reason to take Iron Hands. -1 To Hit was clutch and forces the opponent to come to you, and then you can block the opponent with a synergistic Strategem with a heavy hitter or a screen.

And not, yanno, the flat 16.666% durability buff on the rest of your army?
So you're telling me you'd rather have the 6+++ on the Venerable Dreadnought instead of having it on the rest of your army? You genuinely believe that?

Sorry, did you only take armies of JUST Venerable Dreadnoughts? If so, I think the Rule of Three might have screwed you over more than losing a 6+++.

Iron Hands didn't really have that synergy outside that stacking and the Warlord Trait stacking. They lost the main thing going for them there. Now a Raven Guard Venerable Dreadnought is straight up more durable in any situation or equal at minimum. If that doesn't bother you that the Dreadnought loving chapter has worse off Dreadnoughts as a whole, I don't know what to tell you.

And that's just the Raven Guard. On one unit. Whereas you get a flat out 16.6666% in melee, within 12" and even, if memory serves right, against Mortal Wounds. Unlike the Raven Guard.

So yeah, sure. They're nearly always more durable with one single unit. You're more durable with the rest of your army under certain conditions.

1. People can tell you how useless the Ultramarine trait is overall actually. The only thing going for them is a ridiculous amount of special characters and that it's even harder to get rid of MSU. However the ability to charge first and deny potential bonuses and then just falling back like nothing happened is actually very good offensively. So they gain nothing for Fly units
There's also nothing in the codex that can fall back and charge, so White Scars is technically a new bonus altogether. Why is it dead last with Iron Hands? Not many ways to advance and charge, so nothing really clicks together. They also have a lame relic too.
Imperial Fists are actually good as they ignore some of the top CT equivalents and force the opponent to consider differing deployment strategies.
Black Templars have the single best Strategem in the codex and actually help melee based armies more than White Scars. They also make a better gunline than Iron Hands because they can use a lot of command points to make a new Chapter Master and give the relic increasing his range. Its very opposing playstyles yeah. Still works out better than for Iron Hands.
Then you have Raven Guard where everything clicks together like it does for Alpha Legion.

2. You can make the army without Venerable Dreads. It'll just be terrible because everyone else is doing everything else better.

3. Slamguinus is THAT much better than any Iron Hands character though at durability. White Scars can buff a Biker Captain with a Strategem at least to get into combat quicker, and a Black Templars character is still likely to get into combat without the use of a Strategem.
Deathwatch don't even have a codex yet so it's dishonest to include them to try and make your point have any value. Which it doesn't.

4. It mattered because it stacked, which was one of the ONLY good synergies the Iron Hands player had. Now you get punished for using a Relic Contemptor or Venerable Dread.

4. Actually yeah, because it's that useless on infantry. Ask Iron Warriors players how often they use their own Strategem, seeing that Chaos Marine players get pretty easy access to Cp. The answer is they don't. It is only a useful trait when you can stack it, as at least any other Tactic besides White Scars forces the opponent to conform to a different play style in some manner.

5. Mortal wounds? Not even an issue after the Smite hit.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
1. People can tell you how useless the Ultramarine trait is overall actually. The only thing going for them is a ridiculous amount of special characters and that it's even harder to get rid of MSU. However the ability to charge first and deny potential bonuses and then just falling back like nothing happened is actually very good offensively. So they gain nothing for Fly units

So the UM trait isn't actually so much about the trait as what units you bring - a completely different thing, and technically not a trait of the actual Chapter Tactic.
It IS a good offensive trait, but it's wasted on units that Fly - which is exactly my point. Your Iron Hands have a redundant save on a handful of models. The Ultramarines have a redundant rule on anything that Flies, which is a fair amount (Vanguard, Assault Marines, Inceptors, any HQ with a jump pack).

There's also nothing in the codex that can fall back and charge, so White Scars is technically a new bonus altogether. Why is it dead last with Iron Hands? Not many ways to advance and charge, so nothing really clicks together. They also have a lame relic too.

Advancing and charging is a stratagem, not part of innate trait. If we're going for stratagems, it allows Iron Hands Venerable Dreadnoughts to move at speed and not suffer penalty - a new bonus for Dreadnoughts altogether too. Also, unless I am mistaken (so please correct me if I'm missing something) but can't Fly units charge straight back in after combat? If so, wouldn't that also be wasted on Fly units, like the UM one.

Imperial Fists are actually good as they ignore some of the top CT equivalents and force the opponent to consider differing deployment strategies.

These differing strategies aren't that forceful. If anything, they stop the opponent worrying about needing to hug cover, and liberate them to only focus on LOS and range.
Fists really aren't that great.

Black Templars have the single best Strategem in the codex and actually help melee based armies more than White Scars. They also make a better gunline than Iron Hands because they can use a lot of command points to make a new Chapter Master and give the relic increasing his range. Its very opposing playstyles yeah. Still works out better than for Iron Hands.

