I, for one, was pretty underwhelmed by the Big FAQ 2. It pushed some things around, made an attempt to balance some overused stratagems, but overall the game is in much the same state as it was before, but with slightly less Slamguinius.
My prediction is that the upcoming Chapter Approved, which should be coming out November/December, will have a rash of point changes that will further upset the meta.
But what do people predict? Place your bets, make some wild speculation, or just wishlist, idc, do it here!
I personally foresee a price increase to many of the Imperial Knights, especially the Castellan and Helverins. I also foresee minor point decreases for Necron and Grey Knights.
I don't play them but some help for Grey Knights and Custodes(making it something more than codex jetbike) would be nice.
I'd prefer they take a crack at closing the gap between mono faction and soup but have accepted that they'll probably just crap on the units that soup is making egregious which will only have people slot in the currently next most broken unit.
It’s impossible to know if GW considers non-meta units to be balanced and just held down by how good the meta is, or if they will actually target over costed and under performing units.
They could buff GK, Tactical squads, Crisis suits, Thinos, etc. Or they could just as easily hit Castellans, Gallants, Ravagers, Daemon Princes, Riptides, etc. and leave the other stuff mostly unchanged.
I expect Custodes Jet Bikes and Captain on a bike will get a points increase
I expect DE to get nerfed into the ground
I also expect more ham handed sweeping game changes that make entire units completely useless instead of addressing real issues with the game like morale, cover, dice modifiers, terrain etc.
I fully expect GW to continue proving that they don't have a single clue what they're doing.
I'm hoping that they'll do something drastic to address what a terrible spot Marines are in, but I won't be a bit surprised if vanilla marines get nerfed down to GK levels and GK get rendered completely unplayable and GW puts out some sort of unintentionally hilarious statement about the awsome changes they made to help basic Marines and GK compete in the current meta because they write rules like a spastic chimp with the self awareness of frog spawn.
I also expect this thread to wind up as 20+ pages of such utter bile directed at GW and 40k that any new player who comes here looking for advice and reads through it will come away convinced that they're much better off going back to WoW or LoL or whatever they were doing before the cool plastic mens caught their attention.
The Newman wrote: I fully expect GW to continue proving that they don't have a single clue what they're doing.
I'm hoping that they'll do something drastic to address what a terrible spot Marines are in, but I won't be a bit surprised if vanilla marines get nerfed down to GK levels and GK get rendered completely unplayable and GW puts out some sort of unintentionally hilarious statement about the awsome changes they made to help basic Marines and GK compete in the current meta because they write rules like a spastic chimp with the self awareness of frog spawn.
I also expect this thread to wind up as 20+ pages of such utter bile directed at GW and 40k that any new player who comes here looking for advice and reads through it will come away convinced that they're much better off going back to WoW or LoL or whatever they were doing before the cool plastic mens caught their attention.
I too expect more nerfs to marines.
Gman goes to 450 points.Calgar goes to 240. Orbital bombardment gets rewritten to also provide a 5+ FNP to the units it hits as another level of randomness to bypass. Drop pod goes down 5 points (still unplayable)
Terminators/deathwing kinda need some help. I'd like to run a full deathwing army but terminators and the LR are not in the best place right now. Some points costs need to be shifted around or something. I never see anyone take that cool looking glaive. I like the idea of an elite army like that, but reducing points costs per model means a larger numerous army...which isn't what I really want. I'm not experienced enough at the game to really say what the best course is.
1) 6 new missions with progressive scoring, very similar to the GH2 missions.
2) Point increases to Dissie cannons, Grotesque and Talons.
3) Point increases to bananas.
4) Infantry squads to 5 points and Artemia nerfed into FW realm.
5) Point increase or squad cap decrease to hive guards.
6) Point increase to Gallant. Point increase to Castellan OR nerf to Cawl's Wrath.
7) A huge load of small point reductions to all the stuff that doesn't get used.
I'm quite curious to see if this rumored gift to marines is really going to happen or not.
Thargrim wrote: Terminators/deathwing kinda need some help. I'd like to run a full deathwing army but terminators and the LR are not in the best place right now. Some points costs need to be shifted around or something. I never see anyone take that cool looking glaive. I like the idea of an elite army like that, but reducing points costs per model means a larger numerous army...which isn't what I really want. I'm not experienced enough at the game to really say what the best course is.
Yeah. To be competitive without any rules changes Marines need a 20%-25% cost reduction over the entire faction, and that's not what I think any marine player actually wants. On the other hand, to feel like they're actually worth 13 points the basic Marine profile needs to be vastly tougher than it actually is. Like, T5 and a 2+ 5+++ save levels of tougher. And possibly A2. And to justify the premium Space Marines pay over Guard for any given weapon system they would need the ability to ignore penalties to hit for moving built into the basic army-wide rules. And a significant number of their strategems are based on taking three of something that is hard to justify taking at all.
1) 6 new missions with progressive scoring, very similar to the GH2 missions.
2) Point increases to Dissie cannons, Grotesque and Talons.
3) Point increases to bananas.
4) Infantry squads to 5 points and Artemia nerfed into FW realm.
5) Point increase or squad cap decrease to hive guards.
6) Point increase to Gallant. Point increase to Castellan OR nerf to Cawl's Wrath.
7) A huge load of small point reductions to all the stuff that doesn't get used.
I'm quite curious to see if this rumored gift to marines is really going to happen or not.
if the points increase Custodes that'll kill the army. custodes actually need some minor point decreases on most of their units, although yeah Jetbike CAPTAINS need to go up a bit
It’s an annual rules update, with points changes, new missions and new rules content. It’s both GW’s way of changing up the meta and providing something new, and their way of extorting £15 a year from each player. ;-)
In all seriousness, we really enjoy the missions from last year’s, but I’ll never use the Land Raider design rules. Nor will I use the beta Sisters of Battle Codex in this year’s.
JohnnyHell wrote: and their way of extorting £15 a year from each player. ;-)
haha yes, the cynic in me can't help but think this is one of the main reasons!
I assume then, the Chapter Approved 2018 would replace the 2017 version in terms of point value updates? Or would you need them both?
No-one knows. The Generals Handbook apparently reprints all points each year, whereas CA2017 only published changes. Hopefully they’ll adopt the former but until the book is out (or described on WHC) we won’t know.
JohnnyHell wrote: and their way of extorting £15 a year from each player. ;-)
haha yes, the cynic in me can't help but think this is one of the main reasons!
I assume then, the Chapter Approved 2018 would replace the 2017 version in terms of point value updates? Or would you need them both?
No-one knows. The Generals Handbook apparently reprints all points each year, whereas CA2017 only published changes. Hopefully they’ll adopt the former but until the book is out (or described on WHC) we won’t know.
Thanks for your replies man, really appreciate it, one last question before I stop derailing this thread (sorry all!) did CA2017 make any points changes to Grey Knights? I have built my Army from the codex, I am now worried that it's not going to be acurate points wise :(
EDIT: Nevermind I found out, terminators dropped from 46 to 41 points per model. Argh! Guess I need to paint up another model then, or maybe just wait until CA2018.
Anyway to give an on topic reply I guess GK could see some further points reduction.
meleti wrote: It’s impossible to know if GW considers non-meta units to be balanced and just held down by how good the meta is, or if they will actually target over costed and under performing units.
They could buff GK, Tactical squads, Crisis suits, Thinos, etc. Or they could just as easily hit Castellans, Gallants, Ravagers, Daemon Princes, Riptides, etc. and leave the other stuff mostly unchanged.
Two criterias for price hike:
a) unit is seen more than others whether it's because it's brokenly good or least sucky unit out of sucky units
b) model is resin.
Space Wolves see everything go up in points because they didn't do enough to make us buy more wulfen and throw away our TWC.
Seriously though, TWC need a points decrease, advance and charge, or something that helps them self preserve. They're pretty okay as is, but they have no niche. WG bikers cost less per model, are quicker, and insane against horde. Wulfen knock the tar out of things in CC with hammers.
-
For an actual prediction: Stormwolf and Stormfang possibly going up in points. More specifically the Stormwolf since the Wulfen + Priest bomb is pretty much the nastiest thing we can put in it. halfyourarmy
Wolf Scouts finally becoming troops.
Bloodclaws getting a point decrease since they're absolutely terrible in comparison to Grey Hunters in any scenario.
Wulfen going down in price again, just maybe.
TWCHQs going down in price. They're very expensive for what they do. T5 and 7 wounds is not worth 20 points over a biker lord with one wound less, doing the same number of attacks and moving quicker. Maybe that's why they indexed our bike units, to force us into TWC in 9th.
As a pure Custodes player, I'll chip in with what I personally think would help Custodes to be a mono faction that doesn't rely on jet bikes.
Allarus Terminators:
Make them 4++ to begin rather than 5++
Make their grenade launcher D6 shots but -2AP
If these buffs aren't applied, then their cost should be reduced by 8-10pts.
Venerable Contemptor Dread:
2+ Armour Save
Affected by the custodians +1 to invulnerable in a mono detachment
The ability to take other weapon options that Relic Contemptor dreads can
If these buffs are applied, then a points will increase with weapon options. If not, then a reduction of 15pts is needed.
Custodian Wardens:
Reduce points cost by 4-5pts
Venerable Land Raider:
Needs the ability to be another land raider type than the standard one (FW ones not applicable)
Reduction of points depending on type chosen, but base venerable land raider should be at least 30pts cheaper.
All Custodes:
All spear/axe weapons are Assault 2. Helps alleviate Custodes crippling lack of fire power on troop models.
Sentinel blade will stay pistol 2, but should be 2D like spear weapons.
Cost reduction of the misericordia to 3pts
Dr. Mills wrote: As a pure Custodes player, I'll chip in with what I personally think would help Custodes to be a mono faction that doesn't rely on jet bikes.
Allarus Terminators:
Make them 4++ to begin rather than 5++
Make their grenade launcher D6 shots but -2AP
If these buffs aren't applied, then their cost should be reduced by 8-10pts.
Venerable Contemptor Dread:
2+ Armour Save
Affected by the custodians +1 to invulnerable in a mono detachment
The ability to take other weapon options that Relic Contemptor dreads can
If these buffs are applied, then a points will increase with weapon options. If not, then a reduction of 15pts is needed.
Custodian Wardens:
Reduce points cost by 4-5pts
Venerable Land Raider:
Needs the ability to be another land raider type than the standard one (FW ones not applicable)
Reduction of points depending on type chosen, but base venerable land raider should be at least 30pts cheaper.
All Custodes:
All spear/axe weapons are Assault 2. Helps alleviate Custodes crippling lack of fire power on troop models.
Sentinel blade will stay pistol 2, but should be 2D like spear weapons.
Cost reduction of the misericordia to 3pts
Main issue I have with Wardens is they really don't have a niche. I really struggle to find a use case for them, when alternatively I could take regular Custodian Guards and fill out Troop slots instead.
I think they need something unique to make them stand out (more than just access to axes).
One possibility is to have them be the dualist specialists of the army, and give them a parry ability - basically -1 to hit them in the Fight Phase.
Dr. Mills wrote: As a pure Custodes player, I'll chip in with what I personally think would help Custodes to be a mono faction that doesn't rely on jet bikes.
Allarus Terminators:
Make them 4++ to begin rather than 5++
Make their grenade launcher D6 shots but -2AP
If these buffs aren't applied, then their cost should be reduced by 8-10pts.
Venerable Contemptor Dread:
2+ Armour Save
Affected by the custodians +1 to invulnerable in a mono detachment
The ability to take other weapon options that Relic Contemptor dreads can
If these buffs are applied, then a points will increase with weapon options. If not, then a reduction of 15pts is needed.
Custodian Wardens:
Reduce points cost by 4-5pts
Venerable Land Raider:
Needs the ability to be another land raider type than the standard one (FW ones not applicable)
Reduction of points depending on type chosen, but base venerable land raider should be at least 30pts cheaper.
All Custodes:
All spear/axe weapons are Assault 2. Helps alleviate Custodes crippling lack of fire power on troop models.
Sentinel blade will stay pistol 2, but should be 2D like spear weapons.
Cost reduction of the misericordia to 3pts
Al of this changes are sensible and very needed, specially for the terminators that have literally no use compared with Jetbikes.
Points Decrease - Hopefully most of the FW stuff to make it playable again.
Haha. They were specifically increased to make them UNplayable. GW isn't going to reverse that. They are happy selling those for collectors but gamers they want to spend same money into plastic instead.
Personally I'd love to see the Khorne FW stuff get decrease in points. Blood Slaughterer, Kytan Ravager, Arch Daemon all down. I'd also like to see something done about the Decimators melee arms, something like what dreadnoughts get where the second arm is reduced if they're both melee because +94 points for mediocre melee is way to expensive. I'd also like to see something for Terminators to make them playable, and of course land raider points drop.
For nerfs I'd love to see Papa Smurf get stats change to 10 wounds and Castellan points go up. I'd also like something for shining Spears, diss cannons, grotesque.
chimeara wrote: Personally I'd love to see the Khorne FW stuff get decrease in points. Blood Slaughterer, Kytan Ravager, Arch Daemon all down. I'd also like to see something done about the Decimators melee arms, something like what dreadnoughts get where the second arm is reduced if they're both melee because +94 points for mediocre melee is way to expensive. I'd also like to see something for Terminators to make them playable, and of course land raider points drop.
For nerfs I'd love to see Papa Smurf get stats change to 10 wounds and Castellan points go up. I'd also like something for shining Spears, diss cannons, grotesque.
Why just the Khorne Stuff?
Why not first decrease the points of lists like DKoK, R&H, Elysians, Eldar Corsairs?
Those are all even less playable. Not to mention other daemon engines and especially questionable are the Helltalons and Hellblades.
hobojebus wrote: I expect they'll disappoint us all again, add another nerf to melee
And kick ynnari players again while they are down.
Anyone expecting a magical document that suddenly solves every issue we have with the game deserves to be disappointed frankly!
They aren't going to touch soup, at best there'll be minor CP tweaks. They aren't going to make sweeping reforms to how elite infantry perform.
We'll get some tweaks. Hopefully a few units we like but that underperform will be better than they were. Hopefully the strongest units in the competitive scene will get reigned in a little.
chimeara wrote: Personally I'd love to see the Khorne FW stuff get decrease in points. Blood Slaughterer, Kytan Ravager, Arch Daemon all down. I'd also like to see something done about the Decimators melee arms, something like what dreadnoughts get where the second arm is reduced if they're both melee because +94 points for mediocre melee is way to expensive. I'd also like to see something for Terminators to make them playable, and of course land raider points drop.
For nerfs I'd love to see Papa Smurf get stats change to 10 wounds and Castellan points go up. I'd also like something for shining Spears, diss cannons, grotesque.
Why just the Khorne Stuff?
Why not first decrease the points of lists like DKoK, R&H, Elysians, Eldar Corsairs?
Those are all even less playable. Not to mention other daemon engines and especially questionable are the Helltalons and Hellblades.
Because that's what would affect me the most. I'm being selfish lol.
Honestly though, I'd like to see some semblance of a reversal to the points increase to the FW stuff. While simultaneously decrease the stuff that needs it but didn't get touched last year. Most of the Daemon engines are overpriced, chaos planes are overpriced arch daemons are grossly overpriced, heck I'd even like to see standard greater daemons get a reduction.
I only expect points changes and maybe also some Stratagems points changes.
DE will probably get a little point increase. and generally Eldars.
GK needs a buff.
SM a small point decrease in some units ( Sm is my army, would like to see an improve for Terminator but there we need rules change for them). More things but I don`t want to be another SM player crying.
IK will see a smal points increase.
Necrons point decrease of some units.
And for the rest of factions some small point changes.
I really would like to see in this CA a big balance but, we know GW will do something good and something bad. I still have hope.
The Newman wrote: I fully expect GW to continue proving that they don't have a single clue what they're doing.
I'm hoping that they'll do something drastic to address what a terrible spot Marines are in, but I won't be a bit surprised if vanilla marines get nerfed down to GK levels and GK get rendered completely unplayable and GW puts out some sort of unintentionally hilarious statement about the awsome changes they made to help basic Marines and GK compete in the current meta because they write rules like a spastic chimp with the self awareness of frog spawn.
I also expect this thread to wind up as 20+ pages of such utter bile directed at GW and 40k that any new player who comes here looking for advice and reads through it will come away convinced that they're much better off going back to WoW or LoL or whatever they were doing before the cool plastic mens caught their attention.
My favourite part about this post is that it lacks self-awareness.
Everybody talks about SM, Custodes and stuff like that...
But has anyone noticed in what sorry state admech is currently?
I mean, you go Cawlstar gunline or GO HOME. Synodian dragoons are the other only options being SPAMMED to the max, yet most of the codex is utter
-2 Hq choices, canticles are complitely random, OR 2 CP/battleround (unless you cawl it)
- Reroll aura dominus ONLY in shooting
- Wound boost is non existant, only 1 relic with 18 inch range, for reroll wound rolls of 1 BUT FW specific
- you either go repairman or your warlord is useless
- Skitarii pay premium (7 or 8 pts for vanguard) for +1 BS and the 6++
- transport is non existent
- meelee choices are like paper, no meelee boost besides canticles
- Lack of overall synergy
- most of the codex, besides some unites are just plain MEH!!!
- Kastelan robot is must pick with Cawl, but if there is no cawl its utter MEH
- 2 CP + minimum 120 pts tax for trying to improve BS of the robots for 1 shooting to 3+
What do you guys think, is this ok? Or am I just being too negative?
New relics, warlord traits, strats for sisters and updated entries for some select models.
New missions - mainly progressive scoring and mixed objective/kill point ones.
Hopefully some new terrain guideline but I suspect not.
Perhaps some campaign tools - character advancement, mission reward table or something else along those lines.
Rules - Solidify all the beta rules, add new rule for not stacking negative hit modifiers or always hitting on 6s, add command point bonus for only using a single focuses faction keyword in your army. I.E. only Tau or BA or Catachan.
Unit rulespoints:
Give marine vehicles a chapter trait!!!!!
Droppods can DS on turn one.
Add an ability for all models with the terminator keyword to ignore the penalty for firing heavy weapons and using certain melee weapons. Plus perhaps reduce all damage taken by 1 to a minimum of 1.
Give all landraiders the ability to retreat from combat and still shoot or shoot whilst in combat.
Flamers and melta drop in points a little.
A raft or point drops for marines, too many to list.
Make it so chaos cultists/zombies/Tzaangors can't benefit from VotLW strat.
Change the Commissar moral rule....again!
Increase the cost of lots of cheap infantry - Guardsmen, cultists, kabalites etc... need to reduce the power of just fielding more bodies.
Increase cost of various Drukarii stuff - Dissi cannons, Grots, Talos and perhaps change the profets of flesh ability.
Slight increases to various eldar units.
Reduce the cost of loads of necron stuff
Reduce points on GK stuff and give them access to marine psychic powers.
Inquisition - not even mentioned :(
Tau Battlesuits reduced a bit in cost.
Big shooty knight increased in points.
Daemons given a few point reductions, hopefully to all the greater daemons.
Admech given some points drops
I suspect they will hit some of these and miss others but it'll be better than doing nothing.
4-6 pages of Grey Knight rules rewrites, errata and point changes. That is what I would like to get. But the way GW is acting it may as well be 2 pages of nothing. I have little faith in GW after the lack of a FAQ update for GK.
The Newman wrote: I fully expect GW to continue proving that they don't have a single clue what they're doing.
I'm hoping that they'll do something drastic to address what a terrible spot Marines are in, but I won't be a bit surprised if vanilla marines get nerfed down to GK levels and GK get rendered completely unplayable and GW puts out some sort of unintentionally hilarious statement about the awsome changes they made to help basic Marines and GK compete in the current meta because they write rules like a spastic chimp with the self awareness of frog spawn.
