So, unverified rumors are floating around about armies with blanket -1 to be hit changing to always count as being in cover. Apparently Reece misspoke in a way that alluded to this as well in some video or podcast, but I have not seen that part myself.
Anyway, my question is... if this is true, what (sizable?) impact does this have on the meta? Of course points and other things will change at the same time, but if we assume the majority of stuff stays relatively the same, what armies suddenly become trash or amazing?
It depends on if it will just count those units: A) as being in cover even if not B) getting an additional +1 for being in cover (so +2) or C) both A and B
If only A, then current traits that provide this will slowly drop off the competitive meta, especially since many of them continue to receive other nerfs to their Reserve shenanigans and the fact that Player B gets a strat for this in the first turn already.
If only B, they still might make a showing, but you'll see a shift in the types of units taken, more towards cover-hugging Troops and backfield units. It would also make the Prepared Positions strat even better
If C, than we'll still see Alaitoc, AL and RG in competitively lists.
Honestly, if the trait were changed to 'being in cover' I think the only implication would be that Alaitoc would go away. RG and AL have good enough baseline armor saves that the cover would still be fairly useful, and they have other advantages too.
People only take Alaitoc because of the -1 to hit, extra cover does nearly nothing for common choices like Rangers because their survivability relies exclusively on being difficult to hit. I don't think there would be any less Eldar, but most of the Alaitoc would become Ulthwe. If Alaitoc, RG, and AL get less common, then IF and IW don't really have much more of a bonus than they do right now. I can't see much of an overall meta change though.
Now if strats and individual unit traits that currently cause -1 to hit were changed to 'grants cover', that would be a different story. Harlequins would cease to exist (cover doesn't help Harlequins at all), Craftworlds and Drukhari get shifted slightly further toward 'fringe army' status, etc. Other shifts would happen too.
So as things are currently rumored, things might change a little bit. If the changes are more extensive then would be a major shift.
ph34r wrote: Apparently Reece misspoke in a way that alluded to this as well in some video or podcast, but I have not seen that part myself.
I bet he can barely contain himself, getting the only thing standing in the way of IG dominance removed...
Spoiler:
Only half serious, don't bulli me
If this change is true its obviously being aimed at Alaitoc, but boy AL and RG players will be pissed, getting smacked with that after the big faq nerf to their strats.
Now if strats and individual unit traits that currently cause -1 to hit were changed to 'grants cover', that would be a different story. Harlequins would cease to exist (cover doesn't help Harlequins at all), Craftworlds and Drukhari get shifted slightly further toward 'fringe army' status, etc. Other shifts would happen too. .
This would have zero effect on Harlequins. Their minus to hit comes from Mirage launchers on their vehicles, it's not an army wide rule for them and the infantry do not have that benefit (need strategems or psychic powers to work for the infantry). There is no way they would remove the Mirage launcher rule for the vehicles, but I could see the removal of Lightning Reactions on something with a -1. It would still work on their infantry though.
To be all honest. In fluffy sense, cover save should be functioned like a penalty of to hit rolls. Now it is like they were doing this the other way around.
Creeping Dementia wrote: Honestly, if the trait were changed to 'being in cover' I think the only implication would be that Alaitoc would go away. RG and AL have good enough baseline armor saves that the cover would still be fairly useful, and they have other advantages too.
Well, keep in mind that CWE trait affect their vehicles too, which almost all have 3+ armour. And Shining Spears would basically be flying Terminators. And the Psychic power "Protect" give +1 to saving throws.
So I don't think Alaitoc would "go away" but you would certainly see the lists shift a bit more towards heavier armoured units.
But I really hope there is some advantage to actually being in cover, otherwise it takes that movement "skill" completely out of the picture. Most of the CWE movement pahse is positioning to get cover while also retaining LoS to our target. If you always have cover, you basically just set the movement phase to "easy mode'
By making the traits option B in my above post (+2 for being in cover) it puts tactical choice back into the game.
Creeping Dementia wrote: Honestly, if the trait were changed to 'being in cover' I think the only implication would be that Alaitoc would go away. RG and AL have good enough baseline armor saves that the cover would still be fairly useful, and they have other advantages too.
Well, keep in mind that CWE trait affect their vehicles too, which almost all have 3+ armour. And Shining Spears would basically be flying Terminators. And the Psychic power "Protect" give +1 to saving throws.
So I don't think Alaitoc would "go away" but you would certainly see the lists shift a bit more towards heavier armoured units.
But I really hope there is some advantage to actually being in cover, otherwise it takes that movement "skill" completely out of the picture. Most of the CWE movement pahse is positioning to get cover while also retaining LoS to our target. If you always have cover, you basically just set the movement phase to "easy mode'
By making the traits option B in my above post (+2 for being in cover) it puts tactical choice back into the game.
-
With respect to Alaitoc, I think you'd see a resurgence of Shadow Specters with an always in cover bonus. The innate -1 to hit with a 2+ save and the ability to get back to -2 or -3 (conceal or Lightning fast reactions) to hit is going to be pretty good. My only gripe with this change would be in relation to the new stratagem providing cover to the 2nd player. That would become effectively useless for 3 additional armies (it's already practically useless for Harlequins as it is). Perhaps a decreased penalty range would be a better start (i.e. unit's outside 15" or 18" suffer the penalty to hit). Regardless of how it pans out, Aeldari players will adapt and overcome.
Yeah, I think expanding the traits to be ignored within 18" is a better alternative than just being cover.
That extra 6" makes a big difference. that's what she said.
Orks also getting "always hit on 6" also fixes one of the bigger issues with -1 to-hit traits
I would rather see just a blanket cap on modifiers, maybe -2, or e even just -1. As mentioned previously this affects armies differently, but it seems a bit of a cheap fix. GW already used this fix on the whole "disadvantage by going second", this will make that Strategem obsolete for a lot of armies, and just generally seems like a quick fix that will probably cause further problems down the line.
Oh the other hand, Lias Issodon will be very happy as he'll always be rocking a 0+ save.
What's your source? Where are these rumors from? Literally a single even semi-credible source? Like,even the words of an anonymous source that we can look over ourselves to judge for integrity? Or are we just doing BoLS advertising for them now?
SHUPPET wrote: What's your source? Where are these rumors from? Literally a single even semi-credible source? Like,even the words of an anonymous source that we can look over ourselves to judge for integrity? Or are we just doing BoLS advertising for them now?
The source, as mentioned in the OP, is a known GW playtester miss speaking when answering a question.
Its entirely possible it was a genuine mistake and this rumor is false.
Its also entirely possible that he did speak out of turn and the rumor is true.
SHUPPET wrote: What's your source? Where are these rumors from? Literally a single even semi-credible source? Like,even the words of an anonymous source that we can look over ourselves to judge for integrity? Or are we just doing BoLS advertising for them now?
The source, as mentioned in the OP, is a known GW playtester miss speaking when answering a question.
Its entirely possible it was a genuine mistake and this rumor is false.
Its also entirely possible that he did speak out of turn and the rumor is true.