Again, stratagem. Not very useful when you don't have any CP left. I'm comparing their actual Chapter Tactic, because that's always active. Without that, they're not "better than Iron Hands" at all.

Then you have Raven Guard where everything clicks together like it does for Alpha Legion.

Yes, true - unless you're within 12", or in melee.
Unlike the Iron Hands who ALWAYS get that 6+++, unless you're one of the few units that already has it.

2. You can make the army without Venerable Dreads. It'll just be terrible because everyone else is doing everything else better.

And you have make your other Dreads more durable. That's not changed.

Same as a White Scars army can do a full Devastator army. It'll just be terrible because their Tactics don't support it - like this.

3. Slamguinus is THAT much better than any Iron Hands character though at durability. White Scars can buff a Biker Captain with a Strategem at least to get into combat quicker, and a Black Templars character is still likely to get into combat without the use of a Strategem.
Deathwatch don't even have a codex yet so it's dishonest to include them to try and make your point have any value. Which it doesn't.

White Scars need a stratagem. Not part of their innate speed.
Black Templars need a stratagem, again, not an innate ability.
Deathwatch are still "the best xenos killers" apparently, or apparently not.

4. It mattered because it stacked, which was one of the ONLY good synergies the Iron Hands player had. Now you get punished for using a Relic Contemptor or Venerable Dread.

Not punished. Just no benefit. Punishment would be removing the 6+++ they already had.

5. Actually yeah, because it's that useless on infantry. Ask Iron Warriors players how often they use their own Strategem, seeing that Chaos Marine players get pretty easy access to Cp. The answer is they don't. It is only a useful trait when you can stack it, as at least any other Tactic besides White Scars forces the opponent to conform to a different play style in some manner.

It's exactly the same as Raven Guard. How can Raven Guard be the best of all time and Iron Hands isn't? There's a few fringe cases where one is better than another (Raven Guard being good against plasma weapons and low BS armies, Iron Hands being flat out better under 12" and in melee) but they are largely the same.

How does the Ultramarines Tactic force the opponent to change tactic against their Fly units?

6. Mortal wounds? Not even an issue after the Smite hit.

But they still exist, and against Grey Knights, Thousand Sons, and other psyker heavy armies, that's a 6+ that no-one else can get.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
1. People can tell you how useless the Ultramarine trait is overall actually. The only thing going for them is a ridiculous amount of special characters and that it's even harder to get rid of MSU. However the ability to charge first and deny potential bonuses and then just falling back like nothing happened is actually very good offensively. So they gain nothing for Fly units

So the UM trait isn't actually so much about the trait as what units you bring - a completely different thing, and technically not a trait of the actual Chapter Tactic.
It IS a good offensive trait, but it's wasted on units that Fly - which is exactly my point. Your Iron Hands have a redundant save on a handful of models. The Ultramarines have a redundant rule on anything that Flies, which is a fair amount (Vanguard, Assault Marines, Inceptors, any HQ with a jump pack).

There's also nothing in the codex that can fall back and charge, so White Scars is technically a new bonus altogether. Why is it dead last with Iron Hands? Not many ways to advance and charge, so nothing really clicks together. They also have a lame relic too.

Advancing and charging is a stratagem, not part of innate trait. If we're going for stratagems, it allows Iron Hands Venerable Dreadnoughts to move at speed and not suffer penalty - a new bonus for Dreadnoughts altogether too. Also, unless I am mistaken (so please correct me if I'm missing something) but can't Fly units charge straight back in after combat? If so, wouldn't that also be wasted on Fly units, like the UM one.

Imperial Fists are actually good as they ignore some of the top CT equivalents and force the opponent to consider differing deployment strategies.

These differing strategies aren't that forceful. If anything, they stop the opponent worrying about needing to hug cover, and liberate them to only focus on LOS and range.
Fists really aren't that great.

Black Templars have the single best Strategem in the codex and actually help melee based armies more than White Scars. They also make a better gunline than Iron Hands because they can use a lot of command points to make a new Chapter Master and give the relic increasing his range. Its very opposing playstyles yeah. Still works out better than for Iron Hands.

Again, stratagem. Not very useful when you don't have any CP left. I'm comparing their actual Chapter Tactic, because that's always active. Without that, they're not "better than Iron Hands" at all.

Then you have Raven Guard where everything clicks together like it does for Alpha Legion.

Yes, true - unless you're within 12", or in melee.
Unlike the Iron Hands who ALWAYS get that 6+++, unless you're one of the few units that already has it.

2. You can make the army without Venerable Dreads. It'll just be terrible because everyone else is doing everything else better.

And you have make your other Dreads more durable. That's not changed.

Same as a White Scars army can do a full Devastator army. It'll just be terrible because their Tactics don't support it - like this.

3. Slamguinus is THAT much better than any Iron Hands character though at durability. White Scars can buff a Biker Captain with a Strategem at least to get into combat quicker, and a Black Templars character is still likely to get into combat without the use of a Strategem.
Deathwatch don't even have a codex yet so it's dishonest to include them to try and make your point have any value. Which it doesn't.