I also expect this thread to wind up as 20+ pages of such utter bile directed at GW and 40k that any new player who comes here looking for advice and reads through it will come away convinced that they're much better off going back to WoW or LoL or whatever they were doing before the cool plastic mens caught their attention.
My favourite part about this post is that it lacks self-awareness.
I invoke Poe's Law.
While I do sincerely hope GW addresses Space Marines and I don't have a lot of faith that GW recognizes just how much of a boost they actually need (or their ability fix it without breaking anything else), Chapter Approved and the FAQs are worlds away from the GW that published 5th edition when there were armies still limping along on their 3rd edition codexes.
WisdomLS wrote: New relics, warlord traits, strats for sisters and updated entries for some select models.
New missions - mainly progressive scoring and mixed objective/kill point ones.
Hopefully some new terrain guideline but I suspect not.
Perhaps some campaign tools - character advancement, mission reward table or something else along those lines.
Rules - Solidify all the beta rules, add new rule for not stacking negative hit modifiers or always hitting on 6s, add command point bonus for only using a single focuses faction keyword in your army. I.E. only Tau or BA or Catachan.
Unit rulespoints:
Give marine vehicles a chapter trait!!!!!
Droppods can DS on turn one.
Add an ability for all models with the terminator keyword to ignore the penalty for firing heavy weapons and using certain melee weapons. Plus perhaps reduce all damage taken by 1 to a minimum of 1.
Give all landraiders the ability to retreat from combat and still shoot or shoot whilst in combat.
Flamers and melta drop in points a little.
A raft or point drops for marines, too many to list.
Make it so chaos cultists/zombies/Tzaangors can't benefit from VotLW strat.
Change the Commissar moral rule....again!
Increase the cost of lots of cheap infantry - Guardsmen, cultists, kabalites etc... need to reduce the power of just fielding more bodies.
Increase cost of various Drukarii stuff - Dissi cannons, Grots, Talos and perhaps change the profets of flesh ability.
Slight increases to various eldar units.
Reduce the cost of loads of necron stuff
Reduce points on GK stuff and give them access to marine psychic powers.
Inquisition - not even mentioned :(
Tau Battlesuits reduced a bit in cost.
Big shooty knight increased in points.
Daemons given a few point reductions, hopefully to all the greater daemons.
Admech given some points drops
I suspect they will hit some of these and miss others but it'll be better than doing nothing.
Agree with the Chapter Tactics for SM vehicles. For what they cost we need it.
Primordus wrote:Everybody talks about SM, Custodes and stuff like that...
But has anyone noticed in what sorry state admech is currently?
I mean, you go Cawlstar gunline or GO HOME. Synodian dragoons are the other only options being SPAMMED to the max, yet most of the codex is utter
-2 Hq choices, canticles are complitely random, OR 2 CP/battleround (unless you cawl it)
- Reroll aura dominus ONLY in shooting
- Wound boost is non existant, only 1 relic with 18 inch range, for reroll wound rolls of 1 BUT FW specific
- you either go repairman or your warlord is useless
- Skitarii pay premium (7 or 8 pts for vanguard) for +1 BS and the 6++
- transport is non existent
- meelee choices are like paper, no meelee boost besides canticles
- Lack of overall synergy
- most of the codex, besides some unites are just plain MEH!!!
- Kastelan robot is must pick with Cawl, but if there is no cawl its utter MEH
- 2 CP + minimum 120 pts tax for trying to improve BS of the robots for 1 shooting to 3+
What do you guys think, is this ok? Or am I just being too negative?
I think admech needs help, but much like custodes they were designed with soup in mind. I actually think they are in a better place than custodes in that they do several different playstyles in the medium power level/local metas ( not much beyond cawl-lot though for tournaments admitadly, much like jetbike spam is custodes only option there for mono faction) personally I like what they have but they need some more models to really fill them out as a monofactions. I play both and actually like allying my mech with custodes, they compliment eachother well.
timetowaste85 wrote:CA is unnecessary if we have the digital edition, right? I have a digital CD book; I dont need to buy this at all, right?
its GW I doubt they will add it in to digital for free. I don't think they did in 2017, its the yearly way to squeeze out a few bucks in what could have been a erratta, but they do throw in new missions and some stuff that makes it worth it.
New relics, warlord traits, strats for sisters and updated entries for some select models.
New missions - mainly progressive scoring and mixed objective/kill point ones.
Hopefully some new terrain guideline but I suspect not.
Perhaps some campaign tools - character advancement, mission reward table or something else along those lines.
Rules - Solidify all the beta rules, add new rule for not stacking negative hit modifiers or always hitting on 6s, add command point bonus for only using a single focuses faction keyword in your army. I.E. only Tau or BA or Catachan.
Unit rulespoints:
Give marine vehicles a chapter trait!!!!!
Droppods can DS on turn one.
Add an ability for all models with the terminator keyword to ignore the penalty for firing heavy weapons and using certain melee weapons. Plus perhaps reduce all damage taken by 1 to a minimum of 1.
Give all landraiders the ability to retreat from combat and still shoot or shoot whilst in combat.
Flamers and melta drop in points a little.
A raft or point drops for marines, too many to list.
Make it so chaos cultists/zombies/Tzaangors can't benefit from VotLW strat.
Change the Commissar moral rule....again!
Increase the cost of lots of cheap infantry - Guardsmen, cultists, kabalites etc... need to reduce the power of just fielding more bodies.
Increase cost of various Drukarii stuff - Dissi cannons, Grots, Talos and perhaps change the profets of flesh ability.
Slight increases to various eldar units.
Reduce the cost of loads of necron stuff
Reduce points on GK stuff and give them access to marine psychic powers.
Inquisition - not even mentioned :(
Tau Battlesuits reduced a bit in cost.
Big shooty knight increased in points.
Daemons given a few point reductions, hopefully to all the greater daemons.
Admech given some points drops
I suspect they will hit some of these and miss others but it'll be better than doing nothing.
I agree with every single point, which probably means that none of them will be in CA...
What I hope we get and what we do get are completely different things, however, as a necron player I am really hoping for:
a 10%-20% point reduction across the board.
Fixing our random AT weapons to make them a tad more reliable.
Adding Quantum Shielding to Fliers
Adding a 4++ to monolith
Reducing the CP of Enhanced Reanimation Protocols, buffing Entropic Strike to be all attacks, and generally re-tooling our CP costs on some of our other less great stratagems.
Buff the ever loving hell out of Tesla Destructors, they literally serve no real purpose in our army.
DudleyGrim wrote: What I hope we get and what we do get are completely different things, however, as a necron player I am really hoping for:
a 10%-20% point reduction across the board.
Fixing our random AT weapons to make them a tad more reliable.
Adding Quantum Shielding to Fliers
Adding a 4++ to monolith
Reducing the CP of Enhanced Reanimation Protocols, buffing Entropic Strike to be all attacks, and generally re-tooling our CP costs on some of our other less great stratagems.
Buff the ever loving hell out of Tesla Destructors, they literally serve no real purpose in our army.
As far as point reductions go, a lot of stuff certainly needs it. Though some units, such as Wraiths and Tesseract Vaults are probably fine as is (probably Destroyers too).
Necrons certainly are very inconsistent with their anti-tank weapons, but maybe that was intended. Still, the most obvious outlier for terrible performance is the Death Ray (and Heat Ray too come to think of it) but again it might be intended to be an army weakness.
Quantum Shielding shouldn't be added to the fliers. They have issues, but survivability isn't one of them atm.
Monolith shouldn't have an invuln save. High AP weapons should be the answer to large armoured targets. The Monolith will probably remain hilariously unplayable.
I have no idea why Enhanced Reanimation Protocols costs 2 Command Points. I would be hesitant to even spend 1 CP on it. Entropic Strike is a weird one, as anything that lets you ignore invulns (such as Mortal Wounds) should be used very sparingly.
Tesla Destructors are the literal worst atm. Especially as they can have Tesla never trigger if they suffer any negatives to their to-hit rolls. It also makes the Annihilation Barge really bad at killing anything.
Overall though, I wouldn't expect any large changes to come with Chapter Approved. Maybe some points changes to a couple units, but nothing major. The main selling point they're sticking to is the new missions and beta Sisters codex. Doesn't really help the game, but it might sell more copies. We'll have to see though, as we don't really know for sure what the content even could be until we get closer to its release date.
The problem is there are so many minor tweaks needed that it's too much of an undertaking to make it worthwhile without a whole rewrite. It's never going to happen. If they just address the major problems, it would be a start.
Expecting a sweeping change to marines is just pure fantasy, it's not going to happen. You may get a points change for some weapons/vehicles/support units, but the basic marine is not going to change. It can't change, because you then have to basically redo the Codex....then Blood Angels, Dark Angels, and Space Wolves. No thank you. Dropping points on a meltagun or flamer is much easier to do, but I don't expect it to happen. GW seems to price the weapon on it's max potential rather than it's average result. See Eldar suncannon for example. It's not horribly overcosted if you roll a 12 for shots, but it is almost x2 expensive if you roll 7 or, heaven forbid, less.
Grey Knights points probably won't change much either, not without a new codex in which case they can start with boosting the base Attacks first, then address the terrible strategems, relics, traits etc. I don't see Grey Knights really improving too much without a complete codex overhaul.
Ynnari just need to be left alone and given their own codex. You just can't keep chipping away at them every FAQ/CA hoping for change.
The thing about Marines is GW could probably fix them with a minimum of individual unit tweaks.
Adding a 5+ FNP and Machine Spirit (or whatever the infantry equivalent is) as army-wide rules to go with ATSKNF and removing the restrictions on what Chapter Traits apply to would probably get Marines 90% of the way to where they need to be. They'd have to switch the Iron Hands chapter trait to a 6+ invuln because the current trait would be redundant.
From there it's just a handful of tweaks to obviously overpriced stuff like Centurions and Melta weapons.
While I'd like to see some points decreases across the board for my DA, what I'd like to see most is something to either rein in Soup or to level the playing field between Soup and mono-faction.
The most obvious solution to Soup would be a rule that states that a detachment's CP can only be spent on units from that detachment, or a little more generously on units that share the same army Keyword - to allow a Battalion's CP to be used in another detachment from the same codex. There would still be reasons to field Soup, but not as much.
Alternately, boost mono-faction armies in some way. The easiest thing would be to give a mono-faction army a bonus to CP - +5 seems obvious, since one can get +5 CP for fielding the Loyal 32. Alternate ideas would be bonuses to the roll to go first, rerolls during game (though players are going to build lists with auras that provide these), maybe even a strat or two available to mono-faction lists, but I think the bonus CP would be the the most effective way of leveling the playing field without materially changing the benefit Soup currently gives.
I really wish they would give Terminators no minus for moving and firing heavy weapons. If I deep strike a 500 odd point unit on to the battlefield to shoot 4 krak missiles (TURN 2 AT THE EARLIEST NOW) I'd expect them to be able to hit better than guardsmen.
The Newman wrote: The thing about Marines is GW could probably fix them with a minimum of individual unit tweaks.
Adding a 5+ FNP and Machine Spirit (or whatever the infantry equivalent is) as army-wide rules to go with ATSKNF and removing the restrictions on what Chapter Traits apply to would probably get Marines 90% of the way to where they need to be. They'd have to switch the Iron Hands chapter trait to a 6+ invuln because the current trait would be redundant.
The Newman wrote: Adding a 5+ FNP and Machine Spirit (or whatever the infantry equivalent is) as army-wide rules to go with ATSKNF and removing the restrictions on what Chapter Traits apply to would probably get Marines 90% of the way to where they need to be. They'd have to switch the Iron Hands chapter trait to a 6+ invuln because the current trait would be redundant.
It would also more than double the number of rolls you need to make for them defensively, and 6++ on a power armoured is already redundant (see any sisters of battle game).
All units already have split fire in 8th, unless you were thinking of no move and fire penalties?
The Newman wrote: Adding a 5+ FNP and Machine Spirit (or whatever the infantry equivalent is) as army-wide rules to go with ATSKNF and removing the restrictions on what Chapter Traits apply to would probably get Marines 90% of the way to where they need to be. They'd have to switch the Iron Hands chapter trait to a 6+ invuln because the current trait would be redundant.
It would also more than double the number of rolls you need to make for them defensively, and 6++ on a power armoured is already redundant (see any sisters of battle game).
All units already have split fire in 8th, unless you were thinking of no move and fire penalties?
Death Guard have to make FNP rolls for every wound and it doesn't seem to stop anyone from playing them.
No move and fire penalties is what Machine Spirit does.
You have a point about a 6++ though, there aren't that many AP4 weapons out there. Maybe a 5++ with a +1 (to a max of 3++) instead for units that have an invuln on their own?
Death Guard are also T5, have cheap access to always-on cover, much better special weapon selections, and Plague Weapons, all for 4 more points. And they exist in a faction with cheaper chaff and better psychic powers.
I expect:
- 6 SoB Warlord trait
- A number of SoB relics
- A higher number of SoB stratagems
- A rework of the Shield of Faith mechanics to make it less situational (currently only useful when shot with AP4 weapons and you are not in cover, and with psychic powers with PL5 that get passed on a roll of exactly 5 and then if you roll a 6).
- Maybe a rework to the Act of Faith mechanics to make it work on more models of the army and scale better. Currently only useful on Celestine, Seraphim and Retributors...
Oh, and I guess a bunch of special missions and special battlefields with random tables. You know the kind.
This maybe a stupid question, but when I asked at my store I just got laughed at. And my own expiriance with GW update is limited to 2017-2018. How often do GW fixs are something else then nerfs? Did in the past they buff units or made changes to old units/models to make them more useful without an edition change switching up things?
Karol wrote: This maybe a stupid question, but when I asked at my store I just got laughed at. And my own expiriance with GW update is limited to 2017-2018. How often do GW fixs are something else then nerfs? Did in the past they buff units or made changes to old units/models to make them more useful without an edition change switching up things?
Last ca cut the cost on some equipment and units, making them somewhat viable. Maybee you get lucky and they blanket shave the cost of your GK by 10%
Karol wrote: This maybe a stupid question, but when I asked at my store I just got laughed at. And my own expiriance with GW update is limited to 2017-2018. How often do GW fixs are something else then nerfs? Did in the past they buff units or made changes to old units/models to make them more useful without an edition change switching up things?
Broadly speaking GW have rarely done balance changes at all, usually only with codex releases. In the last CA they did buff some things minorly, but generally they dont do much for poorly performing units.
Karol wrote: This maybe a stupid question, but when I asked at my store I just got laughed at. And my own expiriance with GW update is limited to 2017-2018. How often do GW fixs are something else then nerfs? Did in the past they buff units or made changes to old units/models to make them more useful without an edition change switching up things?
GW trying to change points is a new thing with 8th.
Primordus wrote:Everybody talks about SM, Custodes and stuff like that...
But has anyone noticed in what sorry state admech is currently?
I mean, you go Cawlstar gunline or GO HOME. Synodian dragoons are the other only options being SPAMMED to the max, yet most of the codex is utter
-2 Hq choices, canticles are complitely random, OR 2 CP/battleround (unless you cawl it)
- Reroll aura dominus ONLY in shooting
- Wound boost is non existant, only 1 relic with 18 inch range, for reroll wound rolls of 1 BUT FW specific
- you either go repairman or your warlord is useless
- Skitarii pay premium (7 or 8 pts for vanguard) for +1 BS and the 6++
- transport is non existent
- meelee choices are like paper, no meelee boost besides canticles
- Lack of overall synergy
- most of the codex, besides some unites are just plain MEH!!!
- Kastelan robot is must pick with Cawl, but if there is no cawl its utter MEH
- 2 CP + minimum 120 pts tax for trying to improve BS of the robots for 1 shooting to 3+
What do you guys think, is this ok? Or am I just being too negative?
1. Agreed we need more. Still better then the index when we had 1! The only other character that could fit is the Datasmith but I wonder if the old 7th edition skitarii way of making the alphas characters could be implemented. Canticles aren't that bad but they do need a rework. don't know if it should just be abandoned for a single ability like the SM's know no fear (not saying that ability just a single one) or not, maybe something like the old skitarii ability were you could increase BS or WS at the cost of the other.
2. that is a huge bull%^#@ thing as well. Also it's only for the shooting phase so it does not work in overwatch.
3. Not a big deal but annoying. Also Ryza has a way of dealing with that (but only in the fight phase so....)
4. Agreed, a lot of the warlord traits are useless.
5. You are also paying for the weapons that are very useful on the whole.
6. Not anymore but still too limited.
7. Agreed but it is a shooting army so that's to be expected.
8+9+10+11. A big problem with the Ad Mech codex is that it was an early codex and therefore was trying to be similar to the 7th ed codex's by keeping the old formations relevant, creating stratagems to mimic them like elimination volley not realizing that the new edition would create a new meta game and that the old ways did not work anymore.
Thanks for the explaining guys. By the way the Paying for stuff thing is that like banter or actual thing, does GW really make units of factions bad, because they were good at some time in the past?
Karol wrote: Thanks for the explaining guys. By the way the Paying for stuff thing is that like banter or actual thing, does GW really make units of factions bad, because they were good at some time in the past?
Yes, but it's just because they don't realize how much different the unit is under the new rules.
Karol wrote: Thanks for the explaining guys. By the way the Paying for stuff thing is that like banter or actual thing, does GW really make units of factions bad, because they were good at some time in the past?
All to often if a unit is too strong at some point in the meta GW will over compensate by making that unit far too weak at a later date.
My guess is most balance adjustments will be in the form of price reductions, rather than points increases.
Establishing that balance is a game of relative value, you can improve armies with points reductions, and that pisses less people off than points increases.
Vaktathi wrote: Broadly speaking GW have rarely done balance changes at all, usually only with codex releases. In the last CA they did buff some things minorly, but generally they dont do much for poorly performing units.
There were some reasonable reductions of points in Chapter Approved. Arguably not enough - but then the meta was a bit weird given the number of available codexes and the churn. I feel three flavour soup dominance is much more locked in now.
It really comes down to effort. Expecting "Index 2.0" for every faction is setting yourself up for disappointment. I can't imagine there will be any faction specific special rules. I hope for something on soup but that is probably optimistic.
Points can however be altered relatively freely.
It wouldn't really be beyond the wit of man to get 2 people to run through each codex and identify units which are obviously terrible/too good. They can inform themselves either from looking at tournament data, or by building a relatively simple spreadsheet.
It does require GW to have a vague "baseline" which they compare to (and if this is the basic Marine at 13 points we have clearly moved far away from it) but again - that's not that difficult. It doesn't have to be perfect.
Karol wrote: Thanks for the explaining guys. By the way the Paying for stuff thing is that like banter or actual thing, does GW really make units of factions bad, because they were good at some time in the past?
Okay...lets see.
What were the most powerful units in 7th without taking into account synergy.
Wraithknights - probably best unit in 7th eddition - now it's one of the worst.
Windriders - easily the best troop choice - now they are middling on the lower end.
Riptides - Super OP. Practically indestructible. Now it's a little above average.
Stormsurges - Super OP - now they are in the above average category
Devastator centurions - Obvious best in slot choice for space marines (Melts even the most powerful foe without invo saves) - now obviously the worst unit in the entire game
Thunderwolves - OP a feth - now they seem to be...average?
Wolfen - Super OP - now...average?
Not seeing any consistency here. Maybe I am missing some units but I've gone over this again and again. It is completely random. They quite simply pull points out of a hat for most of this stuff. Without doing any math-hammer. Play-testing is a lie too. This gak was not play-tested.
Karol wrote: Thanks for the explaining guys. By the way the Paying for stuff thing is that like banter or actual thing, does GW really make units of factions bad, because they were good at some time in the past?
All to often if a unit is too strong at some point in the meta GW will over compensate by making that unit far too weak at a later date.
This basically. the WraithKnight, for example, was way too cheap in 7E and although all units were updated and 8E is a different system, it seems fairly obvious that GW "overcompensated" with its 8E points cost.