THATS the source? I don't recall hearing that at any stage and I listen to them all. The poster in question is a notorious troll in the 40k community who is, even right now, causing massive arguments in this week's FLG comment section, justifying why he was banned from Discord, why everyone on dakka is terrible and he quit that too, etc etc, and that's pretty consistent for him in the comments
He's known for reading way too far into everything and went on rants for weeks on end because Geoff referred to Custodes + Culexus as "mono faction". This reads like literally the exact same thing, Reecius makes rules feth ups all the time it gets referenced every second week by the other casters, hell he made them on the one episode of Chapter Tactics he appeared on and you can see them in the comments. And that's even if he did say this one at all.
I'm glad this isn't just BOLS garbage at least, but honestly I would not worry about it.
Valkyrie wrote: I would rather see just a blanket cap on modifiers, maybe -2, or e even just -1. As mentioned previously this affects armies differently, but it seems a bit of a cheap fix. GW already used this fix on the whole "disadvantage by going second", this will make that Strategem obsolete for a lot of armies, and just generally seems like a quick fix that will probably cause further problems down the line.
Oh the other hand, Lias Issodon will be very happy as he'll always be rocking a 0+ save.
A blanket cap doesn't make sense in an environment where you use D6s. If there was a cap of -1 there would never be any penalty for moving and shooting heavy weapons.
Also, you did the thing I hate the most. Lias Issodon doesn't have a 0+ save, he has a 2+ save on a D6+2
SHUPPET wrote: What's your source? Where are these rumors from? Literally a single even semi-credible source? Like,even the words of an anonymous source that we can look over ourselves to judge for integrity? Or are we just doing BoLS advertising for them now?
The source, as mentioned in the OP, is a known GW playtester miss speaking when answering a question.
Its entirely possible it was a genuine mistake and this rumor is false.
Its also entirely possible that he did speak out of turn and the rumor is true.
THATS the source? I don't recall hearing that at any stage and I listen to them all. The poster in question is a notorious troll in the 40k community who is, even right now, causing massive arguments in this week's FLG comment section, justifying why he was banned from Discord, why everyone on dakka is terrible and he quit that too, etc etc, and that's pretty consistent for him in the comments
He's known for reading way too far into everything and went on rants for weeks on end because Geoff referred to Custodes + Culexus as "mono faction". This reads like literally the exact same thing, Reecius makes rules feth ups all the time it gets referenced every second week by the other casters, hell he made them on the one episode of Chapter Tactics he appeared on and you can see them in the comments. And that's even if he did say this one at all.
I'm glad this isn't just BOLS garbage at least, but honestly I would not worry about it.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/315870254?t=19m8s timestamp is a bit earlier for context. Actual qoute is some 30 seconds later.
There you go. "counting as in cover does nothing when your Raven Guard or Alpha Legion".
If you believe it or not is up to you, but there is the origin of it.
I think Reece slipped up on the rules as he is known for doing, and RVD read way too far into nothing as he is known for doing, and here we are now. But thanks for providing the source.
SHUPPET wrote: What's your source? Where are these rumors from? Literally a single even semi-credible source? Like,even the words of an anonymous source that we can look over ourselves to judge for integrity? Or are we just doing BoLS advertising for them now?
I suggested this when the Eldar codex dropped and it caught on. The power of suggestion! Remove the doom that is blanket -1 to hit for your whole army! WOOT.
Spoletta wrote: Just put the traits to 18" and say that lighning fast reflexes maximum penalty is -1.Done.
I don't think a double whammy is necessary. Also, as pointed out above by BCB, this would effectively invalidate Lightning Fast Reactions by making it useless against heavy weapon units that moved and for an entire <Craftworld> selection. Are there even any examples from the SM, Guard, or Chaos codices where a stratagem is restricted from (not to) a single Chapter? If they bump the range to 15 or 18 inches, that should be more than sufficient.
People also seem to not realize that stacking -1 to Hit is the most effective counter to re-rolls. You are indirectly buffing all sources of re-rolls by removing -1 to Hit (and people ALREADY complain about the number of re-rolls).
Another reason not to cap the -ve modifiers is that it basically removes the effect of the Chapter Tactic for units that have them already built in.
Take Alaitoc Rangers for example. Capping -ve modifiers at -1 would essentially mean that Rangers, Alaitocs flagship/famous-for unit, gain zero benefit from even being ALAITOC.
Spartacus wrote: Another reason not to cap the -ve modifiers is that it basically removes the effect of the Chapter Tactic for units that have them already built in.
Take Alaitoc Rangers for example. Capping -ve modifiers at -1 would essentially mean that Rangers, Alaitocs flagship/famous-for unit, gain zero benefit from even being ALAITOC.
Which is why you shouldn't cap at -1 only, but capping at -2 still allows for 2 different things to interact, such as the army trait, unit ability and shooting unit using Heavy weapons.
And that's really all that is needed: A cap that still allows at least 2 abilities to interact.
Spartacus wrote: Another reason not to cap the -ve modifiers is that it basically removes the effect of the Chapter Tactic for units that have them already built in.
Take Alaitoc Rangers for example. Capping -ve modifiers at -1 would essentially mean that Rangers, Alaitocs flagship/famous-for unit, gain zero benefit from even being ALAITOC.
Which is why you shouldn't cap at -1 only, but capping at -2 still allows for 2 different things to interact, such as the army trait, unit ability and shooting unit using Heavy weapons.
And that's really all that is needed: A cap that still allows at least 2 abilities to interact.
-
-2 is already enough to cripple any army other then Custodes (since they are the only ones with army wide 2+)
"-2 is already enough to cripple any army other then Custodes (since they are the only ones with army wide 2+)"
But capping at -1 makes the traits pretty irrelevant in many cases, including giving Heavy weapons the bonus of "ignoring" movement.
You have to balance both sides. So either make -1 to hit traits be cover, or extend their "ignore" range to 18", or cap to-hit mods to -2.
But under NO circumstances should there be a blanket -1 cap on modifiers.
Spartacus wrote: Another reason not to cap the -ve modifiers is that it basically removes the effect of the Chapter Tactic for units that have them already built in.
Take Alaitoc Rangers for example. Capping -ve modifiers at -1 would essentially mean that Rangers, Alaitocs flagship/famous-for unit, gain zero benefit from even being ALAITOC.
Which is why you shouldn't cap at -1 only, but capping at -2 still allows for 2 different things to interact, such as the army trait, unit ability and shooting unit using Heavy weapons.
And that's really all that is needed: A cap that still allows at least 2 abilities to interact.
-
-2 is already enough to cripple any army other then Custodes (since they are the only ones with army wide 2+)
And that's a problem why? If you want to counter such potential measures, start bringing in stuff to shoot close or melee stuff.
I agree it should be a max of -2, but it's a healthy trait for the game that's really only complained about by gunline people.
Spartacus wrote: Another reason not to cap the -ve modifiers is that it basically removes the effect of the Chapter Tactic for units that have them already built in.
Take Alaitoc Rangers for example. Capping -ve modifiers at -1 would essentially mean that Rangers, Alaitocs flagship/famous-for unit, gain zero benefit from even being ALAITOC.
Which is why you shouldn't cap at -1 only, but capping at -2 still allows for 2 different things to interact, such as the army trait, unit ability and shooting unit using Heavy weapons.