White Scars need a stratagem. Not part of their innate speed.
Black Templars need a stratagem, again, not an innate ability.
Deathwatch are still "the best xenos killers" apparently, or apparently not.

4. It mattered because it stacked, which was one of the ONLY good synergies the Iron Hands player had. Now you get punished for using a Relic Contemptor or Venerable Dread.

Not punished. Just no benefit. Punishment would be removing the 6+++ they already had.

5. Actually yeah, because it's that useless on infantry. Ask Iron Warriors players how often they use their own Strategem, seeing that Chaos Marine players get pretty easy access to Cp. The answer is they don't. It is only a useful trait when you can stack it, as at least any other Tactic besides White Scars forces the opponent to conform to a different play style in some manner.

It's exactly the same as Raven Guard. How can Raven Guard be the best of all time and Iron Hands isn't? There's a few fringe cases where one is better than another (Raven Guard being good against plasma weapons and low BS armies, Iron Hands being flat out better under 12" and in melee) but they are largely the same.

How does the Ultramarines Tactic force the opponent to change tactic against their Fly units?

6. Mortal wounds? Not even an issue after the Smite hit.

But they still exist, and against Grey Knights, Thousand Sons, and other psyker heavy armies, that's a 6+ that no-one else can get.

1. Which basically means they just use the +1LD. At least it isn't a whole trait wasted compared to Iron Hands who have models that ARE supposed to benefit but now get zilch. That means their version of those models are strictly inferior.

2. Start playing the game more and then maybe you'll know if something can charge from falling back if it has Fly.

3. Which forces potentially worse deployment or just equal at best. Thanks for proving my point.

4. Apparently Deep Strike and charging isn't dead. They do that better than anyone else without the help of Strategems. They also do ironically make one of the best gunlines even if you don't choose to make benefit of the Chapter Tactic. Also the Marine codex isn't exactly filled with lots of Strategems you want to use, so who is running out of CP exactly?

5. Which the Raven Guard get synergy with thanks to their Strategem. A terribly non-specific -1 to hit is better than the 6+++. That's a fact.

6. You mean the Dreadnoughts you don't want to use? The regular ones that aren't even good? LOL k. At most you could argue for the Ironclad but seeing Drop Pods aren't carrying them anymore unless you have 80 points...

7. White Scars Strategem would be equivalent to the Slamguinus speed Strategem, and the Black Templars one doesn't need a Strategem. You're also bringing up an Index army again to be dishonest by saying saying "LOOK IT'S WORSE TOO". At least wait for the codex before you want to make this a point?

8. It's removing the second 6+++ that the Iron Hands had. That's punishment. Not a difficult concept to grasp.

9. Even when you want to pretend they're largely the same...they aren't. Shooting is king and Raven Guard can use a single CP or two to setup road blocks for any potential melee threats. Synergistic. Iron Hands don't get that now!
Regarding Ultramarines, it forces the opponent to play differently if they're melee (as anything not killed is going to shoot again) or if the player is aggressive and wants to use tarpitting against anything not a vehicle.
For their Fly units, you can't rely on a single bad morale check, so you have to kill every model like you would against a Necron opponent to prevent RP.

10. Wanna tell Grey Knights and Thousand Sons players that? I think any of them can tell you how useless their Smite abilities are, and full Smite got significantly worse because GW can't balance Psykers.

Hmm, let me correct a couple of wrong points in this discussion.

1) IH CT is not bad at all, and on primaris it is actually better than -1 to hit (from a 3+ source) even at distances greater than 12" against damage 2 weapons.

2) Smite spam from thousand sons (a bit less from GK) is real, they are not affected by the smite nerf (inculuding real smites, not only the small ones).

 helgrenze wrote:

And No, Statistically, the average SM should be hitting 50% of the time, not 66%. Their BS is 3+ not 2+. Since the die only has 6 sides and not 7, The Geometric Average is 3, not 3.5.
This just shows why using averaging math on Dice is inaccurate.
So, Thank you for proving that point for me.

I can't even tell if he's serious or trolling.

I suppose if he's not trolling, he probably studies some kind of financial field of studies and was taught, that in finances you should use geometrical average (which makes sense because of it's incremental nature), but now he thinks that it's a "superior" form of calculating averages and should be applied in every case.

Spoletta wrote:
Hmm, let me correct a couple of wrong points in this discussion.

1) IH CT is not bad at all, and on primaris it is actually better than -1 to hit (from a 3+ source) even at distances greater than 12" against damage 2 weapons.

2) Smite spam from thousand sons (a bit less from GK) is real, they are not affected by the smite nerf (inculuding real smites, not only the small ones).

1. Actually Raven Guard is still better, especially if the opponent has to move with a heavy weapon for whatever reason. You list a very specific source, especially when one of those specific sources suffers from that -1 to hit. Sure I'll grant ya Autocannons.

2. No it isn't real. Maybe somewhere super casual.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
2. No it isn't real. Maybe somewhere super casual.

"I thought it wasn't real."