It's good that GW can identify an issued existed, but also frustrating when they go too far in the opposite direction. WKs went from "take at least 1 in EVERY tourney list" to "don't even bother taking one in a casual game" literally overnight.
Xenomancers wrote: Play-testing is a lie too. This gak was not play-tested.
I don't think I can agree with this. I do think they play-test, they just don't intentionally try to break the game over their knee like Bane with an aging vigilante, which WAAC players do. So the play testing they do does not root out the biggest issues in hard core competitive play, which is never the intent of GW for 40K to be played Which is a problem, sure, but I wouldn't say they don't play-test
Playtesting can result in weird results. If you have someone good playing GK or Necrons versus a non-optimised list played by someone who isn't that great its not obvious they are that bad - or at least not to the point where they need 10-20% point reductions as some have claimed here. Just because something is bad mathematically doesn't mean the dice always show that outcome.
With that said when a Centurion Dev with Las/Missile costs more than a Dreadnought with the same (ish) armament you have to wonder. Although arguably the Centurion shoots better (it can move, it ignores cover, the cent missile launcher is better etc) but its still 50+ points per wound in a world of mortal wounds and high AP multi-damage weapons.
I guess the problem is the design envelope doesn't really work. Give them say 6 wounds a model - and you are very close to the unit just being dreadnoughts but better.
The sky isn't falling. The game is pretty close to balanced right now.
Marines will see some love, and I would imagine so will Necrons. Other than that, you'll see minor points tweaks would be my guess. I believe Grey Knights will be singled out - they kind of have to be.
The only faction right now - the ONLY faction - that's unplayable is Grey Knights. Every other faction can be played and you can win games with it.
Dr. Mills wrote: As a pure Custodes player, I'll chip in with what I personally think would help Custodes to be a mono faction that doesn't rely on jet bikes.
Allarus Terminators:
Make them 4++ to begin rather than 5++
Make their grenade launcher D6 shots but -2AP
If these buffs aren't applied, then their cost should be reduced by 8-10pts.
Venerable Contemptor Dread:
2+ Armour Save
Affected by the custodians +1 to invulnerable in a mono detachment
The ability to take other weapon options that Relic Contemptor dreads can
If these buffs are applied, then a points will increase with weapon options. If not, then a reduction of 15pts is needed.
Custodian Wardens:
Reduce points cost by 4-5pts
Venerable Land Raider:
Needs the ability to be another land raider type than the standard one (FW ones not applicable)
Reduction of points depending on type chosen, but base venerable land raider should be at least 30pts cheaper.
All Custodes:
All spear/axe weapons are Assault 2. Helps alleviate Custodes crippling lack of fire power on troop models.
Sentinel blade will stay pistol 2, but should be 2D like spear weapons.
Cost reduction of the misericordia to 3pts
Main issue I have with Wardens is they really don't have a niche. I really struggle to find a use case for them, when alternatively I could take regular Custodian Guards and fill out Troop slots instead.
1) 6 new missions with progressive scoring, very similar to the GH2 missions.
2) Point increases to Dissie cannons, Grotesque and Talons.
3) Point increases to bananas.
4) Infantry squads to 5 points and Artemia nerfed into FW realm.
5) Point increase or squad cap decrease to hive guards.
6) Point increase to Gallant. Point increase to Castellan OR nerf to Cawl's Wrath.
7) A huge load of small point reductions to all the stuff that doesn't get used.
I'm quite curious to see if this rumored gift to marines is really going to happen or not.
Don't forget that a significant portion of this book will be the SoB beta codex.
Dr. Mills wrote: As a pure Custodes player, I'll chip in with what I personally think would help Custodes to be a mono faction that doesn't rely on jet bikes.
Allarus Terminators:
Make them 4++ to begin rather than 5++
Make their grenade launcher D6 shots but -2AP
If these buffs aren't applied, then their cost should be reduced by 8-10pts.
Venerable Contemptor Dread:
2+ Armour Save
Affected by the custodians +1 to invulnerable in a mono detachment
The ability to take other weapon options that Relic Contemptor dreads can
If these buffs are applied, then a points will increase with weapon options. If not, then a reduction of 15pts is needed.
Custodian Wardens:
Reduce points cost by 4-5pts
Venerable Land Raider:
Needs the ability to be another land raider type than the standard one (FW ones not applicable)
Reduction of points depending on type chosen, but base venerable land raider should be at least 30pts cheaper.
All Custodes:
All spear/axe weapons are Assault 2. Helps alleviate Custodes crippling lack of fire power on troop models.
Sentinel blade will stay pistol 2, but should be 2D like spear weapons.
Cost reduction of the misericordia to 3pts
Main issue I have with Wardens is they really don't have a niche. I really struggle to find a use case for them, when alternatively I could take regular Custodian Guards and fill out Troop slots instead.
Guardians have access to Castellan Axes?
They don't - Stux was pointing out (rightly I might add) that Custodian wardens are in a bad position within the internal balance of the codex.
They have the option to take either spears or axes, and have misericordias included with a 6+++ save, and that's it.
They struggle to make an impact as they are in essance guardian squads with a misericordia and 6+++.You'll be better off taking cheaper guardian squads than wardens. They either need a small points decrease of 4-6pts to make them worthwhile to use, or an increase in stats such as a 5+++ save, 4 wounds and 4 attacks, they are elites, and as such need better baseline stats to show it.
Karol wrote: Thanks for the explaining guys. By the way the Paying for stuff thing is that like banter or actual thing, does GW really make units of factions bad, because they were good at some time in the past?
Okay...lets see.
What were the most powerful units in 7th without taking into account synergy.
Wraithknights - probably best unit in 7th eddition - now it's one of the worst.
Windriders - easily the best troop choice - now they are middling on the lower end.
Riptides - Super OP. Practically indestructible. Now it's a little above average.
Stormsurges - Super OP - now they are in the above average category
Devastator centurions - Obvious best in slot choice for space marines (Melts even the most powerful foe without invo saves) - now obviously the worst unit in the entire game
Thunderwolves - OP a feth - now they seem to be...average?
Wolfen - Super OP - now...average?
Not seeing any consistency here. Maybe I am missing some units but I've gone over this again and again. It is completely random. They quite simply pull points out of a hat for most of this stuff. Without doing any math-hammer. Play-testing is a lie too. This gak was not play-tested.
Dr. Mills wrote: As a pure Custodes player, I'll chip in with what I personally think would help Custodes to be a mono faction that doesn't rely on jet bikes.
Allarus Terminators:
Make them 4++ to begin rather than 5++
Make their grenade launcher D6 shots but -2AP
If these buffs aren't applied, then their cost should be reduced by 8-10pts.
Venerable Contemptor Dread:
2+ Armour Save
Affected by the custodians +1 to invulnerable in a mono detachment
The ability to take other weapon options that Relic Contemptor dreads can
If these buffs are applied, then a points will increase with weapon options. If not, then a reduction of 15pts is needed.
Custodian Wardens:
Reduce points cost by 4-5pts
Venerable Land Raider:
Needs the ability to be another land raider type than the standard one (FW ones not applicable)
Reduction of points depending on type chosen, but base venerable land raider should be at least 30pts cheaper.
All Custodes:
All spear/axe weapons are Assault 2. Helps alleviate Custodes crippling lack of fire power on troop models.
Sentinel blade will stay pistol 2, but should be 2D like spear weapons.
Cost reduction of the misericordia to 3pts
Main issue I have with Wardens is they really don't have a niche. I really struggle to find a use case for them, when alternatively I could take regular Custodian Guards and fill out Troop slots instead.
Guardians have access to Castellan Axes?
They don't - Stux was pointing out (rightly I might add) that Custodian wardens are in a bad position within the internal balance of the codex.
They have the option to take either spears or axes, and have misericordias included with a 6+++ save, and that's it.
They struggle to make an impact as they are in essance guardian squads with a misericordia and 6+++.You'll be better off taking cheaper guardian squads than wardens. They either need a small points decrease of 4-6pts to make them worthwhile to use, or an increase in stats such as a 5+++ save, 4 wounds and 4 attacks, they are elites, and as such need better baseline stats to show it.
Every time I play against a custodian list, I do tend to whittle them down by the end of turn 5, stealing the game from them.
But it is literally mentally exhausting for me. 2+/3++ all god emperor day. I've just quit playing against anyone with the golden men. It's not fun.
timetowaste85 wrote:CA is unnecessary if we have the digital edition, right? I have a digital CD book; I dont need to buy this at all, right?
its GW I doubt they will add it in to digital for free. I don't think they did in 2017, its the yearly way to squeeze out a few bucks in what could have been a erratta, but they do throw in new missions and some stuff that makes it worth it.
They did. Points costs are adjusted in the enhanced edition, though they take a few weeks to update.
I don't think I can agree with this. I do think they play-test, they just don't intentionally try to break the game over their knee like Bane with an aging vigilante, which WAAC players do.
So the play testing they do does not root out the biggest issues in hard core competitive play, which is never the intent of GW for 40K to be played
Which is a problem, sure, but I wouldn't say they don't play-test
Still doesn't expalin why they let something like the GK codex be made. Even in a super casual setting they suck. A primaris army using DW rules can walk over a GK army, and it is not like DW are the pinacle of power. At the same time, if they weren't planning to break the meta, how can one explain stuff like super point efficient ravellans or anything eldar in Inari, or the ++4 DE stuff. How the hell did GW come to the idea that a unit of dark reapers, soul bursting from another unit of dark reapers is ok, but giving a normal smite to a GK unit is too OP? I understand missing some rule interactions or some tournament packs making a unit super efficient. But one just has to look how much a unit of shining spears cost and how much a unit of even regular termintors cost to be mind blown.
It's good that GW can identify an issued existed, but also frustrating when they go too far in the opposite direction. WKs went from "take at least 1 in EVERY tourney list" to "don't even bother taking one in a casual game" literally overnight.
What was the Grey Knights OP stuff in 7th ed? Was it the interceptors or something like that?
It wouldn't really be beyond the wit of man to get 2 people to run through each codex and identify units which are obviously terrible/too good. They can inform themselves either from looking at tournament data, or by building a relatively simple spreadsheet.
Ok, but then they come to an army like GK, no one plays GK at tournaments, so there is no data to check what is being and what is not being used. So they leave it as it is. I wish GW did something like real designers talk about new codex, and not the we wanted them to feel special-and-look at the new models etc Like stuff when the codex designer shows how he thinks the army should work, shows combos, outside and inside codex synergies. This way people would know what the designers goal was, and if he happens to miss something , they can ask questions about it AND those could be easilly cleared up in a FAQ or a CA.
With GK right now, I don't even know what questions could be asked other then, what were you drinking while you copy pasted the index or something like that.
From what I have been told the tester for the GK codex just insulted all GK players, told them that they use the wrong units, play the wrong way and his way of playing GK made no sense when comparing to what other armies were playing at the time or right now. And those dudes have to know stuff 3-6 months in advance with how printing and codex supply works.
== wrote:[== 765760 10202450 null]I think the problem with play testing is the fox guarding the hen house now. Some armies keep coming in underneath the radar like Ynnari.
That's mostly because the Ynnari core concept of breaking the action economy is so powerful that even repeated attempts to tone it down aren't enough.
Cephalobeard wrote: I hope they make Tzeentch playable again, so I'm not paying for the Sins of Brimstone horrors for an entire edition.
Pink horrors are great though. 30 man bobs pump out 90 easily buff-able shots. Plus they all have 4++ saves.
Really - nothing tzeentch is bad. LOC is very good when you buff him as your warlord. Burning chariots are good too. What is your complaint?
Honest question Xeno: Do you believe nothing in this game is as bad as the various Adeptus Astartes factions? I've seen you say that Reanimation Protocols is actually a good rule, and now I see you claim that the Lord of Change is "very good". These are things you can only say with a fundamental lack of understanding for armies other than your own.
Cephalobeard wrote: I hope they make Tzeentch playable again, so I'm not paying for the Sins of Brimstone horrors for an entire edition.
Pink horrors are great though. 30 man bobs pump out 90 easily buff-able shots. Plus they all have 4++ saves.
Really - nothing tzeentch is bad. LOC is very good when you buff him as your warlord. Burning chariots are good too. What is your complaint?
Honest question Xeno: Do you believe nothing in this game is as bad as the various Adeptus Astartes factions? I've seen you say that Reanimation Protocols is actually a good rule, and now I see you claim that the Lord of Change is "very good". These are things you can only say with a fundamental lack of understanding for armies other than your own.
Yeah... RP is a good rule on paper and in small games it can border on OP.. but practically any opponent who doesn't know or doesn't have the ability to wipe out and focus a unit/s down each turn has bigger problems than facing Necrons.
== wrote:[== 765760 10202450 null]I think the problem with play testing is the fox guarding the hen house now. Some armies keep coming in underneath the radar like Ynnari.
Playtesters don't have limitless models or time. They likely do what they can.
Additionally, things have come out at break neck speed. They're almost done with monthly codex releases and we can settle in and get a real perspective of the game.
This next CA is a good opportunity for GW to start tying up loose ends.
The playtesters themselves aren't the be all end all of the playtesting process; it's difficult to realistically claim that "the foxes are guarding the henhouse" when Reece himself has some very strong, negative opinions on many of the top lists out there right now. This is a guy who stubbornly goes to tournaments with tier 2 lists because he just doesn't enjoy hopping to and from whatever the current Frankensteined hotness is.
Sometimes, the playtesters don't have the time to test a specific problem and it gets through. Sometimes, the playtesters note a problem (not even necessarily a balance problem, it could be an actual glitch in the way the game works) and their calls for change go unanswered because the developers run out of time before the publishing date, or the developers decide it isn't as much of a problem as the playtesters think it is, or a whole host of other reasons. It's incredibly simplistic to place the blame at the feet of the playtesters for any balance issues because the final decision of what gets published is completely out of their hands.
Honest question Xeno: Do you believe nothing in this game is as bad as the various Adeptus Astartes factions? I've seen you say that Reanimation Protocols is actually a good rule, and now I see you claim that the Lord of Change is "very good". These are things you can only say with a fundamental lack of understanding for armies other than your own.
The LoC isn't terrible. +4 smite/gateway is pretty neat, but it doesn't have enough spells to be flexible.
And as usual it gets shot off by the big toys and is a wee bit too high in points, but it's not like it needs to drop by half.
Arachnofiend wrote: The playtesters themselves aren't the be all end all of the playtesting process; it's difficult to realistically claim that "the foxes are guarding the henhouse" when Reece himself has some very strong, negative opinions on many of the top lists out there right now. This is a guy who stubbornly goes to tournaments with tier 2 lists because he just doesn't enjoy hopping to and from whatever the current Frankensteined hotness is.
Sometimes, the playtesters don't have the time to test a specific problem and it gets through. Sometimes, the playtesters note a problem (not even necessarily a balance problem, it could be an actual glitch in the way the game works) and their calls for change go unanswered because the developers run out of time before the publishing date, or the developers decide it isn't as much of a problem as the playtesters think it is, or a whole host of other reasons. It's incredibly simplistic to place the blame at the feet of the playtesters for any balance issues because the final decision of what gets published is completely out of their hands.
With how fast things have come out, this has to be a huge issue. To debug 40k completely would likely take months, if not a year and that would require it to be static. That means no new models, rules, releases or any other changes till we had one massive patch. There are things that GW could do a bit better like more beta rule release like sisters are getting before the final book but balancing the behemoth that is 40k is a tough task.
Cephalobeard wrote: I hope they make Tzeentch playable again, so I'm not paying for the Sins of Brimstone horrors for an entire edition.
Pink horrors are great though. 30 man bobs pump out 90 easily buff-able shots. Plus they all have 4++ saves.
Really - nothing tzeentch is bad. LOC is very good when you buff him as your warlord. Burning chariots are good too. What is your complaint?
Honest question Xeno: Do you believe nothing in this game is as bad as the various Adeptus Astartes factions? I've seen you say that Reanimation Protocols is actually a good rule, and now I see you claim that the Lord of Change is "very good". These are things you can only say with a fundamental lack of understanding for armies other than your own.
Yeah... RP is a good rule on paper and in small games it can border on OP.. but practically any opponent who doesn't know or doesn't have the ability to wipe out and focus a unit/s down each turn has bigger problems than facing Necrons.
Knowing is half the battle. You still have to finish off the units. Opponent starts out strong in a shooting phase but then starts rolling blanks. Wow - you basically just lost a turn. How could you say that isn't powerful? It might only happen 1 out of 5 games - but it does happen. When it happens you probably win.
== wrote:[== 765760 10202450 null]I think the problem with play testing is the fox guarding the hen house now. Some armies keep coming in underneath the radar like Ynnari.
I hate Ynnari and don't own a single space elf, but this is wrong. Ynnari have gotten repeatedly struck by the nerfbat pretty much from the first FAQ onward. It's not them slipping under the radar, it's that they fundamentally break the game such that 3+ major nerfs still haven't kept them off of top tables. As Nick Nanavati pointed out, they essentially start with 25+ CP just by existing due to all the free actions that normally cost 2-3CP. That's hard to balance correctly, if it's even possible.
Also would people give the play tester conspiracy thing a rest already? It's a tired meme at this point and no one has given anything even resembling convincing proof of it existing.
Leviathan Dread - Points increase (I hope not, but it's almost certain to happen I think)
Dawneagle jetbikes - Same cost
Dawneagle captain - 1 per detachment restriction
Allarus - Point decrease
Chainfist - Point decrease (I so desperately want a reason to field these so this is a pure wishlist item)
Terminators - Point decrease
Land Raider - Point decrease
As a tangent, I wonder if reroll saves of 1 for Terminators would give them the boost they need to be viable. It would make them almost impervious to small arms fire, make them die slower to AP-1/-2, and still leaves them vulnerable to AP -3 so they maintain a weakness.
Okay, I'm wishlisting here, but these are the things I'd like to see in CA2018 for the armies I play. I know that many/most of them probably won't happen this way, but it's actually fun to speculate.
Dark Angels (many of these would be good on Marines in general):
-Basic non-Primaris Marine bodies (Tacticals, Assault, Devastators) reduced to 11 points per model. Honestly, Assault Marines would probably still totally suck balls, but at least Tacticals might be viable as an alternative to Scouts.
-Scouts reduced to 10 points per model. Sniper Rifles reduced to 2 points. Camo Cloaks reduced to 1 point per model.
-Make Assault Marines have 2 attacks base. They are still 1 wound models and so would not totally step on the toes of Primaris Reivers or Inceptors.
-Reduce the costs of most of the special and heavy weapon options. Plasma is probably okay as is, but Flamers should cost 5, Meltaguns should be 10, Grav should also be 10 as it is weaker than Plasma. Grav-cannons should be 20 rather than the ludicrous 28 they currently are. They should also bring back the Grav-amp rerolls for the cannons to make them viable. Multi-melta should only cost like 15. Missile Launcher and Lascannon are probably okay as they are, but could come down to 20 without seriously breaking the game. Heavy Bolter is fine the way it is. Plasma Cannon should be slightly cheaper due to having variable number of shots.
-Get rid of the higher costs of special Primaris weapons on Intercessors and Hellblasters. Auto bolt rifles and stalkers should cost the same as the normal ones; ditto for the assault/heavy plasma incinerators. Stalker Bolt Rifles should also have a Sniper type rule (Mortal wounds on 6's to wound) or be increased to Heavy 2.
-Vehicles need to get access to Grim Resolve (or other Chapter Tactics in the case of vanilla marines). Every other army's traits affect all of their units pretty much, so why not Marines?
-Deathwing Terminators (indeed, all terminators in the game currently) need a special rule that says all incoming damage is reduced by 1 to a minimum of 1. This would make them less susceptible to being blinked out by autocannons, overcharged plasma, etc. They could probably use a points drop as well.
-Drop Pods should have to abide by the 9" rule, but their cargo should be able to get closer. This would give them a niche and might make them playable.