And that's really all that is needed: A cap that still allows at least 2 abilities to interact.
-
-2 is already enough to cripple any army other then Custodes (since they are the only ones with army wide 2+)
That's a great point when viewed in a vacuum. However, we don't play in a vacuum. The reason Custodes hit on 2+ is because there are about 15 of them, so every shot need to hit. Compare that to an army with massed bodies, and you see should see similar statistical outcome of hits when accounting for negative hit modifiers when things are somewhat balanced. Obviously there are outliers where you can choose a horde armies best/worst unit and that will skew the numbers. I think a negative hit modifier cap of -3 is probably the sweet spot as that allows a trait + heavy or advancing assault weapon + some other bonus (stratagem, psychic power, innate ability). But it prevents that last group from stacking. At only -2, you make that last group worthless against the any weapon penalties.
Those won't care about shooting anyway, modifier or not. For example Orks or Wulfens, their game is charge in and attack in CC.
But for some army like Marines, relatively low RoF high quality shooting is one of the most important part of their game. They relies on their BS 3+ to live. So if the modifier drop them to 5+ bs, they are basically toasted.
There ways to prevent stacking in a sensible way. There are many cases of powers abilities and traits which do not stack with each other, just add these to the list. For example:
Fieldcraft: Your opponent must subtract 1 from any hit rolls for attacks that target a unit with this attribute at a range of more than 12". This modifier does not stack with the ones from the concealment power, lightning reflexes stratagem and hard to hit rule.
Done, now you have made going Alaitoc more of a choice, limited the most severe cases of penalty stackings and reigned in Alaitoc wings without nerfing the rangers, which should be the base of any Alaitoc army.
CWE will still be able to stack hit penalties, true, but that's their perk. Alaitoc this ways instead of playing into the strenght of the faction, makes it just more easy to get the protection, does not improve it.
Those won't care about shooting anyway, modifier or not. For example Orks or Wulfens, their game is charge in and attack in CC.
But for some army like Marines, relatively low RoF high quality shooting is one of the most important part of their game. They relies on their BS 3+ to live. So if the modifier drop them to 5+ bs, they are basically toasted.
Except sometimes you can't charge. Especially now that GW made assaulting high level buildings impossible. With pure h2h you can't win. And orks have plenty of shooting units actually...
Also now that boyz got gimped to death h2h for orks is even harder. Hell orks actually AREN'T good h2h army. They don't get to h2h. Orks don't kill stuff in h2h(they won't get there) and orks won't kill stuff in shooting(hitting on 6's suck) so all they actually do is sit on objectives.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoletta wrote: There ways to prevent stacking in a sensible way. There are many cases of powers abilities and traits which do not stack with each other, just add these to the list. For example:
Fieldcraft: Your opponent must subtract 1 from any hit rolls for attacks that target a unit with this attribute at a range of more than 12". This modifier does not stack with the ones from the concealment power, lightning reflexes stratagem and hard to hit rule.
Then GW introduces new rule with -1 to hit and list needs to grow. Why not simply say you can only gain 1 source of bonus and penalty for to hit rolls rather than list potentially growing list of rule names.
Weidekuh wrote: People then will just complain about 2+ wave serpents, Wraithlords, wraithknight, wraithguards, wraithblades and more.
Especially 2+ Guardian Defenders (because of their weapon plattforms).
Same old.
If we still had the all or nothing AP system I'd agree. However anything that has a chance of hurting the tough stuff already has ap-2 or 3 and guardians will still die to massed small arms fire.
leopard wrote: what you could do is to expand the <KEYWORD> system to weapons and abilities, they can then use that to interact.
e.g. an ability giving -1 to hit as <COVER> noting it does not stack with other <COVER> modifiers
Going down that road will eventually expand into less manageable solutions. We need less clutter and more simplicity. A hard card is much easier to manage.
Spartacus wrote: Another reason not to cap the -ve modifiers is that it basically removes the effect of the Chapter Tactic for units that have them already built in.
Take Alaitoc Rangers for example. Capping -ve modifiers at -1 would essentially mean that Rangers, Alaitocs flagship/famous-for unit, gain zero benefit from even being ALAITOC.
Which is why you shouldn't cap at -1 only, but capping at -2 still allows for 2 different things to interact, such as the army trait, unit ability and shooting unit using Heavy weapons.
And that's really all that is needed: A cap that still allows at least 2 abilities to interact.
-
-2 is already enough to cripple any army other then Custodes (since they are the only ones with army wide 2+)
And that's a problem why? If you want to counter such potential measures, start bringing in stuff to shoot close or melee stuff.
I agree it should be a max of -2, but it's a healthy trait for the game that's really only complained about by gunline people.
How can you honestly say something like this? It's not just "gunline people" almost every unit in this game has a gun. Not to mention Eldar armies can easily get to -2 to hit in CC too. Plus weapons like powerfist are -1 to hit in CC and it all stacks.
minus to hit traits in general are extremely unhealthy. If anything can be learned from 7th eddition is that reducing units ability to be hit - makes them almost indestructible.
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Or make hyper effective shooting options more expensive.
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
*checks how many 3++ armor saves my dex has* would you look at that, none at all!
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
No, it's the same as removing re-rolls and that's a GOOD thing not a bad one
The reason the -1 to hit trait is too strong is its too universally applied and it is too overcentralizing.
Basically any army that can take a -1 to hit trait is heavily penalized for not doing so, and since they game still needs to be balanced it means all of the unit's in the codex are designed to be balanced around these outliers. Take a look at what happend to Space Marines, all of their vehicles got price hikes because they were too good in Guilliman's bubble, so all of the vehicles got nerfed. What this did was make Ultramarines fair and balanced, and made all of the other chapters below par. Do you want the same to happen to CWE until only Alaitoc is playable and the other craftworlds are like shooting yourself in the foot?
Space Marines are right now basically down to Raven Guard or Ultramarines, and Ultramarines are entirely held up by Guilliman.
CWE are the Alaitoc show, Iyanden, Ultwe, Biel-Tan, Saim Hann... what are those? Why would you ever take them to a tournament?
The -1 to hit traits need to be brought down the the level of the other traits. Right now they are significantly stronger than things like "ignore cover" or re-roll 1s to hit with Shuriken Weapons, or double wounds for degeneration. Its too over centralizing and it needs to be toned down, players need a reason to pick Iyanden outside of just for fun, and you can't have that if Alaitoc is always better at everything.
stacking negative modifiers to hit is a pox on this game and it needs to go.
akaean wrote: The reason the -1 to hit trait is too strong is its too universally applied and it is too overcentralizing.
Basically any army that can take a -1 to hit trait is heavily penalized for not doing so, and since they game still needs to be balanced it means all of the unit's in the codex are designed to be balanced around these outliers. Take a look at what happend to Space Marines, all of their vehicles got price hikes because they were too good in Guilliman's bubble, so all of the vehicles got nerfed. What this did was make Ultramarines fair and balanced, and made all of the other chapters below par. Do you want the same to happen to CWE until only Alaitoc is playable and the other craftworlds are like shooting yourself in the foot?