-A lot of stuff I haven't already mentioned need points drops too, notably Land Speeders, Attack Bikes, and Land Raiders. None of these are anywhere close to durable enough for their points, and for the first two, if they move they gimp their shooting, so they don't have the firepower to make up for their lack of durability.
Chaos Space Marines:
-Basic CSM squads reduced to 11 points per model, just like their loyalist counterparts need. They also need all of the same weapon price reductions. There's a reason you always see Cultists rather than Marines in competitive Chaos lists.
-Raptors and Warp Talons need both a price drop and to go to 2 attacks base.
-Possessed need either a built-in FnP type save, or a price drop, or both. They aren't terrible as is, but they lack a niche (Berzerkers are pretty much always better).
-Just like loyalists, the Legion Traits should apply to all units, not just certain ones. That might help make things like Predators and Forgefiends better in an Alpha Legion list, and would make Maulerfiends scary in a World Eaters or Renegades list (just to name some examples).
-Also like loyalists, a lot of units are overpriced, notably the Dinobots and Mutilators.
-Daemon Princes should probably get the same god allegiance rules as their Codex: Chaos Daemons counterparts (Unstoppable Ferocity for Khorne, Disgustingly Resilient for Nurgle, etc.). Perhaps even things like Possessed and Warp Talons should get these abilities as well.
Tau Empire:
-Crisis Suits need at least a 15 points reduction in the base cost, along with a reduction is cost for most if not all of their weapons. I think a good way to do this would be to give each weapon 2 costs: one for regular Crisis suits, another for Commanders. Similar to how many of the Support Systems cost different amounts depending on what is equipped with it.
-Stormsurge needs a price drop, or it needs the Battlesuit keyword so that Drones can protect it. I'd be okay with Savior Protocols requiring a 4+ instead of a 2+ for a Stormsurge (because it's big and hard to cover). What I'd love to see for a Surge is a new Stratagem for 2 or 3 CP that lets it shoot twice if it is anchored, but that's not going to happen.
-The Hammerhead's railgun needs to be 2d6 damage, or 4d3, or something. It's just so pathetic right now. Even just being flat 6 damage would be decent. Ion Cannon is both better AND cheaper, and that's a problem (here's hoping they don't increase the cost of Ion Cannons to compensate...).
-Pathfinders need a built-in -1 to be hit or something, as they are currently just too squishy to be good. It doesn't help that Markerlights in general are kind of meh.
-The Ghostkeel's stealth drones need a Character-like rule, as currently it's way too easy to just swat them and get rid of the suit's protection. Indeed, a lot of the drones typically taken singly (Pulse Accelerator, Grav-inhibitor, Guardian, Shadowsun's special ones) need this.
Imperial Knights:
-Castellan probably does need a points increase, but not a huge one. The CP increase to the Order of Companions strat already has weakened it, and it has to pay 3CP to use Rotate Ion Shields. I hope it doesn't have to pay for being a main ingredient of soup.
-Ion Bulwark should probably be ineligible for Rotate Ion Shields. No more 3++ saves on Knights would reduce the crazy durability and help keep them under control, while still being pretty good.
-I'm not sure but what the Stomping Feet need some kind of a rework, as there is currently almost never any reason to actually use a Knight's melee weapons. Maybe give the actual melee weapons an alternative profile, like how Mortarion and the Bloodthirster of Insensate Rage are?
Daemons:
-All Greater Daemons need at least an 80 point drop, perhaps more. Especially now that Warp Surge has been capped at a 4++. They are currently priced into unplayability in competitive lists. Especially poor Kairos Fateweaver...
-Be'lakor probably also needs an 80 point drop. He was already overcosted in the Index, and then in the codex GW actually increased his cost. It's like they hate him.
-Several other units need varying price drops, including Bloodcrushers, Beasts of Nurgle, Screamers, Flamers, and also especially Soul Grinders.
Death Guard:
-Possessed should be T5 and have Disgustingly Resilient. They are Daemons of Nurgle in this codex, so their statline should reflect that. Likewise, Chaos Lords and Sorcerers should get this as well. Helbrutes and Defilers should probably get DR.
-Deathshroud Terminators should have some kind of reroll charges or something, because currently if they fail to get into combat, they'll just be kited forever.
-Plague Marines probably need to come down to 15 points per model.
-Death Guard psykers should have access to the normal CSM psychic powers as well as the Contagion ones, kind of like how Thousand Sons do. At least the actual Sorcerers should get this, even if Malignant Plaguecasters and Morty don't.
Space Wolves:
-TWC need something to help them get into combat better, as currently Wulfen outclass them completely. Maybe just a points reduction to make them easier to fit into a list would be enough, but reroll charges would be even better.
-Many of the same price reductions that vanilla Marines need are also needed for SW. Grey Hunters and Blood Claws should be 11 points, for example.
-Santa Grimnar needs to be able to hide. His main weakness in the sleigh is having more than 9 wounds.
-Wulfen should be able to ride in any transport (except perhaps the Repulsor), counting as 2 models as they normally do. They'd actually be good cargo for a Drop Pod if this were allowed.
These are just some of the thoughts I had, and I'm sure others have thought of the same things before.
Cephalobeard wrote: I hope they make Tzeentch playable again, so I'm not paying for the Sins of Brimstone horrors for an entire edition.
Pink horrors are great though. 30 man bobs pump out 90 easily buff-able shots. Plus they all have 4++ saves.
Really - nothing tzeentch is bad. LOC is very good when you buff him as your warlord. Burning chariots are good too. What is your complaint?
Honest question Xeno: Do you believe nothing in this game is as bad as the various Adeptus Astartes factions? I've seen you say that Reanimation Protocols is actually a good rule, and now I see you claim that the Lord of Change is "very good". These are things you can only say with a fundamental lack of understanding for armies other than your own.
Well for one I play most the armies. Necrons are one of the few armies I don't paly - but I play against them a lot. I have a pretty good understanding of what their problems are. Daemons issue is beta smite was unnecessary and really weakens the army. They have solid units though. Bring TS along for the ride and you can beat anything with them.
== wrote:[== 765760 10202450 null]I think the problem with play testing is the fox guarding the hen house now. Some armies keep coming in underneath the radar like Ynnari.
I hate Ynnari and don't own a single space elf, but this is wrong. Ynnari have gotten repeatedly struck by the nerfbat pretty much from the first FAQ onward. It's not them slipping under the radar, it's that they fundamentally break the game such that 3+ major nerfs still haven't kept them off of top tables. As Nick Nanavati pointed out, they essentially start with 25+ CP just by existing due to all the free actions that normally cost 2-3CP. That's hard to balance correctly, if it's even possible.
Also would people give the play tester conspiracy thing a rest already? It's a tired meme at this point and no one has given anything even resembling convincing proof of it existing.
Leviathan Dread - Points increase (I hope not, but it's almost certain to happen I think)
Dawneagle jetbikes - Same cost
Dawneagle captain - 1 per detachment restriction
Allarus - Point decrease
Chainfist - Point decrease (I so desperately want a reason to field these so this is a pure wishlist item)
Terminators - Point decrease
Land Raider - Point decrease
As a tangent, I wonder if reroll saves of 1 for Terminators would give them the boost they need to be viable. It would make them almost impervious to small arms fire, make them die slower to AP-1/-2, and still leaves them vulnerable to AP -3 so they maintain a weakness.
Ynnari are strong - but really it's just spears with protect and 10 man dark reapers with fire and fade are OP. They give up really good army traits and battle focus to get it. How man CP is your whole army having -1 to hit or 6+fnp worth? Ynnari aren't even necessarily the best way to run eldar.
Dakka as a whole will denounce it as a ripoff and incompetently written. Dakkanaughts will delight in malicious glee as each poster takes a turn gaking on it. Dakka will once again joyfully display it has become a parody of itself.
Looking at the Ork announcement, I'm starting to get the feeling that all Get's Hot weapons might be changing to only overheat on unmodified 1s.
When they had only revealed the Dragsta I didn't think anything of it because GW made it sound like it has abilities that give it +2 to hit (rather than a native BS3+), but the Morkanaut's new Kustom Mega-Zappa has the same wording.
Also @Xeno if you think the Smite changes are why LoC and Daemons as a whole are bad... I'm not sure what to say. What really has screwed Daemons is the beta DS rules because it invalidates the only power play the codex really had going for it (Alpha-striking Bloodletter Bomb).
Well that and the fact there is really bad internal balance amongst the non-troop units.
The Newman wrote: I fully expect GW to continue proving that they don't have a single clue what they're doing.
I'm hoping that they'll do something drastic to address what a terrible spot Marines are in, but I won't be a bit surprised if vanilla marines get nerfed down to GK levels and GK get rendered completely unplayable and GW puts out some sort of unintentionally hilarious statement about the awsome changes they made to help basic Marines and GK compete in the current meta because they write rules like a spastic chimp with the self awareness of frog spawn.
I also expect this thread to wind up as 20+ pages of such utter bile directed at GW and 40k that any new player who comes here looking for advice and reads through it will come away convinced that they're much better off going back to WoW or LoL or whatever they were doing before the cool plastic mens caught their attention.
My favourite part about this post is that it lacks self-awareness.
I invoke Poe's Law.
While I do sincerely hope GW addresses Space Marines and I don't have a lot of faith that GW recognizes just how much of a boost they actually need (or their ability fix it without breaking anything else), Chapter Approved and the FAQs are worlds away from the GW that published 5th edition when there were armies still limping along on their 3rd edition codexes.
The funny part about even this edit is that it also lacks self awareness. You're implying here that GW game designers are so incompetent that they will both fail to do enough and simultaneously do too much that it breaks the game. Ridiculous!
And I imagine you think you know exactly what is necessary. Mmhmm. Tell me more while I shake out this salt shaker
I don't think I can agree with this. I do think they play-test, they just don't intentionally try to break the game over their knee like Bane with an aging vigilante, which WAAC players do.
So the play testing they do does not root out the biggest issues in hard core competitive play, which is never the intent of GW for 40K to be played
Which is a problem, sure, but I wouldn't say they don't play-test
-
It's not a problem GW needs to address. You don't ever want WAAC players weighing in. Force those fools out like the AoS reboot did and never look back.
I don't think I can agree with this. I do think they play-test, they just don't intentionally try to break the game over their knee like Bane with an aging vigilante, which WAAC players do.
So the play testing they do does not root out the biggest issues in hard core competitive play, which is never the intent of GW for 40K to be played
Which is a problem, sure, but I wouldn't say they don't play-test
Still doesn't expalin why they let something like the GK codex be made. Even in a super casual setting they suck. A primaris army using DW rules can walk over a GK army, and it is not like DW are the pinacle of power. At the same time, if they weren't planning to break the meta, how can one explain stuff like super point efficient ravellans or anything eldar in Inari, or the ++4 DE stuff. How the hell did GW come to the idea that a unit of dark reapers, soul bursting from another unit of dark reapers is ok, but giving a normal smite to a GK unit is too OP? I understand missing some rule interactions or some tournament packs making a unit super efficient. But one just has to look how much a unit of shining spears cost and how much a unit of even regular termintors cost to be mind blown.
Well, to easily dispel any belief in bias, I will point out that there's a consistent pattern of defensive stat overvaluation when it comes to infantry. Particularly with the point cost of a 3+ or better, or multiple wounds.
Cephalobeard wrote: I hope they make Tzeentch playable again, so I'm not paying for the Sins of Brimstone horrors for an entire edition.
Pink horrors are great though. 30 man bobs pump out 90 easily buff-able shots. Plus they all have 4++ saves.
Really - nothing tzeentch is bad. LOC is very good when you buff him as your warlord. Burning chariots are good too. What is your complaint?
Honest question Xeno: Do you believe nothing in this game is as bad as the various Adeptus Astartes factions? I've seen you say that Reanimation Protocols is actually a good rule, and now I see you claim that the Lord of Change is "very good". These are things you can only say with a fundamental lack of understanding for armies other than your own.
Yeah... RP is a good rule on paper and in small games it can border on OP.. but practically any opponent who doesn't know or doesn't have the ability to wipe out and focus a unit/s down each turn has bigger problems than facing Necrons.
Knowing is half the battle. You still have to finish off the units. Opponent starts out strong in a shooting phase but then starts rolling blanks. Wow - you basically just lost a turn. How could you say that isn't powerful? It might only happen 1 out of 5 games - but it does happen. When it happens you probably win.
So that 1 game out of 5 that you might win because the opponent whiffed average rolls is a powerful ability? Right... RP aside, if your opponent is rolling cold, chances are you'll win either way.
As I said, in small games it is a very good ability, but as more units and firepower are brought forward in larger games it doesn't scale well at all - but they are costed to the point as if expecting you to roll RP every turn, where in reality - using you're example, 4 games out of 5 you will never get to use.
It's hard to balance and keep it making sense narratively without lazily resorting to a FNP save like last edition.
Well, to easily dispel any belief in bias, I will point out that there's a consistent pattern of defensive stat overvaluation when it comes to infantry. Particularly with the point cost of a 3+ or better, or multiple wounds.
I don't know what it is, if it is bias or not. One thing I do know, is that there is no explanation I can think of, well maybe other then them not working on the GK codex at all and just doing an index copy past and adding some bad relics, why the same group of people both in the design and testing team, made within the same 6 months a codex like eldar and a codex like grey knights.
Its like a world olympic class sports man suddenly losing in a 200m dash to a bunch of 18-25 year olds. It only rises questions I can find anwsers for. I makes even less sense if one assumes GW is a company that actually wants to sell its Grey Knight models. I mean if we were to be cynical, it would have been better to not make the codex at all and leave it at the index stage. the index GK were better, then the codex GK.
Well, by and large the underlying systemic problem IMO is that, Index-to-Codex, offensive is almost always improved far more significantly than the defensive.
It's happening again with the Ork previews: More shots for certain weapons, more re-rolls, more exploding 6s, stratagems to pile on even more damage, fight twice, shoot twice, get even better re-rolls, etc.. and I haven't seen a single bonus to something defensive yet.
If you'd field the same Ork army Index-to-Codex, model for model, I am almost certain the Codex-version will have a lot of firepower and offensive output, while the defensive capacities of the same models will be virtually unchanged.
With a few exceptions (mainly -1-to-hit-armies, +1 Invul stuff like Prophets of Flesh and Ion Bulwark, and perhaps now the FAQ strat for going second), that's been true for every Codex.
That will and has inevitably lead to every army becoming ever more "glasscannon"-like unless you're consciously going with some extreme defensive strategy like mega-hordes or stacking -1s as much as you can, etc.. which is also frustrating to play against.
Sunny Side Up wrote: Well, by and large the underlying systemic problem IMO is that, Index-to-Codex, offensive is almost always improved far more significantly than the defensive.
It's happening again with the Ork previews: More shots for certain weapons, more re-rolls, more exploding 6s, stratagems to pile on even more damage, fight twice, shoot twice, get even better re-rolls, etc.. and I haven't seen a single bonus to something defensive yet.
If you'd field the same Ork army Index-to-Codex, model for model, I am almost certain the Codex-version will have a lot of firepower and offensive output, while the defensive capacities of the same models will be virtually unchanged.
With a few exceptions (mainly -1-to-hit-armies, +1 Invul stuff like Prophets of Flesh and Ion Bulwark, and perhaps now the FAQ strat for going second), that's been true for every Codex.
That will and has inevitably lead to every army becoming ever more "glasscannon"-like unless you're consciously going with some extreme defensive strategy like mega-hordes or stacking -1s as much as you can, etc.. which is also frustrating to play against.
Hah. Defensive buffs? Orks got softer per point compared to index. Will take less shots to take down ork army than before.
Cephalobeard wrote: I hope they make Tzeentch playable again, so I'm not paying for the Sins of Brimstone horrors for an entire edition.
Pink horrors are great though. 30 man bobs pump out 90 easily buff-able shots. Plus they all have 4++ saves.
Really - nothing tzeentch is bad. LOC is very good when you buff him as your warlord. Burning chariots are good too. What is your complaint?
I'm going to, respectfully, disengage at the assessment that nothing of theirs is bad. I will concede that Pink horrors, and only pink horrors, are in a very workable place.
A LoC is "fine" when only using other Daemon units as an example, but even then it's now worse with the Warp Surge adjustment, and still very poor compared to other options (Like simply taking two Thousand Son princes for the same cost). Burning chariots are quite not fine, in my experience, as their fragility is not outweighed by the damage they can cause, and only having WS4+ makes taking them into melee where they would appear to indicate they'd like to be doesn't quite work out. If you want to see Burning Chariots that DO actually have a thematic place and are worth taking, I ask you to just take a moment to see what they do in AOS.
Screamers, Heralds, Flamers, etc, etc, are all quite poor for their cost, and the boon of tzeentch is so wildly out of place for them as an army it's crazy, to me.
I offer you, very simply, the history of Tzeentch as my example for my complaints. It's long now been a very psychic focused army, and the codex turned them into a gunline instead. If we look to them in AoS, where they have all very interesting abilities (like Lords of Change casting psychic powers through Exalted Flamers, to gain extra range, etc.) and synergies, that it just makes me frown when considering them for 40k, as they are.
Honest question Xeno: Do you believe nothing in this game is as bad as the various Adeptus Astartes factions? I've seen you say that Reanimation Protocols is actually a good rule, and now I see you claim that the Lord of Change is "very good". These are things you can only say with a fundamental lack of understanding for armies other than your own.
The LoC isn't terrible. +4 smite/gateway is pretty neat, but it doesn't have enough spells to be flexible.
And as usual it gets shot off by the big toys and is a wee bit too high in points, but it's not like it needs to drop by half.
It starts base with a 3++ invun and -1 damage with a relic and warlord trait combo. It's extremely durable.
Wasn't tzeench in AoS like super OP, hit by nerfs like eldar every FAQ, but still winning event after event, till the new edition killed the tzeench armies?
Cephalobeard wrote: I hope they make Tzeentch playable again, so I'm not paying for the Sins of Brimstone horrors for an entire edition.
Pink horrors are great though. 30 man bobs pump out 90 easily buff-able shots. Plus they all have 4++ saves.
Really - nothing tzeentch is bad. LOC is very good when you buff him as your warlord. Burning chariots are good too. What is your complaint?
I'm going to, respectfully, disengage at the assessment that nothing of theirs is bad. I will concede that Pink horrors, and only pink horrors, are in a very workable place.
A LoC is "fine" when only using other Daemon units as an example, but even then it's now worse with the Warp Surge adjustment, and still very poor compared to other options (Like simply taking two Thousand Son princes for the same cost). Burning chariots are quite not fine, in my experience, as their fragility is not outweighed by the damage they can cause, and only having WS4+ makes taking them into melee where they would appear to indicate they'd like to be doesn't quite work out. If you want to see Burning Chariots that DO actually have a thematic place and are worth taking, I ask you to just take a moment to see what they do in AOS.
Screamers, Heralds, Flamers, etc, etc, are all quite poor for their cost, and the boon of tzeentch is so wildly out of place for them as an army it's crazy, to me.
I offer you, very simply, the history of Tzeentch as my example for my complaints. It's long now been a very psychic focused army, and the codex turned them into a gunline instead. If we look to them in AoS, where they have all very interesting abilities (like Lords of Change casting psychic powers through Exalted Flamers, to gain extra range, etc.) and synergies, that it just makes me frown when considering them for 40k, as they are.
Fair points. How would you feel if the smite nerf was pulled? As we all basically get around it by spamming smite with TS units. Also - try running LOC with TSDP - works great for me. LOC tanks - and heavy mortal damage takes the day.
The main change I feel or want for my army (Templars);
Neophytes get a 1-2 Point Reduction
Initaites (And PAnMarines in General) 1 point reduction
MELEE Weapons for Non-Characters points reduced a third to half
ASSAULT Special Weapons cut in half
And then on a super wishlisty;
New Warlord Trait (+1 Damage for Non Relics)
Updated/Modified Tactic, something like a Non-CHARACTER Black Templar unit within 6” of a model with CHAMPION Keyword attacking with a melee weapon of -1 or greater may attack an additional time with that weapon.
In general rework Strategems that require 3 of the same model. Finally a general change for vindicators and similar unit; “If model shoots a unit with 10 or more Wounds roll 1d6”. Given addendum Vindi ignore heavy penalties.
Marmatag wrote: The sky isn't falling. The game is pretty close to balanced right now.
Exalted!!!!
Thank you for this comedy gold!
He means at the competitive level where people bring nothing but the best options in an ITC format. I understand what he means. He's not saying that every codex is balanced to every codex and that all the models in each codex are viable. That is what balance really means. He's saying that the competitive meta is kinda balanced when you factor soup and all the rest. It's just disappointing to a lot of people that this is the path they chose to balance the game.
Cephalobeard wrote: I hope they make Tzeentch playable again, so I'm not paying for the Sins of Brimstone horrors for an entire edition.
Pink horrors are great though. 30 man bobs pump out 90 easily buff-able shots. Plus they all have 4++ saves.
Really - nothing tzeentch is bad. LOC is very good when you buff him as your warlord. Burning chariots are good too. What is your complaint?
I'm going to, respectfully, disengage at the assessment that nothing of theirs is bad. I will concede that Pink horrors, and only pink horrors, are in a very workable place.
A LoC is "fine" when only using other Daemon units as an example, but even then it's now worse with the Warp Surge adjustment, and still very poor compared to other options (Like simply taking two Thousand Son princes for the same cost). Burning chariots are quite not fine, in my experience, as their fragility is not outweighed by the damage they can cause, and only having WS4+ makes taking them into melee where they would appear to indicate they'd like to be doesn't quite work out. If you want to see Burning Chariots that DO actually have a thematic place and are worth taking, I ask you to just take a moment to see what they do in AOS.
Screamers, Heralds, Flamers, etc, etc, are all quite poor for their cost, and the boon of tzeentch is so wildly out of place for them as an army it's crazy, to me.
I offer you, very simply, the history of Tzeentch as my example for my complaints. It's long now been a very psychic focused army, and the codex turned them into a gunline instead. If we look to them in AoS, where they have all very interesting abilities (like Lords of Change casting psychic powers through Exalted Flamers, to gain extra range, etc.) and synergies, that it just makes me frown when considering them for 40k, as they are.
Fair points. How would you feel if the smite nerf was pulled? As we all basically get around it by spamming smite with TS units. Also - try running LOC with TSDP - works great for me. LOC tanks - and heavy mortal damage takes the day.
If Tzeentch were to gain a rule, or even changing their Boon to allow them to cast smite without limits like Thousand Sons, it would be a good step in the right direction.
I'd still be upset Eldar have 18+ Psychic powers, meanwhile the daemons made of magic that serve the literal god of magic have 6, but it'd be a good start.
== wrote:[== 765760 10202450 null]I think the problem with play testing is the fox guarding the hen house now. Some armies keep coming in underneath the radar like Ynnari.
Actually the playtesters have a great deal of integrity.
And GW is aware of Ynnari as a problem. The problem really is that they're defined in such a way that makes them unfair. You can't have a mechanic like soulburst and also be balanced, those two things are fundamentally at odds. It is highly likely that Ynnari are squatted (eventually), and the HQs are turned into generic DE/Eldar HQs, providing solid benefits but without the Ynnari nonsense.
Preceptors reduced in points. They cost more than a Crusader for half the shots (depending on loadout) and more than a gallant for worse melee. The buff should also be a 12" Range, rather than 6", since Guilliman gives the same buff with a 12" range and costs less, as well as being able hide and return to life.
Possible point reduction for Warglaives. As it stands, you rarely see a Warglaive, and I think a 10pt or so Reduction for Armigers would do quite well.
If people want to give Ynnari a hard pass okay but honestly they are quite broken and there has been plenty of opportunity to address them properly. I don’t understand how this army can even exist in its present form.
Preceptors reduced in points. They cost more than a Crusader for half the shots (depending on loadout) and more than a gallant for worse melee. The buff should also be a 12" Range, rather than 6", since Guilliman gives the same buff with a 12" range and costs less, as well as being able hide and return to life.
Possible point reduction for Warglaives. As it stands, you rarely see a Warglaive, and I think a 10pt or so Reduction for Armigers would do quite well.
I know it's greedy but I'd love Preceptors also available for Traitoris as well.
Preceptors reduced in points. They cost more than a Crusader for half the shots (depending on loadout) and more than a gallant for worse melee. The buff should also be a 12" Range, rather than 6", since Guilliman gives the same buff with a 12" range and costs less, as well as being able hide and return to life.
Possible point reduction for Warglaives. As it stands, you rarely see a Warglaive, and I think a 10pt or so Reduction for Armigers would do quite well.
I know it's greedy but I'd love Preceptors also available for Traitoris as well.
"meanwhile the daemons made of magic that serve the literal god of magic have 6"
The Demons faction as a whole have 18, don't they? CWE as a whole has 12. That seems right.
Besides, CWE psykers are also limited to picking from 6 powers - no psykers can pick from both CWE tables.
Put anther way, Farseers and Warlocks each have the same options as a Primairs Psyker or a Librarian. If Tzeench should have more power options than Farseers, shouldn't Farseers have more options than Imperial Guard flunkies?
Automatically Appended Next Post: As for balance, which was a more fun game:
-6e Eldar or Marines vs Orkz or CSM? What could they do in the face of Grav Bikers or Serpent Spam or Seer Council?
-7e Eldar or Marines vs Orkz or Guard? Da boyz or the Guardsmen might as well not even set up vs Scat Bikes, Spiders, WK, Gladius, Obsec Spam, SuperBestFriends, etc
Compare those matchups to:
-8e Eldar or Guard vs AdMech or Marines? It's an uphill battle, but nowhere near as much a blowout as the 6e/7e scenarios
The difference between the top books and the bottom books is a *lot* closer in 8th than it was in 6th or 7th.
Marmatag wrote: And GW is aware of Ynnari as a problem. The problem really is that they're defined in such a way that makes them unfair. You can't have a mechanic like soulburst and also be balanced, those two things are fundamentally at odds. It is highly likely that Ynnari are squatted (eventually), and the HQs are turned into generic DE/Eldar HQs, providing solid benefits but without the Ynnari nonsense.
I think its more likely we will get a Ynnari release in 2019/2020 and rather than piggybacking on already good Eldar/DE options and breaking them "Ynnari units" will be designed with soulburst in mind.
Bharring wrote: "meanwhile the daemons made of magic that serve the literal god of magic have 6"
The Demons faction as a whole have 18, don't they? CWE as a whole has 12. That seems right.
Besides, CWE psykers are also limited to picking from 6 powers - no psykers can pick from both CWE tables.
Put anther way, Farseers and Warlocks each have the same options as a Primairs Psyker or a Librarian. If Tzeench should have more power options than Farseers, shouldn't Farseers have more options than Imperial Guard flunkies?
Certainly. However, just as an example, Thousand Sons have access to... 3 Trees of powers? So, 18?
Meanwhile, again, Tzeentch has only 6. This is a broader issue of Daemons all being jammed into one codex, but I'm sure you can understand my point all the same.
Now, to your point of who should have what amount, yes. I'd say the tier should be Tzeentch > Eldar/Thousand Sons > Normal Grey Knights (Their powers are often described in books as just manifestations of their emotions, not always something they control perfectly) > Librarians/Sorcerers > Imperial Psykers and the like.
Manifestations of Magic, Students of Magic, Naturally gifted and psychically enhanced, enhanced, and then just gifted.
If that makes sense?
Alternatively, just give Tzeentch something akin to AoS, where they manipulate their rolls, to properly reflect what they're supposed to be, and I'll accept that over less powers and more uses of Smite as a cantrip.
I miss the "book powers" from 6e, and to a lesser extent 7e. You could give more personality to your psykers that way. Obviously, it's hard to balance (Invis....). But it was fun.
Cynical answer: I expect more salt, because that's what I expect everytime GW releases something at this point.
As for the book itself, points reshuffling is a given, perhaps some additional rules for armies that still won't have a codex (GSC, Sisters of Silence, Inquisition), the beta rules we all know Sisters of Battle are getting, likely narrative/open play only rules for looted wagons (because of course GW isn't going to make them matched play and put them in the codex), and maybe some new missions.
If we're really good this year, maybe some more universal strats and expanded terrain rules. But that's just wishlisting.
== wrote:[== 765760 10203270 null]If people want to give Ynnari a hard pass okay but honestly they are quite broken and there has been plenty of opportunity to address them properly. I don’t understand how this army can even exist in its present form.
Dude. In 7th edition they got 2 soul burst actions per death - it activated on their own deaths - and it could happen unlimited amount of times. Yeah - that was broken. It's completely fine the way it is now. The issue is shinning spears. I repeat - the issue is shinning spears.
I expect -
Shinning spears will not be nerfed in chapter approved though. So eldar armies that build around them will continue to dominate.
They'll probably keep nerfing fly though - pretty soon fly units wont even be able to jump over walls.
Only thing I really hope is Grey Knights get their smite changed to like Tzeetch or changed period to something else and points etc. Some change so I can actually play them, without my opponent feeling sry for me if play them
Obviously points changes for a lot of other factions etc.
Ynnari are a design problem. Acting out of phase makes the game weird. If you shoot in the assault phase, and character targeting restrictions are present in the shooting phase, what happens? As an example.
I would like to see their rules completely redone, and allow them to be taken in Harlequins /Eldar / Dark Eldar detachments without corrupting the keyword.
For example, you could have any of the Triumvirate of Ynnead as an HQ in a <Kabal> detachment without losing the <Kabal> keyword benefits.
I would appreciate some steps to make Wraithknights viable. I certainly understand the situation they were in the last edition and I have no desire to go back there.
Oh and perhaps fiddling with the costs of Dire Avengers/corsairs (any sort of expansion of the corsair forces would be more than welcome, even utterly stupid over costed ones)
Only thing I really hope is Grey Knights get their smite changed to like Tzeetch or changed period to something else and points etc. Some change so I can actually play them, without my opponent feeling sry for me if play them
Obviously points changes for a lot of other factions etc.
Grey Knights, and basically all Marines in general, need a points adjustment and a look at how they tank wounds in this edition to be solid. GK are basically all the problems of regular Marines cranked to 11 so it's no shock that they are having problems.
I don't feel they need to be the loyalist equivilant of Thousand Sons in terms of smite as much as I feel like they should have stronger bonuses against daemons, monsters and chaos keywords. You know, to play up that knightly hero aspect they have.
Grey Knights can't kill daemons, or the daemons just come back. That, right there, is absurd. Just absurd. That stratagem alone is the biggest "FU" to a faction in any game i've ever seen.
Only thing I really hope is Grey Knights get their smite changed to like Tzeetch or changed period to something else and points etc. Some change so I can actually play them, without my opponent feeling sry for me if play them
Obviously points changes for a lot of other factions etc.
Grey Knights, and basically all Marines in general, need a points adjustment and a look at how they tank wounds in this edition to be solid. GK are basically all the problems of regular Marines cranked to 11 so it's no shock that they are having problems.
I don't feel they need to be the loyalist equivilant of Thousand Sons in terms of smite as much as I feel like they should have stronger bonuses against daemons, monsters and chaos keywords. You know, to play up that knightly hero aspect they have.
They can't have rules against a certain faction anymore (like back in the day with summon rules counter etc) because has no affect if they fight Imperial guard, tau etc. I think they need some changes that are generic (just to make them viable in matched and narrative play, you can add your own rules for narrative) and ye marines need a points adjustment in general.
Spectral Ceramite wrote: They can't have rules against a certain faction anymore (like back in the day with summon rules) because has no affect if they fight Imperial guard, tau etc. I think they need some changes that are generic (just to make them viable in matched and narrative play, you can add your own rules for narrative) and ye marines need a points adjustment in general.
I didn't specify a single faction, and the three keywords I mentioned are among the most common keywords across many armies. I'd throw in the psyker keyword but that's more the Sisters of Battle and Sisters of Silence's turf and we need to leave some room for other factions in the game to have something special too.
That said, toning down how much they get charged for such bonuses would be very good.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Marmatag wrote: Grey Knights can't kill daemons, or the daemons just come back. That, right there, is absurd. Just absurd. That stratagem alone is the biggest "FU" to a faction in any game i've ever seen.
I think it was supposed to be a call back to Codex Daemonhunters were there was a rule that let the Daemon player return defeated models to the table because the Grey Knights always fought where Daemonic incursions were the worst.
The problem is that the Grey Knights aren't effective enough against Daemons in their current form to justify such a balancing mechanic. Maybe if Nemesis Force Weapons always did 3 wounds to models with the Chaos, Daemon or Monster keyword and their baby smites turned into regular smites against Daemons or something then it'd matter, but as it is they just don't do enough to balance the mechanic.
I expect Spears to go up a little. Enough to make them not OP, but not enough for people to stop claiming they're game-breaking-good. Like what they did with Reapers.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, I expect Dev Cents to go up in points. For tradition's sake.
Marmatag wrote: I would imagine Shining Spears will get nerfed.
Ynnari are a design problem. Acting out of phase makes the game weird. If you shoot in the assault phase, and character targeting restrictions are present in the shooting phase, what happens? As an example.
I would like to see their rules completely redone, and allow them to be taken in Harlequins /Eldar / Dark Eldar detachments without corrupting the keyword.
For example, you could have any of the Triumvirate of Ynnead as an HQ in a <Kabal> detachment without losing the <Kabal> keyword benefits.
Everything they do - some spell or stratagem can duplicate. You can do it only once per turn per type and they don't have any stratagems to shoot or fight again. They just get acess to these abilities a different way. It's not really broken. Or if it is - those spells and strats that do the same thing are broken. Like when nids fire hive gaurd 2 times - is that broken? I don't think so.
Now if hive guards gun was heavy 4 instead of heavy 2 - and they paid the same price...now that is broken. It's all about price. You fix shinning spears and reapers. No one plays ynnari. Cause what does ynnari do? It makes over overpowered units even better at the cost of making the rest of your army worse (you lose your army traits). Another way to fix ynnari would be to make a rule that all eldar detachments in an army must be ynnari to be battle forged.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: I expect Spears to go up a little. Enough to make them not OP, but not enough for people to stop claiming they're game-breaking-good. Like what they did with Reapers.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, I expect Dev Cents to go up in points. For tradition's sake.
THEY ARE GAME BREAKINGLY GOOD.
Yeah - Cents going up for sure. Probably landspeeders too.
== wrote:[== 765760 10202450 null]I think the problem with play testing is the fox guarding the hen house now. Some armies keep coming in underneath the radar like Ynnari.
Actually the playtesters have a great deal of integrity.
And GW is aware of Ynnari as a problem. The problem really is that they're defined in such a way that makes them unfair. You can't have a mechanic like soulburst and also be balanced, those two things are fundamentally at odds. It is highly likely that Ynnari are squatted (eventually), and the HQs are turned into generic DE/Eldar HQs, providing solid benefits but without the Ynnari nonsense.
Couldn't they just put the free actions behind a stratagem that scales up in cost like relics?
The Newman wrote: I fully expect GW to continue proving that they don't have a single clue what they're doing.
I'm hoping that they'll do something drastic to address what a terrible spot Marines are in, but I won't be a bit surprised if vanilla marines get nerfed down to GK levels and GK get rendered completely unplayable and GW puts out some sort of unintentionally hilarious statement about the awsome changes they made to help basic Marines and GK compete in the current meta because they write rules like a spastic chimp with the self awareness of frog spawn.
I also expect this thread to wind up as 20+ pages of such utter bile directed at GW and 40k that any new player who comes here looking for advice and reads through it will come away convinced that they're much better off going back to WoW or LoL or whatever they were doing before the cool plastic mens caught their attention.
My favourite part about this post is that it lacks self-awareness.
I invoke Poe's Law.
While I do sincerely hope GW addresses Space Marines and I don't have a lot of faith that GW recognizes just how much of a boost they actually need (or their ability fix it without breaking anything else), Chapter Approved and the FAQs are worlds away from the GW that published 5th edition when there were armies still limping along on their 3rd edition codexes.
The funny part about even this edit is that it also lacks self awareness. You're implying here that GW game designers are so incompetent that they will both fail to do enough and simultaneously do too much that it breaks the game. Ridiculous!
And I imagine you think you know exactly what is necessary. Mmhmm. Tell me more while I shake out this salt shaker
You don't know what Poe's law is do you.
It's not ridiculous when they've already done it. They stated flat-out that they were increasing the CP generation for Battalions and Brigades because elite armies that struggled with CPs needed more of a reward for using those structures, when anyone who's brain is at least mostly inside their skull could tell you that such a move rewards horde armies more than elite ones and leaves elite armies in a comparatively worse state than where they started.
I applaud GW for trying to improve their game balance over time, doubly so because they've never shown signs of caring before, while also recognizing that they've gotten off to a ham-handed start.
Now on the subject of how to fix it, this is exactly where that lack of faith I mentioned is coming from. Marines need to be significantly tougher for the points to be competitive, and GW has painted themselves into a corner there. Make them more than a little bit cheaper and they start making SoB look bad, make them more than a little bit tougher at the same point cost and they start making Death Guard look bad, and any change to the basic marine profile needs to be evaluated both in the context of a dozen armies and with an eye on how everything else in those armies stack up against the new profile. That's a tough needle to thread, with lots of opportunities to miss problems.
My personal suggestions are:
1) Apply chapter traits to everything, not just infantry, bikes, and dreads.
2) Add a 5+ Feel No Pain to all Marine infantry and bikes.
3) Add +1 toughness to all Marine vehicles.
4) Reduce the cost of Marine special and heavy weapons to the cost IG pays for the same gun.
5) Replace the Iron Hand chapter trait (which is why I suggest a 5+++ instead of a 6+++, I know from experience that a 6+++ isn't enough) with something else. Maybe a 5+ invuln for models with no invulns and a +1 (to a max of 3++) for models that have native invulns.
== wrote:[== 765760 10202450 null]I think the problem with play testing is the fox guarding the hen house now. Some armies keep coming in underneath the radar like Ynnari.
Actually the playtesters have a great deal of integrity.
And GW is aware of Ynnari as a problem. The problem really is that they're defined in such a way that makes them unfair. You can't have a mechanic like soulburst and also be balanced, those two things are fundamentally at odds. It is highly likely that Ynnari are squatted (eventually), and the HQs are turned into generic DE/Eldar HQs, providing solid benefits but without the Ynnari nonsense.
Couldn't they just put the free actions behind a stratagem that scales up in cost like relics?
I could see that. "If a Ynarri unit is within 6" of another unit that is destroyed this turn it may move as if it were the movement phase, shoot as if it was the shooting phase or fight as if it were the fight phase. A unit that has been chosen for this stratagem can not be chosen twice in the same turn." and then charge 1 CP, with Yvrainne doing it once per turn for free or something. This would bring it down to 2-3 times a player turn and would make it less powerful without completely breaking Ynnari, I think.
Please don't get Xeno started on another non-stop tirade against Shining Spears. A year of that has been more than enough.
For Chapter Approved 2018, I'm more concerned about ignored units than powerful ones being nerfed. There are loads of sub-par units in the codices which are just a points change from being fun and useful, even cool. To list a few on the Eldar side of things:
-Support Weapons. I've never seen one on a table, and it's understandable. Their weapons are mediocre and their cost is eye-watering. However, it's never mentioned in threads or posts...so will an ignored unit like this be given any attention? Or will only major and popular units seen (or conspicuously not seen) at tournaments be considered?
-Falcon Grav Tank. It's not bad, but it's not great. It's outshone by the Wave Serpent. Now the Wave Serpent could be nixxed a bit, but some minor attention to the Falcon would be nice (honestly just granting the move-half, shooting twice turret would be fine, etc.)