Space Marines are right now basically down to Raven Guard or Ultramarines, and Ultramarines are entirely held up by Guilliman.
CWE are the Alaitoc show, Iyanden, Ultwe, Biel-Tan, Saim Hann... what are those? Why would you ever take them to a tournament?
The -1 to hit traits need to be brought down the the level of the other traits. Right now they are significantly stronger than things like "ignore cover" or re-roll 1s to hit with Shuriken Weapons, or double wounds for degeneration. Its too over centralizing and it needs to be toned down, players need a reason to pick Iyanden outside of just for fun, and you can't have that if Alaitoc is always better at everything.
stacking negative modifiers to hit is a pox on this game and it needs to go.
Aye.
Automatically Appended Next Post: 3+ armies don't pay to shoot like orks. It's pathetic we even need to have this discussion after 7th eddition was basically destroyed by invis.
Well for a start it's going to confuse people just glancing at a copy of their rules because the rule that's written down doesn't actually do the thing it's supposed to do but something else instead.
Second it will make Dark Angels Azrael/Darkshroud bubbles interesting.
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
*checks how many 3++ armor saves my dex has* would you look at that, none at all!
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
No, it's the same as removing re-rolls and that's a GOOD thing not a bad one
-1 to hit bones tyranids harder than most armies. They don't even have a reroll hits to take away. Plenty of units hit on 4's. Plenty of units need to advance to shoot - so now you are hitting on 6's with a -1.
Not saying that a 10 point upgrade like sporeocyst is problematic. It's not - I love the upgrade. A blanket -1 to hit trait is basically like a 10-20 point upgrade on every unit for free. Absolutely insane. Plus it scales incredibly hard with additional -1 to hits.
OFC - I am of the opinion that there are too many defenses that always work in this game. I think more weapons need to ignore invo saves - I think more weapons need to ignore to hit penalties (or at least stratagems should exist that do this). Right now if you have good invos and to hit penalities you are basically immune to damage. Outside of mortal wounds.
MistaGav wrote: Well for a start it's going to confuse people just glancing at a copy of their rules because the rule that's written down doesn't actually do the thing it's supposed to do but something else instead.
This is my biggest complaint with a "living" ruleset. Player just picking up an army shouldn't have to refer to other sources for the complete picture of their rules, nor should they be required to use digital media. The current system is certainly better than before, but it has it's downsides.
A blanket rule for Match play that makes -1 to be hit armywide traits not be able to stack, could work. It would still allow unit abilities and moving with heavies/advancing with assault weapons still be able to stack, but the army-wide traits would be there just for units without some other -1s. But this is far more clunky than just capping to-hit mods at -2.
But I am also very much in favor of the traits providing cover AND a bonus for units already in cover and removing the -1 to hit. It allows the traits to be roughly as useful while allowing other traits to make an appearance now an then.
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
*checks how many 3++ armor saves my dex has* would you look at that, none at all!
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
No, it's the same as removing re-rolls and that's a GOOD thing not a bad one
And what about all the armies that don't blanket re-roll everything? Which, funny enough, is most of the game.
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
*checks how many 3++ armor saves my dex has* would you look at that, none at all!
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
No, it's the same as removing re-rolls and that's a GOOD thing not a bad one
And what about all the armies that don't blanket re-roll everything? Which, funny enough, is most of the game.
Which army doesn't have some type of re-roll ability?
Polonius wrote: one simple solution would be to change AL/RG/Alaitoc to getting a -1 to hit, if they are in cover..
Agreed, which is the rumor. I'm all for it, so long as it also gives a bonus for actually being in cover as well. Otherwise terrain wouldn't matter as much aside from blocking LoS. And as mentioned, Eldar Rangers, which are Alaitoc's SIGNATURE troops, would get no benefit from Alaitoc if there is not a cover bonus for actually being in cover
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
*checks how many 3++ armor saves my dex has* would you look at that, none at all!
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
No, it's the same as removing re-rolls and that's a GOOD thing not a bad one
And what about all the armies that don't blanket re-roll everything? Which, funny enough, is most of the game.
Which army doesn't have some type of re-roll ability?
we're not talking about 'some type of re-roll' we are talking about entire armies that negate re-roll fails entirely. That you can get 1 unit to re-roll 'some' dice (all is again very limited) still makes everything else in your army dogshit.
Hence my use of the words 'blanket re-roll everything'.
A non-exhaustive list is:
Space Marines (and various subfactions)
Guard
AdMech
IK
CSM (and various subfactions)
Dark Eldar
Harlequins
Necrons
Tau
Tyranids
GSC
So.... everything except Eldar? Who between Reapers and Hemlocks ignoring it, Guide and Linked-Fire can pretty much re-roll all their major elements.
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
*checks how many 3++ armor saves my dex has* would you look at that, none at all!
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
No, it's the same as removing re-rolls and that's a GOOD thing not a bad one
And what about all the armies that don't blanket re-roll everything? Which, funny enough, is most of the game.
Which army doesn't have some type of re-roll ability?
we're not talking about 'some type of re-roll' we are talking about entire armies that negate re-roll fails entirely. That you can get 1 unit to re-roll 'some' dice (all is again very limited) still makes everything else in your army dogshit.
Hence my use of the words 'blanket re-roll everything'.
A non-exhaustive list is:
Space Marines (and various subfactions)
Guard
AdMech
IK
CSM (and various subfactions)
Dark Eldar
Harlequins
Necrons
Tau
Tyranids
GSC
So.... everything except Eldar? Who between Reapers and Hemlocks ignoring it, Guide and Linked-Fire can pretty much re-roll all their major elements.
Please explain how Eldar, as an army, negates all re-roll fails.
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
*checks how many 3++ armor saves my dex has* would you look at that, none at all!
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
No, it's the same as removing re-rolls and that's a GOOD thing not a bad one
And what about all the armies that don't blanket re-roll everything? Which, funny enough, is most of the game.
Which army doesn't have some type of re-roll ability?
we're not talking about 'some type of re-roll' we are talking about entire armies that negate re-roll fails entirely. That you can get 1 unit to re-roll 'some' dice (all is again very limited) still makes everything else in your army dogshit.
Hence my use of the words 'blanket re-roll everything'.
A non-exhaustive list is:
Space Marines (and various subfactions)
Guard
AdMech
IK
CSM (and various subfactions)
Dark Eldar
Harlequins
Necrons
Tau
Tyranids
GSC
So.... everything except Eldar? Who between Reapers and Hemlocks ignoring it, Guide and Linked-Fire can pretty much re-roll all their major elements.
Please explain how Eldar, as an army, negates all re-roll fails.
Eldar, as an army partially negate minus to hit in the manner talked above.
By virtue of Reapers always hitting on 3+.
By Hemlocks being equipped with flamers that ignore minus to hit.
By the Linked-Fire Stratagem on their main battle tank equivalent.
By Guide on whatever unit isn't covered by the above.
Which only leaves, what? the unit of rangers taken as a troop tax?
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
*checks how many 3++ armor saves my dex has* would you look at that, none at all!
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
No, it's the same as removing re-rolls and that's a GOOD thing not a bad one
And what about all the armies that don't blanket re-roll everything? Which, funny enough, is most of the game.