-Scorpions and Banshees. Decent stats, but outshone by the obnoxious 5-attack Ork Boyz syndrom of 8th. They're not in as bad shape as Space Marine Assault Marines, but 8th made some units stupidly strong when they shouldn't be, and thus made an entire range of units pointless because they don't measure up to a meagre Ork boy. Again though, stuff like Banshees and Scorpions are often ignored, so I don't see them being fixed/aided in an update.
-The Wraithknight - though this one does seem a bit conspicuous. It's unmitigated trash...even in a Narrative setting, which is unfortunate.
-Warp Spiders are shockingly mediocre. No real "reason" to take them like you find with some other Aspects. Could use some attention.
-The Avatar. Never really mentioned, but an absolute travesty at 250 points. It is still being penalized for having an old 2nd edition smaller model...and is a joke compared to what it should be. It needs a massive points reduction, or needs to be ramped up to proper Greater Daemon stat levels as it used to be.
Elbows wrote: Please don't get Xeno started on another non-stop tirade against Shining Spears. A year of that has been more than enough.
For Chapter Approved 2018, I'm more concerned about ignored units than powerful ones being nerfed. There are loads of sub-par units in the codices which are just a points change from being fun and useful, even cool. To list a few on the Eldar side of things:
-Support Weapons. I've never seen one on a table, and it's understandable. Their weapons are mediocre and their cost is eye-watering. However, it's never mentioned in threads or posts...so will an ignored unit like this be given any attention? Or will only major and popular units seen (or conspicuously not seen) at tournaments be considered?
-Falcon Grav Tank. It's not bad, but it's not great. It's outshone by the Wave Serpent. Now the Wave Serpent could be nixxed a bit, but some minor attention to the Falcon would be nice (honestly just granting the move-half, shooting twice turret would be fine, etc.)
-Scorpions and Banshees. Decent stats, but outshone by the obnoxious 5-attack Ork Boyz syndrom of 8th. They're not in as bad shape as Space Marine Assault Marines, but 8th made some units stupidly strong when they shouldn't be, and thus made an entire range of units pointless because they don't measure up to a meagre Ork boy. Again though, stuff like Banshees and Scorpions are often ignored, so I don't see them being fixed/aided in an update.
-The Wraithknight - though this one does seem a bit conspicuous. It's unmitigated trash...even in a Narrative setting, which is unfortunate.
-Warp Spiders are shockingly mediocre. No real "reason" to take them like you find with some other Aspects. Could use some attention.
-The Avatar. Never really mentioned, but an absolute travesty at 250 points. It is still being penalized for having an old 2nd edition smaller model...and is a joke compared to what it should be. It needs a massive points reduction, or needs to be ramped up to proper Greater Daemon stat levels as it used to be.
etc.
I'll shut up about spears. It's kind of hard when people cry about ynnari though.
Support weapons aren't terrible. D cannons are worth their 75 - the other two need damage to go up considerably. Something cool with these things that I wish they would do. Is have them act as a shield for any unit within 3 " of them. Maybe giving them the bodyguard ability.
Falcon needs a point drop
WK needs to go down 100 points - sword and board 130 points
Warp spiders aren't bad but their weapon needs a little love - perhaps have them always wound on 2's.
Scorpions and banshees need more attacks - think you are onto the right idea there.
They're Assault Marines who trade Jumppack/Fly for Infiltrate.
Infiltrate became a poor Deep Strike, making them a downgrade.
Deep Strike changes made Deep Strike even more pointless for a unit that wants to Infiltrate.
Now they're just ASM who trade Jumppack/Fly for nothing.
They don't need a points change: they need different rules.
Banshees are a different animal. They do their job just about well enough. There isn't a lot of demand for their job. And Spears do it better. An extra attack might help them, but doesn't change much: they're still wounding Marines on 5s.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I should be clearer: neither Scorps nor Banshees are designed for, nor should be designed for, use as a frontline assault unit. The closest thing CWE has to that is probably the Storm Guardian. Which, even if it weren't bad, probably wouldn't see a lot of use. (There was a CWE tournament-winning list that focused on CC and took a bunch of Guardians - even that list took Defenders, not storm.)
I like the tradeoff of "rocket strapped to my back" vs "Sneak up to you". I like both ASM and Scorpions. A lot of the rules dovetail well to make them just about equal, same general use, but different ways of doing it. Until Scorp infiltrate was killed.
Sometimes, I want my skirmishers to jet around the board. Other times I want to plan how to get my skirmishers past my enemy's line. Unfortunately both suck right now.
Any buff to Scorpion's CC ability I hope gets put into the ASM too.
Ynnari just need either a complete rework with codex or mostly rules removed as an option for regular Aeldari. For the latter, A Ynnari army can add detachments from other factions as normal, but they keep their normal rules (masques, craftworld traits etc), but then Strength from Death only works for the Yncarne (why should it work for regular Eldar anyway?). The Yncarne should start with just moderate stats that start to get better the more times it triggers strength from death. Yvraine still gets her spell deck as normal.
So now, you can still have Ynnari, but your spears and reapers can only benefit from doing something twice due to psychic power. I could really see the Yncarne becoming a beast though if it gets to be close to more death and destruction (as it should be)
They're Assault Marines who trade Jumppack/Fly for Infiltrate.
Infiltrate became a poor Deep Strike, making them a downgrade.
Deep Strike changes made Deep Strike even more pointless for a unit that wants to Infiltrate.
Now they're just ASM who trade Jumppack/Fly for nothing.
They don't need a points change: they need different rules.
Banshees are a different animal. They do their job just about well enough. There isn't a lot of demand for their job. And Spears do it better. An extra attack might help them, but doesn't change much: they're still wounding Marines on 5s.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I should be clearer: neither Scorps nor Banshees are designed for, nor should be designed for, use as a frontline assault unit. The closest thing CWE has to that is probably the Storm Guardian. Which, even if it weren't bad, probably wouldn't see a lot of use. (There was a CWE tournament-winning list that focused on CC and took a bunch of Guardians - even that list took Defenders, not storm.)
Eldar don't work like that. Gardians aren't front line units. They are used as sparingly as possible. In this sense aspect warriors and wraith units are front line. They don't die because they are 1000 year old veteran warriors.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: Ynnari just need either a complete rework with codex or mostly rules removed as an option for regular Aeldari. For the latter, A Ynnari army can add detachments from other factions as normal, but they keep their normal rules (masques, craftworld traits etc), but then Strength from Death only works for the Yncarne (why should it work for regular Eldar anyway?). The Yncarne should start with just moderate stats that start to get better the more times it triggers strength from death. Yvraine still gets her spell deck as normal.
So now, you can still have Ynnari, but your spears and reapers can only benefit from doing something twice due to psychic power. I could really see the Yncarne becoming a beast though if it gets to be close to more death and destruction (as it should be)
Sounds a lot worse than armies that can just spend cp to shoot or fight twice.
Yep, Guardians should be rear-echelon emergency troops only. The squad leaders in a Guardian squad would often be an Eldar who had previously trod the path of an Aspect Warrior shrine, but no longer summons their war face (more or less). Eldar's general accelerated heartbeat, reaction speed, and precision means that even a normal Eldar is a capable militia fighter - equal to an Imperial Guardsman (who, by contrast are trained and current infantry). Guardians shouldn't be WS/BS 3+ though, they should return to 4+. WS/BS of 3+ should be strictly reserved for dedicated/excelling warriors, ala Space Marines or Aspect Warriors.
You could argue that Eldar don't even have "front line" troops as that's not really how they would fight. But normal incursions should be predominantly Aspect Warriors assisted by scouts and psykers. Guardians (if even present) could be driving the tanks, firing the artillery, driving the transports etc. They'd only be called up on a serious full war footing, or if fighting in defence of the Craftworld itself.
A normal Eldar engagement would be more of a type of raid - with scouts and psykers helping Aspect Warriors appear out of nowhere and strike hard/fast before disappearing. Some exceptions would be Saim-Hann who are very tribal in their war making, and whose citizen militia would be more prone to joining in on the fun - and likewise the Ulthwe who have a much more common use of Guardians because of their constant warring around the proximity of the Eye of Terror. Their advanced training would make them more akin to Dire Avengers than normal Guardians and they would likely be used more openly/offensively.
Storm Guardians (which should just be...Guardians) would basically be a militia unit armed with close combat weapons solely due to the nature of their environment...i.e. fighting in a densely packed interior of a Craftworld, they would opt for close combat weapons in place of longer shuriken catapults. They're still not front line combat units who'd be leading an attack (except in desperate circumstances).
____
Of course, almost none of this has any impact on how people play 40K or use Eldar.
Disclaimer: Moar Eldar discussion, following said rant. Skip if desired. Unless you're Elbows.
The frontline troop of CWE are Ork WAAAAGHs and IoM stupidity.
When I said "The closest thing CWE has" to a frontline assualt unit, I meant the closest thing CWE has to a frontline assault unit.
Guardians are used sparingly. But so are Aspect Warriors and Wraiths. Aside from some Biel-Tan, CWE use direct engagements sparingly. But there are far more Guardians than Aspect Warriors. And fewer still Honoured Dead (Wraiths).
Guardians should be militia. Used because they're necessary. The Shuriken Catapault should be treated like a sidearm: the purpose of the squad is boots on the ground, manning weapon emplacements, and bringing specialists to bear (not the same as bringing a specialized combat unit to bear).
I wholeheartedly agree on the WS/BS thing. Guardians are often untrained - so should be WS/BS4+ - an untrained Space Elf is as skilled/accurate as a trained human. But not as skilled as a Super Human Soldier.
If CWE had the Aspect Warriors in the numbers they needed, the Aspect Warriors would be the frontline units. In the fluff, it's usually claimed that the bulk of a warhost are Guardians. So they do the bulk of the fighting. Aspects are used where available, but there are only so many to go around. Much like the IoM would rather fight engagements using Custodes and Knights, but there aren't enough - so they need the IG.
Storm Guardians would make more sense if both they and Defenders could pick Pistol/CCW or Catapault. Defenders to hold ground and man the heavy weapons. Storm Guardians for storming territory and bringing the close-range special weapons (melta, flamers) to bear. In theory, they have a place - in both fluff and mechanics. In practice, they're a terrible entry.
It is very true that Eldar have no 'heavy infantry' in the classic sense. No units designed to fight pitched battles or head-on engagements. But Guardians are *closer* to that concept than Aspect Warriors. If you try to use Storm Guardians as frontline CC units, the only person you're outplaying is the one trying to use Scorpions and Banshees as frontline CC units.
What really needs to happen to make Guardians look like less of a frontline unit is CWE needs to lose WWP. CWE units have the firepower and mobility to do great things. Clasically, their range has kept them in check. Now they don't have that weakness anymore. And who benefits from that more than a unit that can take 22 bodies and even leverage a strat for a 4++?
Yep, I agree...and it's part of the issue with Guardians having a new WS/BS of 3+. They become better in many instances than Aspect Warriors which is simply wrong. You might not webway portal them if they were BS 4+, etc. You've all but murdered the reason for having Dire Avengers...where they could be genuinely decent troops if Guardians were slightly worse. It wouldn't hurt to drop a point or two on the Dire Avengers though. 12 is pushing it for a Toughness 3 model with 4+ armour...
It's the same reason you saw a big rise in Space Marine Scouts when they inexplicably became as good as Marines with a similar stat-line bump. Why remove the steps or tiers in an army? They exist for a reason. To provide options and more considerations when making an army.
2+ save against 1 damage weapons 5++ Ignores penalty for moving and shooting heavy Default gun is 4, -2, 1 Aspiring sorcerer has a 1/d3 smite Extra attacks against Imperium on 6+ And an expanded wargear list with little restrictions
If this was 13 points then your regular marines would need to be 6 points.
Eldarain wrote:I don't play them but some help for Grey Knights and Custodes(making it something more than codex jetbike) would be nice.
I'd prefer they take a crack at closing the gap between mono faction and soup but have accepted that they'll probably just crap on the units that soup is making egregious which will only have people slot in the currently next most broken unit.
No points changes can do this, and that's what they said was coming in CA. Any buff to any individual unit is a buff to soup. It sounds obvious enough, but if there's no disadvantage to taking allies, then there is only advantages.
2+ save against 1 damage weapons
5++
Ignores penalty for moving and shooting heavy
Default gun is 4, -2, 1
Aspiring sorcerer has a 1/d3 smite
Extra attacks against Imperium on 6+
And an expanded wargear list with little restrictions
If this was 13 points then your regular marines would need to be 6 points.
Regular marine would be about 8-10 to keep even with this change, and i thought thats about where we wanted them.
Marmatag wrote: It is highly likely that Ynnari are squatted (eventually), and the HQs are turned into generic DE/Eldar HQs, providing solid benefits but without the Ynnari nonsense.
It is the exact opposite of 'highly likely', there is zero chance of that happening. They might rework the rules completely, but the Ynnari are staying and there will be more of them.
ZergSmasher wrote: Okay, I'm wishlisting here, but these are the things I'd like to see in CA2018 for the armies I play. I know that many/most of them probably won't happen this way, but it's actually fun to speculate.
Dark Angels (many of these would be good on Marines in general):
-Basic non-Primaris Marine bodies (Tacticals, Assault, Devastators) reduced to 11 points per model. Honestly, Assault Marines would probably still totally suck balls, but at least Tacticals might be viable as an alternative to Scouts.
-Scouts reduced to 10 points per model. Sniper Rifles reduced to 2 points. Camo Cloaks reduced to 1 point per model.
-Make Assault Marines have 2 attacks base. They are still 1 wound models and so would not totally step on the toes of Primaris Reivers or Inceptors.
-Reduce the costs of most of the special and heavy weapon options. Plasma is probably okay as is, but Flamers should cost 5, Meltaguns should be 10, Grav should also be 10 as it is weaker than Plasma. Grav-cannons should be 20 rather than the ludicrous 28 they currently are. They should also bring back the Grav-amp rerolls for the cannons to make them viable. Multi-melta should only cost like 15. Missile Launcher and Lascannon are probably okay as they are, but could come down to 20 without seriously breaking the game. Heavy Bolter is fine the way it is. Plasma Cannon should be slightly cheaper due to having variable number of shots.
-Get rid of the higher costs of special Primaris weapons on Intercessors and Hellblasters. Auto bolt rifles and stalkers should cost the same as the normal ones; ditto for the assault/heavy plasma incinerators. Stalker Bolt Rifles should also have a Sniper type rule (Mortal wounds on 6's to wound) or be increased to Heavy 2.
-Vehicles need to get access to Grim Resolve (or other Chapter Tactics in the case of vanilla marines). Every other army's traits affect all of their units pretty much, so why not Marines?
-Deathwing Terminators (indeed, all terminators in the game currently) need a special rule that says all incoming damage is reduced by 1 to a minimum of 1. This would make them less susceptible to being blinked out by autocannons, overcharged plasma, etc. They could probably use a points drop as well.
-Drop Pods should have to abide by the 9" rule, but their cargo should be able to get closer. This would give them a niche and might make them playable.
-A lot of stuff I haven't already mentioned need points drops too, notably Land Speeders, Attack Bikes, and Land Raiders. None of these are anywhere close to durable enough for their points, and for the first two, if they move they gimp their shooting, so they don't have the firepower to make up for their lack of durability.
Chaos Space Marines:
-Basic CSM squads reduced to 11 points per model, just like their loyalist counterparts need. They also need all of the same weapon price reductions. There's a reason you always see Cultists rather than Marines in competitive Chaos lists.
-Raptors and Warp Talons need both a price drop and to go to 2 attacks base.
-Possessed need either a built-in FnP type save, or a price drop, or both. They aren't terrible as is, but they lack a niche (Berzerkers are pretty much always better).
-Just like loyalists, the Legion Traits should apply to all units, not just certain ones. That might help make things like Predators and Forgefiends better in an Alpha Legion list, and would make Maulerfiends scary in a World Eaters or Renegades list (just to name some examples).
-Also like loyalists, a lot of units are overpriced, notably the Dinobots and Mutilators.
-Daemon Princes should probably get the same god allegiance rules as their Codex: Chaos Daemons counterparts (Unstoppable Ferocity for Khorne, Disgustingly Resilient for Nurgle, etc.). Perhaps even things like Possessed and Warp Talons should get these abilities as well.
Tau Empire:
-Crisis Suits need at least a 15 points reduction in the base cost, along with a reduction is cost for most if not all of their weapons. I think a good way to do this would be to give each weapon 2 costs: one for regular Crisis suits, another for Commanders. Similar to how many of the Support Systems cost different amounts depending on what is equipped with it.
-Stormsurge needs a price drop, or it needs the Battlesuit keyword so that Drones can protect it. I'd be okay with Savior Protocols requiring a 4+ instead of a 2+ for a Stormsurge (because it's big and hard to cover). What I'd love to see for a Surge is a new Stratagem for 2 or 3 CP that lets it shoot twice if it is anchored, but that's not going to happen.
-The Hammerhead's railgun needs to be 2d6 damage, or 4d3, or something. It's just so pathetic right now. Even just being flat 6 damage would be decent. Ion Cannon is both better AND cheaper, and that's a problem (here's hoping they don't increase the cost of Ion Cannons to compensate...).
-Pathfinders need a built-in -1 to be hit or something, as they are currently just too squishy to be good. It doesn't help that Markerlights in general are kind of meh.
-The Ghostkeel's stealth drones need a Character-like rule, as currently it's way too easy to just swat them and get rid of the suit's protection. Indeed, a lot of the drones typically taken singly (Pulse Accelerator, Grav-inhibitor, Guardian, Shadowsun's special ones) need this.
Imperial Knights:
-Castellan probably does need a points increase, but not a huge one. The CP increase to the Order of Companions strat already has weakened it, and it has to pay 3CP to use Rotate Ion Shields. I hope it doesn't have to pay for being a main ingredient of soup.
-Ion Bulwark should probably be ineligible for Rotate Ion Shields. No more 3++ saves on Knights would reduce the crazy durability and help keep them under control, while still being pretty good.
-I'm not sure but what the Stomping Feet need some kind of a rework, as there is currently almost never any reason to actually use a Knight's melee weapons. Maybe give the actual melee weapons an alternative profile, like how Mortarion and the Bloodthirster of Insensate Rage are?
Daemons:
-All Greater Daemons need at least an 80 point drop, perhaps more. Especially now that Warp Surge has been capped at a 4++. They are currently priced into unplayability in competitive lists. Especially poor Kairos Fateweaver...
-Be'lakor probably also needs an 80 point drop. He was already overcosted in the Index, and then in the codex GW actually increased his cost. It's like they hate him.
-Several other units need varying price drops, including Bloodcrushers, Beasts of Nurgle, Screamers, Flamers, and also especially Soul Grinders.
Death Guard:
-Possessed should be T5 and have Disgustingly Resilient. They are Daemons of Nurgle in this codex, so their statline should reflect that. Likewise, Chaos Lords and Sorcerers should get this as well. Helbrutes and Defilers should probably get DR.
-Deathshroud Terminators should have some kind of reroll charges or something, because currently if they fail to get into combat, they'll just be kited forever.
-Plague Marines probably need to come down to 15 points per model.
-Death Guard psykers should have access to the normal CSM psychic powers as well as the Contagion ones, kind of like how Thousand Sons do. At least the actual Sorcerers should get this, even if Malignant Plaguecasters and Morty don't.
Space Wolves:
-TWC need something to help them get into combat better, as currently Wulfen outclass them completely. Maybe just a points reduction to make them easier to fit into a list would be enough, but reroll charges would be even better.
-Many of the same price reductions that vanilla Marines need are also needed for SW. Grey Hunters and Blood Claws should be 11 points, for example.
-Santa Grimnar needs to be able to hide. His main weakness in the sleigh is having more than 9 wounds.