Which army doesn't have some type of re-roll ability?
we're not talking about 'some type of re-roll' we are talking about entire armies that negate re-roll fails entirely. That you can get 1 unit to re-roll 'some' dice (all is again very limited) still makes everything else in your army dogshit.
Hence my use of the words 'blanket re-roll everything'.
A non-exhaustive list is:
Space Marines (and various subfactions)
Guard
AdMech
IK
CSM (and various subfactions)
Dark Eldar
Harlequins
Necrons
Tau
Tyranids
GSC
So.... everything except Eldar? Who between Reapers and Hemlocks ignoring it, Guide and Linked-Fire can pretty much re-roll all their major elements.
Please explain how Eldar, as an army, negates all re-roll fails.
Eldar, as an army partially negate minus to hit in the manner talked above.
By virtue of Reapers always hitting on 3+.
By Hemlocks being equipped with flamers that ignore minus to hit.
By the Linked-Fire Stratagem on their main battle tank equivalent.
By Guide on whatever unit isn't covered by the above.
Which only leaves, what? the unit of rangers taken as a troop tax?
So when referencing negative hit modifiers, re-rolls happen before modifiers, which debunks your examples of Linked-Fire and Guide. They are re-rolling failed hit rolls just like lots of other armies (For Space Marines, Chapter Masters say hello!) Regarding Hemlocks, a lot of Armies have auto hitting weapons (e.g. Death Guard have a bunch of flamers that are quite strong). Reapers are the outlier here as they are of the few (perhaps only) units in the game with the ability to completely ignore modifiers. So in light of that, I'll agree with you that Eldar has a unit that can negate failed re-rolls entirely.
It's totally fine for -1 to hit to exist. To give it away for free as an army trait is insane.
This is very simple.
reroll all hits is completely negated at 3+ to hit by a -1 modifer. Therefore the 2 traits are equal. However - reroll all hits does not exist as an army trait - just reroll 1's - and quite often you are forced to stay still in order to use it. Pretty clear the trait is effing busted. I called it out day 1. It took them a year and a half to figure it out. LOL.
Sigh, @Mokoshkana could you please read the conversation you are commenting on....
The conversation went something like this.
A)-1 to hit (roughly) cancels out re-roll misses. It's the equivalent to giving your entire army re-roll misses. Its super powerful
B)Taking away re-rolls is actually a good thing
C)And what about armies that don't blanket re-roll everything (aka most of them)
We are talking about the equivalence in interaction between re-roll misses and -1 to hit and the availability of one compared to the other.
And the -1 as an army wide trait has a range restriction. You conveniently leave that out. If that range is increased to 15 or 18, its effectiveness goes down immensely.
Sigh, @Ordana A) That's not a valid comparison. Making one army harder to hit is not the same as give a different army (or even the same one) the ability to re-roll everything. I understand your statistical comparison in a vacuum, but this game isn't a vacuum. B) I concur C) NO army blanket rerolls everything except for an Ultramarine Army with RG and everything in his bubble. Guess we should change his ability as its too powerful if its equivalent to an Army wide -1
mokoshkana wrote: And the -1 as an army wide trait has a range restriction. You conveniently leave that out. If that range is increased to 15 or 18, its effectiveness goes down immensely.
It will go down, sure.
Does it still apply for the first 2 turns of the game and has most of the damage been done at that point? Pretty much yeah.
They also tends to deploy and play in such a way to keep you away from the high value units so that getting within 18, let alone 12" tends to be a problem.
And none of that changes that if you propose an army wide trait for re-roll all misses against units outside of 12" (or 18" if you will) the cries of "OP" will be deafening.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
mokoshkana wrote: And the -1 as an army wide trait has a range restriction. You conveniently leave that out. If that range is increased to 15 or 18, its effectiveness goes down immensely.
Sigh, @Ordana
A) That's not a valid comparison. Making one army harder to hit is not the same as give a different army (or even the same one) the ability to re-roll everything. I understand your statistical comparison in a vacuum, but this game isn't a vacuum.
B) I concur
C) NO army blanket rerolls everything except for an Ultramarine Army with RG and everything in his bubble. Guess we should change his ability as its too powerful if its equivalent to an Army wide -1
My sarcasm detector is broken so please help me here. Is your point C an attempt at sarcasm? Because Girlymans re-roll aura has completely destroyed the SM codex by forcing repeated nerfs to anything remotely playable in the codex. It is a clear example of an OP rule negatively effecting the game in a big way.
Are major game changing errata like this really a Chapter Approved thing though? They added additional rules, but never a complete revamp. A big change like this would have likely appeared in the Big FAQ and have been a beta rule first.
mokoshkana wrote: And the -1 as an army wide trait has a range restriction. You conveniently leave that out. If that range is increased to 15 or 18, its effectiveness goes down immensely.
It will go down, sure.
Does it still apply for the first 2 turns of the game and has most of the damage been done at that point? Pretty much yeah.
They also tends to deploy and play in such a way to keep you away from the high value units so that getting within 18, let alone 12" tends to be a problem.
And none of that changes that if you propose an army wide trait for re-roll all misses against units outside of 12" (or 18" if you will) the cries of "OP" will be deafening.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
mokoshkana wrote: And the -1 as an army wide trait has a range restriction. You conveniently leave that out. If that range is increased to 15 or 18, its effectiveness goes down immensely.
Sigh, @Ordana
A) That's not a valid comparison. Making one army harder to hit is not the same as give a different army (or even the same one) the ability to re-roll everything. I understand your statistical comparison in a vacuum, but this game isn't a vacuum.
B) I concur
C) NO army blanket rerolls everything except for an Ultramarine Army with RG and everything in his bubble. Guess we should change his ability as its too powerful if its equivalent to an Army wide -1
My sarcasm detector is broken so please help me here. Is your point C an attempt at sarcasm? Because Girlymans re-roll aura has completely destroyed the SM codex by forcing repeated nerfs to anything remotely playable in the codex. It is a clear example of an OP rule negatively effecting the game in a big way.
You inferred earlier that CWE has army wide blanket re-rolls:
we're not talking about 'some type of re-roll' we are talking about entire armies that negate re-roll fails entirely. That you can get 1 unit to re-roll 'some' dice (all is again very limited) still makes everything else in your army dogshit.
Hence my use of the words 'blanket re-roll everything'.
A non-exhaustive list is:
Space Marines (and various subfactions)
Guard
AdMech
IK
CSM (and various subfactions)
Dark Eldar
Harlequins
Necrons
Tau
Tyranids
GSC
So.... everything except Eldar? Who between Reapers and Hemlocks ignoring it, Guide and Linked-Fire can pretty much re-roll all their major elements.
Which is not true at all. I'm not being sarcastic, I am actually pointing out the only army with an ability for blanket re-rolls is Ultramarines with RG. Eldar can re-roll some dice here and there but the entire army is not able to blanket re-roll everything.
As for SM being nerfed due to RG, that is the exact same thing that is happening to CWE due to Ynnari, but that's an aside for another time.
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
*checks how many 3++ armor saves my dex has* would you look at that, none at all!
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
No, it's the same as removing re-rolls and that's a GOOD thing not a bad one
And what about all the armies that don't blanket re-roll everything? Which, funny enough, is most of the game.
Sigh. Then they get a penalty to hit. This is a defensive tool against shooting, and it's a good thing. It's MEANT to have an impact.
Either way, Tyranids most common source of -1 is a targeted power affecting a single unit lol, NOT a blanket -1 to everything buff
SHUPPET wrote: Shooting is ridiculous right now - there SHOULD be defensive options against it.
3++ and 4++ saves do a really nice job by ignoring 66%-50% of all damage.
*checks how many 3++ armor saves my dex has* would you look at that, none at all!
Do you realize that blanket -1 to hit. Takes 3+ to hit with rerolls down to 3+ to hit averages. Effectively the power level is exactly the same as giving your entire army reroll all hits. It's too bloody powerful.
No, it's the same as removing re-rolls and that's a GOOD thing not a bad one
-1 to hit bones tyranids harder than most armies. They don't even have a reroll hits to take away. Plenty of units hit on 4's. Plenty of units need to advance to shoot - so now you are hitting on 6's with a -1.
Not saying that a 10 point upgrade like sporeocyst is problematic. It's not - I love the upgrade. A blanket -1 to hit trait is basically like a 10-20 point upgrade on every unit for free. Absolutely insane. Plus it scales incredibly hard with additional -1 to hits.
OFC - I am of the opinion that there are too many defenses that always work in this game. I think more weapons need to ignore invo saves - I think more weapons need to ignore to hit penalties (or at least stratagems should exist that do this). Right now if you have good invos and to hit penalities you are basically immune to damage. Outside of mortal wounds.
It impacts our shooting too, as it's a defensive tool against shooting, but while we don't have the BS to shoot through, we deal with it in our own way by using assaulty units, powers, etc. Very few armies in the game have no options to deal with it, and these armies are the ones with other problems elsewhere. Tyranids ALSO don't have the AP to deal with 2+ saves everywhere either, the only worthwhile gun with AP is pretty much the impaler cannon, so any target of the dakka is just as survivable. The game needs defense against shooting, that's all there is to it.
The way to rein in shooting is to make good guns more expensive or give guns less insane stats.
The solution is not to throw minus to hit on things (and only some things so those without it are fethed) and make people throw buckets of dice that do next to nothing.
Ordana wrote: The way to rein in shooting is to make good guns more expensive or give guns less insane stats.
The solution is not to throw minus to hit on things (and only some things so those without it are fethed) and make people throw buckets of dice that do next to nothing.
You can change every single gun in the game to make them more expensive, or you can just give out a couple of defensive options sensibly and achieve the same impact.
and what you do with units like plaguebearers that wont give a gak about being in cover? lose that -1 to hit would make them cheaper? I really doubt that rule will be implemented, but in case i should doubt about mental integrity of GW game designers, instead of erase a whole rule why just dont let stack multiple -1? isn't that more simple? They really cant write rules properly, editions pass and always same dumbness...
blackmage wrote: and what you do with units like plaguebearers that wont give a gak about being in cover? lose that -1 to hit would make them cheaper? I really doubt that rule will be implemented, but in case i should doubt about mental integrity of GW game designers, instead of erase a whole rule why just dont let stack multiple -1? isn't that more simple? They really cant write rules properly, editions pass and always same dumbness...
I agree, but remember that so far it's just the players. Though GW has made some terrible changes already.
I don't think removing stacking is the answer either. I think just removing / changing the specific offending instances of the rule is the answer. Most sources of -1 in the game aren't even resembling OP.
Ordana wrote: The way to rein in shooting is to make good guns more expensive or give guns less insane stats.
The solution is not to throw minus to hit on things (and only some things so those without it are fethed) and make people throw buckets of dice that do next to nothing.
You can change every single gun in the game to make them more expensive, or you can just give out a couple of defensive options sensibly and achieve the same impact.
And what happens to those armies who don't have access to a minus to hit when we are using that to balance out of control shooting?
Or do you just introduce a new rule? "all models are at -1 to hit in Matched Play".
Ordana wrote: The way to rein in shooting is to make good guns more expensive or give guns less insane stats.
The solution is not to throw minus to hit on things (and only some things so those without it are fethed) and make people throw buckets of dice that do next to nothing.
You can change every single gun in the game to make them more expensive, or you can just give out a couple of defensive options sensibly and achieve the same impact.
And what happens to those armies who don't have access to a minus to hit when we are using that to balance out of control shooting?
Or do you just introduce a new rule? "all models are at -1 to hit in Matched Play".
No, because not all armies need models with defensive options against shooting, and have their own strengths?
Ordana wrote: The way to rein in shooting is to make good guns more expensive or give guns less insane stats.
The solution is not to throw minus to hit on things (and only some things so those without it are fethed) and make people throw buckets of dice that do next to nothing.
You can change every single gun in the game to make them more expensive, or you can just give out a couple of defensive options sensibly and achieve the same impact.
And what happens to those armies who don't have access to a minus to hit when we are using that to balance out of control shooting?
Or do you just introduce a new rule? "all models are at -1 to hit in Matched Play".
No, because not all armies need models with defensive options against shooting, and have their own strengths?
So, below are the top 5 armies from a 70-man event held over the weekend. It was an ETC style event, so running eternal war and maelstrom missions, not ITC missions (though still giving ITC points).
1st place
Ynnari. Only units with natural negative to hit modifiers were 3 Alaitoc Craftworld flyers and 1 Wave Serpent (if auxiliary -1 cp detachments get it). EDIT - also contains 2 units of 5 Ynnari rangers.
2nd place
Ynnari. ZERO units with natural negative to hit modifiers. EDIT - also contains 3 units of Ynnari Rangers.
3rd place
Cultist spam and thousand sons. Only units with a -1 were a Chaos Lord and 1 40-man blob.
4th place
Drukari. 2 Razorwing Jetfighters.
5th place
Guard, Custodes and 1 DA libby. 1 Custodes -1 to hit banner.
6th-10th only saw 1 more list with natural negative to hit penalties, and that was again on Drukari flyers and 1 Alaitoc Battalion (without flyers) in the same list.
I personally took Knights and Guard to the event. Got smashed game 1 and game 5 thanks to BobbyG and a Castellan and then Haywire talos spam and Harlie bikes. I just couldn’t kill the Talos fast enough (thank god the very strong rumour is they are getting a big points hike).
So, based off that event anyway, massively stacking negative to hits army wide doesn’t appear to be an auto-win. Biggest issue I think is more to do with Doom letting everyone re-roll and 2-3 Talos man units being practically impossible to remove effectively or quickly.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Addition to say - This event used all the new faq stuff as well.
Which is what? Orks which can't go beyond 6 anyway and get an extra chance at a shot? Conscripts which were already too effective at 3 points?
Get over it.
a) orks still get screwed by -1 to hit. You don't even need to go beyond 6 to be screwed. Learn some basic math if you don't see why
b) conscript cost 4pts
c) there's still units with 5+ beyond those two. Maybe read codexes one day? Then you might actually be correct once in a while.