-Wulfen should be able to ride in any transport (except perhaps the Repulsor), counting as 2 models as they normally do. They'd actually be good cargo for a Drop Pod if this were allowed.
These are just some of the thoughts I had, and I'm sure others have thought of the same things before.
1ksons get that extra access because they are the 1ksons. Its like giving their DP's DR because DG's have it. I do like most of the rest of what you typed here. For once I would love to see Possessed actually hit the tables outside of a (love the models/fluff) capacity. All demon engines need a point drop not just the Dinobots. Id say 20 off across the board. 4 WS/BS really hurts them and it shows because no one is running them in comp lists (that I am aware of).
Cephalobeard wrote: I'd say the tier should be Tzeentch > Eldar/Thousand Sons > Normal Grey Knights (Their powers are often described in books as just manifestations of their emotions, not always something they control perfectly) > Librarians/Sorcerers > Imperial Psykers and the like.
I'd actually put Eldar much lower than you did; the thing is that Tzeentch, Thousand Sons, and Grey Knights are entirely incapable of running an army without multiple psykers, while Eldar could if they so wished not run any psykers at all. The three truly psychic-focused factions depend on having a large diversity of powers because their HQ options see diminishing returns and there's no real way to get around that. Eldar, on the other hand, can just run Autarchs instead once they have enough Farseers and Warlocks.
You guys are definitely forgetting Nids. They have highly intense psychic abilities, and the shadow lets them win almost every psychic battle by default. The lore on things like the Maleceptor is pretty insane, that thing is like a bio-engineered psychic brain in a shell 1000x the size of a regular psykers brain.
Elbows wrote: Yep, I agree...and it's part of the issue with Guardians having a new WS/BS of 3+. They become better in many instances than Aspect Warriors which is simply wrong. You might not webway portal them if they were BS 4+, etc. You've all but murdered the reason for having Dire Avengers...where they could be genuinely decent troops if Guardians were slightly worse. It wouldn't hurt to drop a point or two on the Dire Avengers though. 12 is pushing it for a Toughness 3 model with 4+ armour...
It's the same reason you saw a big rise in Space Marine Scouts when they inexplicably became as good as Marines with a similar stat-line bump. Why remove the steps or tiers in an army? They exist for a reason. To provide options and more considerations when making an army.
I think the argument in a White Dwarf at the time was that some players found it hard to remember when units have divergent stat lines in their army. I don't know if this is true or not - but then people struggled with the to hit/to wound charts for decades, so maybe I can see it.
Really though - infantry guardians just don't make much sense in the fluff and never have. If you were a dying race you wouldn't put civilians in harms way. You certainly wouldn't give them next to no protection and a gun which from 3rd edition (might be wrong here) has had the same range as a pistol, and so guarantees your opponent can charge you if you can shoot them.
Also putting Guardians back to WS/BS 4+ would also (in theory, I guess you could argue technology helps) effect bikers and all the vehicles. In which case the army goes from being elite to being more like Guard or Tau. Which doesn't really fit the fluff feel.
Different stats don't change the fact guardian defenders/dire avengers occupy the same space. Every edition one is better than the other - so you are likely to use that one unless you really fancy a change.
Very little faith Banshees or Scorpions can be fixed without making them incredibly cheap - and even then I suspect there would be better options unless you can have them jog across the field Ork style. As I see it we have had multiple editions handing Banshees out buffs and they still don't work.
The problem with assault is that there is critical mass. Light assault is garbage in 8th. Given the difficulties/expense of getting across the table, charging, taking overwatch and then your opponent can just withdraw you can't kill a few guys once you get there. It might be obnoxious but 30 Boyz work. 15 Genestealers with a good chance of a turn 1 charge work. 5-10 Banshees never will.
Cephalobeard wrote: I'd say the tier should be Tzeentch > Eldar/Thousand Sons > Normal Grey Knights (Their powers are often described in books as just manifestations of their emotions, not always something they control perfectly) > Librarians/Sorcerers > Imperial Psykers and the like.
I'd actually put Eldar much lower than you did; the thing is that Tzeentch, Thousand Sons, and Grey Knights are entirely incapable of running an army without multiple psykers, while Eldar could if they so wished not run any psykers at all. The three truly psychic-focused factions depend on having a large diversity of powers because their HQ options see diminishing returns and there's no real way to get around that. Eldar, on the other hand, can just run Autarchs instead once they have enough Farseers and Warlocks.
I was mostly quoting lore wise, but using it as a parallel for game purposes. I'd also add Tyranids, as mentioned, to the second tier.
Also putting Guardians back to WS/BS 4+ would also (in theory, I guess you could argue technology helps) effect bikers and all the vehicles. In which case the army goes from being elite to being more like Guard or Tau. Which doesn't really fit the fluff feel.
To be fair, it worked fine for 20+ years and 5 editions. Jetbikes, Falcons, Wave Serpents, War Walkers etc all found extensive use through the editions at their lower skill ratings. I never minded my War Walkers and Wave Serpents being BS3 personally.
Their specialness came from the other abilities of these units (holofields, Fast vehicles, Skimmer status, advanced weaponry, Jetbikes vs Bikes, etc), the stat boost in 6E really felt like it was just feeding the tired "elves are superior" trope for its own sake. At least to me
It also fit nicely with the buffing nature of many of the seers powers. The 6th change was juat a clear pet army buff from a designer without self control.
Also, remember in 2nd edition, almost every vehicle had proper targeters, so they were equivalent of BS4...but I agree, BS3 would have been fine with me. Points reduced as appropriate (or allow simple wargear on the vehicles at an added cost, etc.)
One other minor gripe about Eldar...excusing for the moment that Psykers became hapless combatants....their psychic weapons need work. Nothing says "bitch" like a psychic force weapon with 0 AP.
Also putting Guardians back to WS/BS 4+ would also (in theory, I guess you could argue technology helps) effect bikers and all the vehicles. In which case the army goes from being elite to being more like Guard or Tau. Which doesn't really fit the fluff feel.
To be fair, it worked fine for 20+ years and 5 editions. Jetbikes, Falcons, Wave Serpents, War Walkers etc all found extensive use through the editions at their lower skill ratings. I never minded my War Walkers and Wave Serpents being BS3 personally.
Their specialness came from the other abilities of these units (holofields, Fast vehicles, Skimmer status, advanced weaponry, Jetbikes vs Bikes, etc), the stat boost in 6E really felt like it was just feeding the tired "elves are superior" trope for its own sake. At least to me
For more than 20 years Assault Marines couldn't benefit from their jump packs in the charge phase either, but once you take that away the angry grumbling begins.
Face it, no one likes the nerfs back down to what things "used to" be like. Which is a shame because sometimes it's a lot more balanced than what we currently have with some things.
2+ save against 1 damage weapons
5++
Ignores penalty for moving and shooting heavy
Default gun is 4, -2, 1
Aspiring sorcerer has a 1/d3 smite
Extra attacks against Imperium on 6+
And an expanded wargear list with little restrictions
If this was 13 points then your regular marines would need to be 6 points.
- The 2+ is only a bit better than what marines get in cover anyway.
- The 5++ almost never comes into play.
- You almost never want them in melee so DTTFE is pretty moot.
- No natural morale mitigation.
- Perils on casting can absolutely obliterate the unit so I always need to save a reroll for that.
I'm not sure what you mean by "an expanded wargear list with little restrictions".
I need 10 models for the heavy. Warpflamers are nearly impossible to use.
Note : I'm not really complaining about them. Saving 60 points isn't going to break me. It would just open more lists heavy on them.
Marmatag wrote: Grey Knights can't kill daemons, or the daemons just come back. That, right there, is absurd. Just absurd. That stratagem alone is the biggest "FU" to a faction in any game i've ever seen.
And playing against Grey Knights with Daemons, every unit being able to cast a Smite on 5+ that is an automatic 3 MW is absurd. Just absurd.
Marmatag wrote: Grey Knights can't kill daemons, or the daemons just come back. That, right there, is absurd. Just absurd. That stratagem alone is the biggest "FU" to a faction in any game i've ever seen.
And playing against Grey Knights with Daemons, every unit being able to cast a Smite on 5+ that is an automatic 3 MW is absurd. Just absurd.
Don't daemons just have a strat to bring the unit back if killed by a GK unit?
A Death Guard buff would be nice for plague marines, hardly anyone ever plays those. But the same could be said for vanilla marines, rubric marines, or anything else that is power armored.
Also, I'm not sure if a points drop is something I'd actually want, I'm actually fine with playing fewer models, but they need to feel elite at least. 4 pts Catachans are so much better than normal marines it's insane.
Arachnofiend wrote: Eldar can't be BS4+ because then it would be even more difficult to make Tau feel distinctive.
Isn't BS 4+ supposed to be for trained soldiers?
I know Tau border between guardsmen and marines but since there's no 3.5 on a 6 sided die
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gryphonne wrote: A Death Guard buff would be nice for plague marines, hardly anyone ever plays those. But the same could be said for vanilla marines, rubric marines, or anything else that is power armored.
Also, I'm not sure if a points drop is something I'd actually want, I'm actually fine with playing fewer models, but they need to feel elite at least. 4 pts Catachans are so much better than normal marines it's insane.
A marine is just a more expensive guardsman. I'd like to start custodes I bet they feel more like super soldiers
Marmatag wrote: Grey Knights can't kill daemons, or the daemons just come back. That, right there, is absurd. Just absurd. That stratagem alone is the biggest "FU" to a faction in any game i've ever seen.
And playing against Grey Knights with Daemons, every unit being able to cast a Smite on 5+ that is an automatic 3 MW is absurd. Just absurd.
Don't daemons just have a strat to bring the unit back if killed by a GK unit?
Good thing you'll have 20+ MW a turn to deal with it
I like the tradeoff of "rocket strapped to my back" vs "Sneak up to you". I like both ASM and Scorpions. A lot of the rules dovetail well to make them just about equal, same general use, but different ways of doing it. Until Scorp infiltrate was killed.
Sometimes, I want my skirmishers to jet around the board. Other times I want to plan how to get my skirmishers past my enemy's line. Unfortunately both suck right now.
Any buff to Scorpion's CC ability I hope gets put into the ASM too.
To me a proper assault marine has 2 wounds and 2 attacks.and costs about 15 points.
I think a striking scorpion be infiltrate - 1+ save in cover - have their mandiblaster attack and have 3 attacks ap-1 - have the ability to advance and charge and cost about 13.
I think these units would get some play with these stats.
Banshees I think need a special ability. Like -1 to hit for the units they end a charge with. 3 attacks with ap-3 - and something like a 5++(call it a dodge) They should have the ability to fall back and charge. Cost like 13 points.
Firedragons should be like 20 points.
Swooping hawks I think are actually pretty good. Maybe upgrade the stats on the hawks talon.
Marmatag wrote: Grey Knights can't kill daemons, or the daemons just come back. That, right there, is absurd. Just absurd. That stratagem alone is the biggest "FU" to a faction in any game i've ever seen.
And playing against Grey Knights with Daemons, every unit being able to cast a Smite on 5+ that is an automatic 3 MW is absurd. Just absurd.
It's actually a 4+ smite . Though. A LOC coming back to life after you hit it with 6 smites. That is basically GG.
There is a way around this though - just take a detachment of vindicar assasins and have them finish off units with their ignore invo.
Marmatag wrote: Grey Knights can't kill daemons, or the daemons just come back. That, right there, is absurd. Just absurd. That stratagem alone is the biggest "FU" to a faction in any game i've ever seen.
And playing against Grey Knights with Daemons, every unit being able to cast a Smite on 5+ that is an automatic 3 MW is absurd. Just absurd.
Don't daemons just have a strat to bring the unit back if killed by a GK unit?
Good thing you'll have 20+ MW a turn to deal with it
So perpetually killing one unit over and over? I think that draigos lore. Cool
If all you're doing is smiting and not using your shooting phase (which masses of storm bolter fire is excellent for daemon killing) then you have other issues and a 2CP strat is not one of them.
This is the crux of the issue isn't it? Imagine a world where Grey Knights are a strong faction that stands on its own, even in fairly competitive formats - if such an army just automatically does 3 mortal wounds to any daemon unit with every unit in their army then there's zero way for daemons to compete with that.
Frankly, the Grey Knights bonuses against daemons need to be nerfed down (about the level of impact Deathwatch have against Xenos is fine) if GK's are ever going to be a good army without just ruining things for Chaos players.
Don't daemons just have a strat to bring the unit back if killed by a GK unit?
Good thing you'll have 20+ MW a turn to deal with it
Ok how many points do you play, because 21 MW would be 7 GK units and all would have to be in range, pass tests and non of them would have to die on the way of getting in to range.
This is the crux of the issue isn't it? Imagine a world where Grey Knights are a strong faction that stands on its own, even in fairly competitive formats - if such an army just automatically does 3 mortal wounds to any daemon unit with every unit in their army then there's zero way for daemons to compete with that.
Ok let us enter that magical realm. GK cost more then demon units. They have more screen options, while GK have 0, and each non named demon unit returns. Even in the magical realm of GK lists, the demon army works just fine.
That doesn't make sense, Karol. You are comparing current state GK, that's not what he's saying. If the army becomes balanced against the rest of the game without it, having it a buff like that vs Daemons is probably going to destroy the match up.
"I'd actually put Eldar much lower than you did; the thing is that Tzeentch, Thousand Sons, and Grey Knights are entirely incapable of running an army without multiple psykers"
From a gameplay perspective, yes. From a lore perspective, no. Every single CWE Eldar is a psyker. But trained not to use it when not walking the appropriate Paths. (Not claiming every Eldar is a Farseer-powerhouse-psyker.)
"To me a proper assault marine has 2 wounds and 2 attacks.and costs about 15 points."
All Marines should have 2A base. And wouldn't even need a points increase. Still not sold on 2W base, but there's virtually no way that's happening in CA.
"I think a striking scorpion be infiltrate - 1+ save in cover - have their mandiblaster attack and have 3 attacks ap-1 - have the ability to advance and charge and cost about 13.
I think these units would get some play with these stats."
But are those the right stats? 1+ save in cover would make them very hard to dislodge. I'd rather they didn't become more durable after they engaged, though. And I'd rather they retain their AP0. They aren't armor hunters. Their CC ability should stay at "We'll kill some backfielders, but not a tank or frontline unit". And fewer things need Advance + Charge, not more. What they really need is a way to "get there" that isn't just "magic fairydust, freechargenao". Something like "1+ save in cover if they have not attacked", or Scout-like deployment options, or old-outflank or something. Their durability is about right. Their killiness is about right. They just don't have any real ambush ability - which is what should define them.
"Banshees I think need a special ability. Like -1 to hit for the units they end a charge with. 3 attacks with ap-3 - and something like a 5++(call it a dodge) They should have the ability to fall back and charge. Cost like 13 points. "
I'd love to see the Banshees Wail do more - like, instead of the "Always fight first, unless of course you might not have fought first anyways" rule they have now, make it something more synergistic with other friendly units. Something like "enemy units within 3" suffer -1 to hit" - and maybe the Exarch gets a 6" bubble instead (around her, not the unit). More attacks is just inflation, and fewer things should have decent dodge invulns, not more. They aren't Wyches.
I like Fall Back and Charge on more CWE stuff. I wish Battle Focus were 'Fall back for free' instead of what it is. But again, no way that's happening in CA.
"Firedragons should be like 20 points."
Fire Dragons are good at what they do. But nobody wants Melta these days. Because other stuff is OP.
"Swooping hawks I think are actually pretty good. Maybe upgrade the stats on the hawks talon."
I agree that Hawks are about right right now. But I want their Grenades back. Wouldn't change much, but made them more obviously a toolbox. Plus, RF2 instead of A4 made a more risk/reward scenario in the index. If I were wishlisting, I'd suggest that, too.
"Spiders - have them wound on 2's vs anything."
That works. I was thinking more Flamer-style weapons on them. Strength might need to go down for that. But it'd be more fitting.
Automatically Appended Next Post: One more thing:
However else you buff them, what Banshees/Scorps really need is a nerf to Spears.
Nerfing Spears will not do much except increase the number of Wave Serpents on the field instead of increasing the use of Banshees and Scorpions.
Banshees and Scorpions suffer mostly from being a 3/3 unit which means you are paying a premium for stuff that is going to have a hard time killing stuff. At least the Scorpions get a +1 to strength, but most of the time they are going to collapse. If they are lucky they'll get a round of combat before their opponent Falls Back and shoots the Aeldari CC dead.
The reason Shining Spears are popular is because they sync quite well with Aeldari Psychic Powers whereas you'll most of the time not waste your powers on a unit of Banshees and Scorpions. It's the reason people take large squads of Shining Spears; to maximize psychic power ability.
SHUPPET wrote: That doesn't make sense, Karol. You are comparing current state GK, that's not what he's saying. If the army becomes balanced against the rest of the game without it, having it a buff like that vs Daemons is probably going to destroy the match up.
How is it any worse than eldar matching up against armies with 3+ armor as a main protection? Ap-4 all over the place.
Bad matchups happen. Some armies excell vs other armies. An army doesnt need to be at a lower power level because it's good against 1 army. Heck - Chaos gets free abilities against imperium.
I think the solution here is simple though - give GK a smite more like TS so it's not more or less effecitve vs everything. Retain the reroll wounds in CC though because that is super situational and plenty of rules exist like this through out the game. It adds character.
By nerfing spears, I just mean that any buff to Scorpions or Banshees that'd make them worth taking over Spears would make them OP. So you'd need to buff them while nerfing Spears (a little, not a lot).
Spears (and Reapers) "suffer" from being high PPM models that can be taken in largish units. Doubling the impact of a 9-man Spears unit will mean more than doubling the impact of a 9-man DA unit, even if DAs and Spears were equally powerful/pt.
Thargrim wrote: Terminators/deathwing kinda need some help. I'd like to run a full deathwing army but terminators and the LR are not in the best place right now. Some points costs need to be shifted around or something. I never see anyone take that cool looking glaive. I like the idea of an elite army like that, but reducing points costs per model means a larger numerous army...which isn't what I really want. I'm not experienced enough at the game to really say what the best course is.
Yeah. To be competitive without any rules changes Marines need a 20%-25% cost reduction over the entire faction, and that's not what I think any marine player actually wants. On the other hand, to feel like they're actually worth 13 points the basic Marine profile needs to be vastly tougher than it actually is. Like, T5 and a 2+ 5+++ save levels of tougher. And possibly A2. And to justify the premium Space Marines pay over Guard for any given weapon system they would need the ability to ignore penalties to hit for moving built into the basic army-wide rules. And a significant number of their strategems are based on taking three of something that is hard to justify taking at all.
They're just in a bad place.
I agree & IMO Terminators should already ignore the HW penalty. It has in the past specifically mentioned that Tactical Dreadnought Armor was to be a stable heavy weapons platform...
Aren't some of the highest-ranking monofaction lists already SM, though? Sure, soups of all kinds crap on them, but they aren't nearly as bad as a 20-25% cost reduction factionwide.
Bharring wrote: Aren't some of the highest-ranking monofaction lists already SM, though? Sure, soups of all kinds crap on them, but they aren't nearly as bad as a 20-25% cost reduction factionwide.
Remove the reroll your rerolls crutch of Guilliman and vanilla marine codex is a fair fight for necrons currently.
Really marines need more worj than is likely in CA to make them work without having some OP outcomes with all the snowflake codex's.
Bharring wrote: Aren't some of the highest-ranking monofaction lists already SM, though? Sure, soups of all kinds crap on them, but they aren't nearly as bad as a 20-25% cost reduction factionwide.
Bharring wrote: By nerfing spears, I just mean that any buff to Scorpions or Banshees that'd make them worth taking over Spears would make them OP. So you'd need to buff them while nerfing Spears (a little, not a lot).
Spears (and Reapers) "suffer" from being high PPM models that can be taken in largish units. Doubling the impact of a 9-man Spears unit will mean more than doubling the impact of a 9-man DA unit, even if DAs and Spears were equally powerful/pt.