Whilst a single event, using the new rules, it does get the ball rolling and does tie in with results from previous events as well. We can also look at the results of the Battle for Salvation as well. We can see from the top 16 lists there was a total of 3 units in the winning list having an in-built negative to hit. In 5th we have 1 detachment of Alaitoc Eldar and 1 Druarki flyer. In 9th we have 1 Alaitoc battalion and Alaitoc flyer detachment (first army to have full negative to hits). 11th place we have Venomthropes.
So, currently, we can see from the trend of 2 events (both different styles) but both containing top players (The event I was at had the Dutch ETC team in attendance, some of the Finish team, some of the players from the UK teams and then other top non ETC players).
But, I guess we will see what happens this weekend at the SoCal open as to whether or not full, stacking, negative to hit modifier armies dominate everything else, or whether the trend to continues to be Ynnari (with some individual units with –‘s to hit), Imperium soup and Chaos soup being top of the pile.
Which is what? Orks which can't go beyond 6 anyway and get an extra chance at a shot? Conscripts which were already too effective at 3 points?
Get over it.
a) orks still get screwed by -1 to hit. You don't even need to go beyond 6 to be screwed. Learn some basic math if you don't see why
b) conscript cost 4pts
c) there's still units with 5+ beyond those two. Maybe read codexes one day? Then you might actually be correct once in a while.
1. EVERYONE gets hit by a -1 to hit. Orks are now the army to ignore stacking, which makes them effective.
2. Everyone already knows Conscripts are gonna go down a point in Chapter Approved.
3. You didn't even bother to name other units which makes this part pretty funny.
Which is what? Orks which can't go beyond 6 anyway and get an extra chance at a shot? Conscripts which were already too effective at 3 points?
Get over it.
a) orks still get screwed by -1 to hit. You don't even need to go beyond 6 to be screwed. Learn some basic math if you don't see why
b) conscript cost 4pts
c) there's still units with 5+ beyond those two. Maybe read codexes one day? Then you might actually be correct once in a while.
1. EVERYONE gets hit by a -1 to hit. Orks are now the army to ignore stacking, which makes them effective.
2. Everyone already knows Conscripts are gonna go down a point in Chapter Approved.
3. You didn't even bother to name other units which makes this part pretty funny.
What about any faction that can't easily circumvent their bs 4+, that includes nids for exemple. Or even Tau to a degree.
Btw 5+ is average troop stats in renegade and heretics armies. With mutants, militia, militia Hwt suffering from it. Mind you unlike orks however renegades are not designated as a melee army.
Which is what? Orks which can't go beyond 6 anyway and get an extra chance at a shot? Conscripts which were already too effective at 3 points?
Get over it.
a) orks still get screwed by -1 to hit. You don't even need to go beyond 6 to be screwed. Learn some basic math if you don't see why
b) conscript cost 4pts
c) there's still units with 5+ beyond those two. Maybe read codexes one day? Then you might actually be correct once in a while.
1. EVERYONE gets hit by a -1 to hit. Orks are now the army to ignore stacking, which makes them effective.
2. Everyone already knows Conscripts are gonna go down a point in Chapter Approved.
3. You didn't even bother to name other units which makes this part pretty funny.
What about any faction that can't easily circumvent their bs 4+, that includes nids for exemple. Or even Tau to a degree.
Btw 5+ is average troop stats in renegade and heretics armies. With mutants, militia, militia Hwt suffering from it. Mind you unlike orks however renegades are not designated as a melee army.
Tau get over it easily, and Tyranids have mostly units designed to get close anyway. Only Renegades have an argument here, and you can't seriously say they aren't in desperate need of fixing even without these armies existing.
What about any faction that can't easily circumvent their bs 4+, that includes nids for exemple. Or even Tau to a degree.
Tau are in the best state they've been yet this edition, they do NOT need the one defensive mechanic turned to cover, which they can then ignore with markerlights. That's absurd.
And getting rid of it would NERF Nids. Nids rely on -1 sources like Thropes, Horror, and Hypnosis, to get an almost exclusively close range army across the board. As a Nid main do NOT try to sell your want for this change as if you are doing us favors, our -1 is in no way OP yet you want it gone rather than adapting your own play.
Almost every single army in the game has a way to deal with it, whether through overwhelming firepower that the mechanic in fact helps to offset, or through a focus on other strengths that get around it.
People wanting this mechanic gone are the epitome of what the 40k community has become, just whining till GW for implement an easy mode to their multiplayer game. There's really balance issues out there and this mechanic EXISTING isn't one of them. Focus on the individual instances where it's too much, if you have an issue.
What about any faction that can't easily circumvent their bs 4+, that includes nids for exemple. Or even Tau to a degree.
Tau are in the best state they've been yet this edition, they do NOT need the one defensive mechanic turned to cover, which they can then ignore with markerlights. That's absurd.
And getting rid of it would NERF Nids. Nids rely on -1 sources like Thropes, Horror, and Hypnosis, to get an almost exclusively close range army across the board. As a Nid main do NOT try to sell your want for this change as if you are doing us favors, our -1 is in no way OP yet you want it gone rather than adapting your own play.
Almost every single army in the game has a way to deal with it, whether through overwhelming firepower that the mechanic in fact helps to offset, or through a focus on other strengths that get around it.
People wanting this mechanic gone are the epitome of what the 40k community has become, just whining till GW for implement an easy mode to their multiplayer game. There's really balance issues out there and this mechanic EXISTING isn't one of them. Focus on the individual instances where it's too much, if you have an issue.
First off: nice ad hominem against a opinion you disagree with. Shows about the level of discurse you are capable off.
Secondly: so you would rather relly upon a terrible mechanic like -1 modifiers? Instead of getting propperly working units?
Thirdly i did not complain about Nid sources of -1 since they are one unit at a instance. Making counterplay something that is achievable, not to mention you pay pts for it, unlike certain faction traits. Contrary to that army traits like alaitoc, alpha legion and ravenguard which by virtue of just existing do harm to the internal balance of a codex, not to mention issues in the overall balance afterwards thanks to soup.
What about any faction that can't easily circumvent their bs 4+, that includes nids for exemple. Or even Tau to a degree.
Tau are in the best state they've been yet this edition, they do NOT need the one defensive mechanic turned to cover, which they can then ignore with markerlights. That's absurd.
And getting rid of it would NERF Nids. Nids rely on -1 sources like Thropes, Horror, and Hypnosis, to get an almost exclusively close range army across the board. As a Nid main do NOT try to sell your want for this change as if you are doing us favors, our -1 is in no way OP yet you want it gone rather than adapting your own play.
Almost every single army in the game has a way to deal with it, whether through overwhelming firepower that the mechanic in fact helps to offset, or through a focus on other strengths that get around it.
People wanting this mechanic gone are the epitome of what the 40k community has become, just whining till GW for implement an easy mode to their multiplayer game. There's really balance issues out there and this mechanic EXISTING isn't one of them. Focus on the individual instances where it's too much, if you have an issue.
First off: nice ad hominem against a opinion you disagree with. Shows about the level of discurse you are capable off.
Secondly: so you would rather relly upon a terrible mechanic like -1 modifiers? Instead of getting propperly working units?
Thirdly i did not complain about Nid sources of -1 since they are one unit at a instance. Making counterplay something that is achievable, not to mention you pay pts for it, unlike certain faction traits. Contrary to that army traits like alaitoc, alpha legion and ravenguard which by virtue of just existing do harm to the internal balance of a codex, not to mention issues in the overall balance afterwards thanks to soup.
First off, thats really not an ad hominem, I quite clearly attacked your argument and expressed my dislike of it
Secondly, I don't think -1 modifiers are a terrible mechanic at all, and you saying it doesn't make it so, and I countered your only reasoning for why it was. I think it's a perfectly fine defensive mechanic, and a community largely used to winning shooting matches is struggling to accept that.
Thirdly, you are both wrong about Nids (Malanthrope affects everything in a bubble, can stack with -1 to hit relic, and cast 2 separate -1 powers on a single enemy unit too), wrong about Alpha Legion / Ravenguard (watch them do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the tournament scene after the recent nerf), and wrong that you weren't complaining about Nids - as you are NOT asking for a change to individual instances, you are asking for them ALL to be blanket changed, and that includes Nids. And other instances of it that aren't OP. The game needs the mechanic now more than ever. Improve your list own play. Shooting is not weak in 8th loool
Spartacus wrote: Another reason not to cap the -ve modifiers is that it basically removes the effect of the Chapter Tactic for units that have them already built in.
Take Alaitoc Rangers for example. Capping -ve modifiers at -1 would essentially mean that Rangers, Alaitocs flagship/famous-for unit, gain zero benefit from even being ALAITOC.
Which is why you shouldn't cap at -1 only, but capping at -2 still allows for 2 different things to interact, such as the army trait, unit ability and shooting unit using Heavy weapons.
And that's really all that is needed: A cap that still allows at least 2 abilities to interact.
-
-2 is already enough to cripple any army other then Custodes (since they are the only ones with army wide 2+)
And that's a problem why? If you want to counter such potential measures, start bringing in stuff to shoot close or melee stuff.
I agree it should be a max of -2, but it's a healthy trait for the game that's really only complained about by gunline people.
Besides of that, I believe that to hit roll penalties never should drop further than 6+ (maybe 5+?) a hit roll. There is already armies that hit a 5+ and other ones that have a trollistic capacity to stack -1 to hit.
People wanting this mechanic gone are the epitome of what the 40k community has become, just whining till GW for implement an easy mode to their multiplayer game. There's really balance issues out there and this mechanic EXISTING isn't one of them. Focus on the individual instances where it's too much, if you have an issue.
@shuppet. Ad hominem, personal attack. In this case directed at multiple people because it fits your narrative. So yes you used an ad hominem which you tried to justfy behind supposed missmanagement of army list certain players make. Dissmising any argument you don't like that way. Btw called a Totschlag argument.
Secondly: They are. Simply put you pay pts for a unit with an expected average behaviour dependant on it's stats. Possibly you also spend pts according to the strength / power of a weapon you buy. This trait alone breaks this balance approach since it, depending on your BS, makes you lose effectiveness.
Thirdly: I meant individual instances as in you don't get a blanket -1 trait, you need to pay pts for them unlike certain traits. Nids need to buy it and don't get it for free. That is why i don't mind nids but i could have formualted that one better, i'll concede that.
Fourth: Just because AL and RG do not accomplish much now after their stratagem nerf,does not mean that the Trait is not inherently better then any alternative trait in the respective Codex. It limits design space and that is my gripe with it.
Fifth: Balancing alone from a tournament aspect, we should remove any and all soup aswell as Castellans, etc. especially if we only consider top 5-10 lists as relevant. Ergo instead of balancing torwards the middle you just nerf the top outliers, doing nothing for the things stuck at the low end.
Edit: To clarify, i am not against the -1 modifyer perse, but i am against army wide traits that are this way, simply put i am fine so long you pay pts for it instead of getting it handed out, ergo i am fine with the Nid way to get -1s. However i don't like trait's i can't play around except getting into doubletap range, which against these armies will mean 2 shooting phases of no reaction aginst them. I am also not argueing that shooting is not superior to melee. However i'd rather see Melee units buffed to a point that they can make it into it and or that transports, especially groungbound ones, get a boost as to be able to get within the range.
I didn't think it was ad hominem at all, just a description of the attitude I dislike in the community. But whatever let's move past it.
It breaks balance no more than T8 breaks the balance of S7 weaponry. It lowers the effectiveness of your shooting, this is the impact it's INTENDED to have. This is a perfectly apt mechanic by my measure, in a game still dominated by shooting even WITH it's presence.
Alpha Legion may have the best trait but they are one of the worser legions now, because a faction choice is so much more than that. IW and Black Legion are going to see play and Alpha Legion... never will again lol.
Honestly I'm not against an update to Alpha Legion they don't really reflect their flavor at all on the tabletop, but just nerfing them further is a terrible answer.
Also, are you saying just remove -1 army rules, but leave other instances that you have to pay for? Like Malanthrope for example would be okay, where do you stand on powers, since you have to buy the caster does that include?
I edited the above comment but for simplicities sake:
Also, are you saying just remove -1 army rules, but leave other instances that you have to pay for? Like Malanthrope for example would be okay, where do you stand on powers, since you have to buy the caster does that include?
I am fine with most of those powers. I am perfectly fine with the malanthope (we can debate about the range of his aura, the ammount of times he can give out -1 etc. but again at this point that would be hairsplitting and we have bigger fish to fry balance wise atm).
I am not fine with certain powers that need to pass and then affect whole armies (doom).
Another exemple is miasma of pestilence, which i find fine since A: both units need nurgle heretic astarte keywords and B : it is single target one use per caster which you pay for with pts and a "slot " for a spell.
I'm complaining about a -1 hit blanket and I'm not playing Guard. Well, not always at least.
It's stupidly broken that an army gets -1 hit for free and I have to pay 3cp to get it in a 6" bubble for one round. And I also have to bring a specific HQ and cast a spell successfully as a prerequisite (SW stratagem).
Oh and while we're at it Linked Fire should be 2cp, or maybe even 3cp. At 1cp it's just ridiculously OP.
I feel that the Alpha legion trait rules doesn't truly reflect their legion anyway. Maybe they will take the opportunity to change it to something better.
Eldenfirefly wrote: I feel that the Alpha legion trait rules doesn't truly reflect their legion anyway. Maybe they will take the opportunity to change it to something better.
Actually forward deployment and ambushes fit alpha legion, just like elaborate rouses and the use of agents.
Frankly i am unsure why we never saw alpha legion agents as an Elite unit for them.
Spoletta wrote: According to today's spoilers, Ork's trait works outside 18".
Is this what is going to happen to these traits? And if so, how much of a nerf do you think it will be?
Not enough to make people stop talking them especially on eldar flyers as -2 even at 18 inch makes shooting at that unit a poor return. Also flyers have the mobility to manage the range.
For marine's admech etc I can see them become even rarer after the nerf their strategums already took
Lias Issodon doesn't have a 0+ save, he has a 2+ save on a 