Isn't that always the case though that some are just more point efficient in buffing? If I have S.Cannon Serpent and a BL Serpent I am most of the time probably going to get better ROI from buffing the BL Serpent and debuffing its target(which is probably going to be a high wound/armor target). This is just a general problem with psychic powers and abilities that buff rerolls. At least with the Aeldari psychic powers you are going to have a harder time using them due to a high warp charge compared to something static like Roboute's buff aura.
Bharring wrote: By nerfing spears, I just mean that any buff to Scorpions or Banshees that'd make them worth taking over Spears would make them OP. So you'd need to buff them while nerfing Spears (a little, not a lot).
Spears (and Reapers) "suffer" from being high PPM models that can be taken in largish units. Doubling the impact of a 9-man Spears unit will mean more than doubling the impact of a 9-man DA unit, even if DAs and Spears were equally powerful/pt.
Isn't that always the case though that some are just more point efficient in buffing? If I have S.Cannon Serpent and a BL Serpent I am most of the time probably going to get better ROI from buffing the BL Serpent and debuffing its target(which is probably going to be a high wound/armor target). This is just a general problem with psychic powers and abilities that buff rerolls. At least with the Aeldari psychic powers you are going to have a harder time using them due to a high warp charge compared to something static like Roboute's buff aura.
Not so much - spears are clearly undercosted compared to every other biker unit. The fact that you can buff them to high levels just makes them one of the best units in the game. They aren't the only undercosted unit.
Bharring wrote: By nerfing spears, I just mean that any buff to Scorpions or Banshees that'd make them worth taking over Spears would make them OP. So you'd need to buff them while nerfing Spears (a little, not a lot).
Spears (and Reapers) "suffer" from being high PPM models that can be taken in largish units. Doubling the impact of a 9-man Spears unit will mean more than doubling the impact of a 9-man DA unit, even if DAs and Spears were equally powerful/pt.
Isn't that always the case though that some are just more point efficient in buffing? If I have S.Cannon Serpent and a BL Serpent I am most of the time probably going to get better ROI from buffing the BL Serpent and debuffing its target(which is probably going to be a high wound/armor target). This is just a general problem with psychic powers and abilities that buff rerolls. At least with the Aeldari psychic powers you are going to have a harder time using them due to a high warp charge compared to something static like Roboute's buff aura.
Not so much - spears are clearly undercosted compared to every other biker unit. The fact that you can buff them to high levels just makes them one of the best units in the game. They aren't the only undercosted unit.
More or less every other biker unit is overpriced for what it does which is why you don't see many Space Marine bikers, DA Bikers, CSM bikers, Windriders, Vypers, Ork Bikers, or really any other bikers so your point is moot unless the point is that Shining Spears should also be as useless as the rest.
They are also a unit that requires a lot of synchronicity to work properly(Guide, Doom, Jinx, and/or Ynnari ability. All of these things require point investments). I am going to be curious when the eventual nerf comes whether they will fall back into the dust bin of history where they've stayed since forever. It was at least nice to have been able to use them for a year or so.
I really want to see the Ynnari characters offered as normal HQs with the appropriate keyword to Eldar and Dark Eldar.
Having to completely rebuild your army around Ynnari to use them is silly. I would also be fine removing strength from death from the game in its entirety, and replacing all soulburst mechanics with a targeted "+1 attack" or "+1 shot" kind of buff. It'd still be good, as you'd get an extra shot out of reapers, but shooting twice is just bonkers good. By toning it down and making it easier to take these characters, you affect balance in a really positive way: people can play the models and stay mono-faction (if that's your goal), and there's less reason to power game a ynnari list.
And the last thing i want to see is a Ynnari codex. They have 3 models. It makes no sense.
Marmatag wrote: I really want to see the Ynnari characters offered as normal HQs with the appropriate keyword to Eldar and Dark Eldar.
Having to completely rebuild your army around Ynnari to use them is silly. I would also be fine removing strength from death from the game in its entirety, and replacing all soulburst mechanics with a targeted "+1 attack" or "+1 shot" kind of buff. It'd still be good, as you'd get an extra shot out of reapers, but shooting twice is just bonkers good. By toning it down and making it easier to take these characters, you affect balance in a really positive way: people can play the models and stay mono-faction (if that's your goal), and there's less reason to power game a ynnari list.
And the last thing i want to see is a Ynnari codex. They have 3 models. It makes no sense.
Agreed, however GW has indeed release army books in the past that only had 3 models. The first Imperial Knight "codex" was released for a single kit that had only 2 builds
A Ynnari codex could also include specifc CWE, DE and Harlie units to be used and give them specific Ynnair datasheets, rather than relying on having the other books.
Bharring wrote: By nerfing spears, I just mean that any buff to Scorpions or Banshees that'd make them worth taking over Spears would make them OP. So you'd need to buff them while nerfing Spears (a little, not a lot).
Spears (and Reapers) "suffer" from being high PPM models that can be taken in largish units. Doubling the impact of a 9-man Spears unit will mean more than doubling the impact of a 9-man DA unit, even if DAs and Spears were equally powerful/pt.
Isn't that always the case though that some are just more point efficient in buffing? If I have S.Cannon Serpent and a BL Serpent I am most of the time probably going to get better ROI from buffing the BL Serpent and debuffing its target(which is probably going to be a high wound/armor target). This is just a general problem with psychic powers and abilities that buff rerolls. At least with the Aeldari psychic powers you are going to have a harder time using them due to a high warp charge compared to something static like Roboute's buff aura.
Not so much - spears are clearly undercosted compared to every other biker unit. The fact that you can buff them to high levels just makes them one of the best units in the game. They aren't the only undercosted unit.
More or less every other biker unit is overpriced for what it does which is why you don't see many Space Marine bikers, DA Bikers, CSM bikers, Windriders, Vypers, Ork Bikers, or really any other bikers so your point is moot unless the point is that Shining Spears should also be as useless as the rest.
They are also a unit that requires a lot of synchronicity to work properly(Guide, Doom, Jinx, and/or Ynnari ability. All of these things require point investments). I am going to be curious when the eventual nerf comes whether they will fall back into the dust bin of history where they've stayed since forever. It was at least nice to have been able to use them for a year or so.
Not that I disagree with what you are saying about the other bike units. They obviously just cost too much. There is a middle ground between a company vet on bike (36 with no special weapon or close combat weapon) and a shinning spear (31 with all it's gear) You start putting gear on that Company vet and hes over 50 points and still doesn't have fly key word. it's clear - 1 needs to come up and 1 needs to come down. In the end the company vet should cost more because he will have a 3++ save t5 more or less they do about the same damage though and still doesn't have access to eldar buffs.
Marmatag wrote: I really want to see the Ynnari characters offered as normal HQs with the appropriate keyword to Eldar and Dark Eldar.
Having to completely rebuild your army around Ynnari to use them is silly. I would also be fine removing strength from death from the game in its entirety, and replacing all soulburst mechanics with a targeted "+1 attack" or "+1 shot" kind of buff. It'd still be good, as you'd get an extra shot out of reapers, but shooting twice is just bonkers good. By toning it down and making it easier to take these characters, you affect balance in a really positive way: people can play the models and stay mono-faction (if that's your goal), and there's less reason to power game a ynnari list.
And the last thing i want to see is a Ynnari codex. They have 3 models. It makes no sense.
Agreed, however GW has indeed release army books in the past that only had 3 models. The first Imperial Knight "codex" was released for a single kit that had only 2 builds A Ynnari codex could also include specifc CWE, DE and Harlie units to be used and give them specific Ynnair datasheets, rather than relying on having the other books.
-
True, although historical GW seems to not be a predictor for future releases.
I just see Ynnari in their current form making balance a lot harder and in general you have to build very specific lists to make them work. It'd be nice to open them up a bit, and have native in-faction psychic access for my DE army. It's not like DE can function without doom and jinx anyway.
Agreed. I think the best way to address Ynnari is to release a book, codex or not, that has just the 3 Characters with a special rule that they do not affect Aeldari detachment bonuses if added to one. They can just be added as if they had the right keywords and give they detachment YNNARI Make SfD an aura ability that all 3 have that they give to Aeldari units within 18". Something like re-roll to-wound rolls instead of double actions. You can make 1 Psychic powers grant "move, shoot, charge or fight twice"
YNNARI units would not have SfD at all, but merely get a minor bonus for being range of one of the Characters
Why is it problematic for ynnari to fight twice and shoot twice in a turn but it's not problematic for an army to shoot twice and fight twice off of stratagems? If they could double up on strats and ability and fight 3 times i'd be with you (outside of harliquens though it's not happening) and i don't see anyone exploiting harliquens with it anyways.
Honestly, I'd like GW to stop pricing things based on what buffs it. Price the buffing unit highly if you must, but leave the wargear and other options alone so armies who can't or don't take that buff aren't being penalized for it.
ClockworkZion wrote: Honestly, I'd like GW to stop pricing things based on what buffs it. Price the buffing unit highly if you must, but leave the wargear and other options alone so armies who can't or don't take that buff aren't being penalized for it.
I'm not sure they do anything like that. Pretty sure they just pull numbers out of hats to determine point values. How do you charge for a buff anyways? Especially with the fact that characters have protections from being targeted first - this is the natural way you could balance buffs.
It's like in LOL if they have a healer support and you don't take them out you literally can not win the fight. However - they are usually very vulnerable characters. 40k buff characters are practically immune to damage - that is the real problem. Cause buffs almost always hit above their weight class. Perhaps we should go back to the old ways - where characters have to be in units to be protected AND they aren't allowed to tank for those units. That way you could focus characters by wiping out their units and then crushing them.
Bharring wrote: Aren't some of the highest-ranking monofaction lists already SM, though? Sure, soups of all kinds crap on them, but they aren't nearly as bad as a 20-25% cost reduction factionwide.
I think Roboute and Ynnari are in about the same place.
Once OP hot garbage. Now, nerfed to where they can do work, but are questionable.
In both cases you have special character(s) who buff units insanely well. And, in both cases, the units they buff can be fielded for the same points in their army, or in armies that can't take the character(s).
Both Tac Marines and Shining Spears are really hard to price such that they're a valid option both with and without said character(s), without making them OP.
Marines won't be fine generally until Big G himself is terribad. Eldar won't be fine generally until Ynnari gets sorted out somehow.
ClockworkZion wrote: Honestly, I'd like GW to stop pricing things based on what buffs it. Price the buffing unit highly if you must, but leave the wargear and other options alone so armies who can't or don't take that buff aren't being penalized for it.
I'm not sure they do anything like that. Pretty sure they just pull numbers out of hats to determine point values. How do you charge for a buff anyways? Especially with the fact that characters have protections from being targeted first - this is the natural way you could balance buffs.
It's like in LOL if they have a healer support and you don't take them out you literally can not win the fight. However - they are usually very vulnerable characters. 40k buff characters are practically immune to damage - that is the real problem. Cause buffs almost always hit above their weight class. Perhaps we should go back to the old ways - where characters have to be in units to be protected AND they aren't allowed to tank for those units. That way you could focus characters by wiping out their units and then crushing them.
They upped Guilliman's points to try and balance his buffing, which was fine, the problem was they upped the cost of things he could buff too which hurt factions that don't or can't take him. I mean Grey Knights have to pay a premium on Autocannon Razorbacks despite the fact that they don't need or want Guilliman in their army lists.
Bharring wrote: I think Roboute and Ynnari are in about the same place.
Once OP hot garbage. Now, nerfed to where they can do work, but are questionable.
In both cases you have special character(s) who buff units insanely well. And, in both cases, the units they buff can be fielded for the same points in their army, or in armies that can't take the character(s).
Both Tac Marines and Shining Spears are really hard to price such that they're a valid option both with and without said character(s), without making them OP.
Marines won't be fine generally until Big G himself is terribad. Eldar won't be fine generally until Ynnari gets sorted out somehow.
Ehh - Big G just needs to be reworked - like instead of an aura - he can make 1 units reroll hits and wounds. Let him keep his 12 inch aura though which is just kinda cool. With a significant drop in points.
Then reprice every marine unit accordingly. Ynnari IMO are not really a big problem. As I have pointed out repeatedly - all their abilities can be duplicated with stratagems and spells. Plus they aren't getting it for free - they give up an army trait and battle focus (very good abiltiies) to get it. Why do ynnari do so well? Because the units they exploit are OP - it's simple as that.
ClockworkZion wrote: Honestly, I'd like GW to stop pricing things based on what buffs it. Price the buffing unit highly if you must, but leave the wargear and other options alone so armies who can't or don't take that buff aren't being penalized for it.
I'm not sure they do anything like that. Pretty sure they just pull numbers out of hats to determine point values. How do you charge for a buff anyways? Especially with the fact that characters have protections from being targeted first - this is the natural way you could balance buffs.
It's like in LOL if they have a healer support and you don't take them out you literally can not win the fight. However - they are usually very vulnerable characters. 40k buff characters are practically immune to damage - that is the real problem. Cause buffs almost always hit above their weight class. Perhaps we should go back to the old ways - where characters have to be in units to be protected AND they aren't allowed to tank for those units. That way you could focus characters by wiping out their units and then crushing them.
They upped Guilliman's points to try and balance his buffing, which was fine, the problem was they upped the cost of things he could buff too which hurt factions that don't or can't take him. I mean Grey Knights have to pay a premium on Autocannon Razorbacks despite the fact that they don't need or want Guilliman in their army lists.
Yeah I agree with that. Except - at the same time if you are going to go after problematic interactions but don't go after all of them - or even the most problematic interactions...you don't accomplish anything.
All they did was doc ultras 40 points to the top space marine build and every other space marine faction got that much weaker if they utilized assault cannons. Meanwhile IG and Eldar hardly get touched...I think spirit seers went up 10 points...MY MY GOD GOD. Those are the armies that win everything.
Thy need their buff to be reworked. Instead of insane buff for one unit it should be moderate buff for many units. That way it would make sense to field an actual Ynnari army, instead of just one allied mini detachment. Them drawing units from other Eldar factions is perfectly fine, it is their thing. They're like Inquisition for Imperium, a great excuse for a weird soup.
Yeah that will help - in the codex it states - they can't use craft-world stratagems.
Honestly they could do something awesome with it...like this army doesn't start with any CP However when they kill units they gain CP (kind of like how daemon kin used to work) they could use those CP to do the things that SFD allows them to do - plus some other cool ideas they can come up with. That would be cool.
ClockworkZion wrote: Honestly, I'd like GW to stop pricing things based on what buffs it. Price the buffing unit highly if you must, but leave the wargear and other options alone so armies who can't or don't take that buff aren't being penalized for it.
I'm not sure they do anything like that. Pretty sure they just pull numbers out of hats to determine point values. How do you charge for a buff anyways? Especially with the fact that characters have protections from being targeted first - this is the natural way you could balance buffs.
It's like in LOL if they have a healer support and you don't take them out you literally can not win the fight. However - they are usually very vulnerable characters. 40k buff characters are practically immune to damage - that is the real problem. Cause buffs almost always hit above their weight class. Perhaps we should go back to the old ways - where characters have to be in units to be protected AND they aren't allowed to tank for those units. That way you could focus characters by wiping out their units and then crushing them.
They upped Guilliman's points to try and balance his buffing, which was fine, the problem was they upped the cost of things he could buff too which hurt factions that don't or can't take him. I mean Grey Knights have to pay a premium on Autocannon Razorbacks despite the fact that they don't need or want Guilliman in their army lists.
Yeah I agree with that. Except - at the same time if you are going to go after problematic interactions but don't go after all of them - or even the most problematic interactions...you don't accomplish anything.
All they did was doc ultras 40 points to the top space marine build and every other space marine faction got that much weaker if they utilized assault cannons. Meanwhile IG and Eldar hardly get touched...I think spirit seers went up 10 points...MY MY GOD GOD. Those are the armies that win everything.
You can address problems without nerfing every part of the combo though. You need to pull the lynchpin out of the combo instead of just wildly flailing a nerf bat around though.
I dunno, the Commisar nerf and Conscript nerfs weren't nothing.
And the CWE book was written at the same time as the last CA - why would you see nerfs to a book that wasn't out when CA was written?
Yes, more balancing is needed. If only the FAQ made some changes?
Yes, more balancing is needed after those too.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The Assault Cannon was an amazing weapon on it's own right, for it's points. It went up too much, and the other options those armies have are bad, though.
Bharring wrote: I dunno, the Commisar nerf and Conscript nerfs weren't nothing.
And the CWE book was written at the same time as the last CA - why would you see nerfs to a book that wasn't out when CA was written?
Yes, more balancing is needed. If only the FAQ made some changes?
Yes, more balancing is needed after those too.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The Assault Cannon was an amazing weapon on it's own right, for it's points. It went up too much, and the other options those armies have are bad, though.
the conscript nerf didn't really matter - infantry squads are just as problematic.
Infantry were inferior to conscripts as a means of mass, basically unshiftable, screening for cheap. Infantry should got up a 1ppm to compensate for the Conscript point increase, and I feel like officers need to be adjusted a bit since you don't roll to pass orders anymore.
ClockworkZion wrote: Infantry were inferior to conscripts as a means of mass, basically unshiftable, screening for cheap. Infantry should got up a 1ppm to compensate for the Conscript point increase, and I feel like officers need to be adjusted a bit since you don't roll to pass orders anymore.
Agreed. The HQ tax needs to be an actual Tax. 30 points is not a tax. If Infantry Squads don't go to 5ppm I'll be genuinely surprised.
Ehhh - infantry were never worse than conscripts IMO. The points you save get wasted on a commissar - that infantry never needed to function.
They do more damage per points.
The have access to mortars.
They fill out detachments for cheaper.
Were undercosted then and are still now.
You could argue that one is better than than the other at the time based on what you wanted your army to do. However - Calling one inferior to the other is foolhardy.
Xenomancers wrote: Ehhh - infantry were never worse than conscripts IMO. The points you save get wasted on a commissar - that infantry never needed to function.
They do more damage per points.
The have access to mortars.
They fill out detachments for cheaper.
Were undercosted then and are still now.
You could argue that one is better than than the other at the time based on what you wanted your army to do. However - Calling one inferior to the other is foolhardy.
They costed more, mortars aren't free and you could only run them in units of 10 while Conscripts could run units of 30 and with a single character screen an entire gunline. And if 30 wasn't enough, you could run 60 for only 180 points and bubblewrap your army cheaper than 6 units of Infantry.
They were better for specific roles and your refusal to accept that screams more of your bias in how strong the infantry squad is in your mind compared to how good it actually is.
Xenomancers wrote: Ehhh - infantry were never worse than conscripts IMO. The points you save get wasted on a commissar - that infantry never needed to function.
They do more damage per points.
The have access to mortars.
They fill out detachments for cheaper.
Were undercosted then and are still now.
You could argue that one is better than than the other at the time based on what you wanted your army to do. However - Calling one inferior to the other is foolhardy.
They costed more, mortars aren't free and you could only run them in units of 10 while Conscripts could run units of 30 and with a single character screen an entire gunline. And if 30 wasn't enough, you could run 60 for only 180 points and bubblewrap your army cheaper than 6 units of Infantry.
They were better for specific roles and your refusal to accept that screams more of your bias in how strong the infantry squad is in your mind compared to how good it actually is.
Yes - conscripts costed less at the time but with min unit requirements you could take min detachments of infantry for cheaper. Basically that's all that matters right now.
Xenomancers wrote: Ehhh - infantry were never worse than conscripts IMO. The points you save get wasted on a commissar - that infantry never needed to function.
They do more damage per points.
The have access to mortars.
They fill out detachments for cheaper.
Were undercosted then and are still now.
You could argue that one is better than than the other at the time based on what you wanted your army to do. However - Calling one inferior to the other is foolhardy.
They costed more, mortars aren't free and you could only run them in units of 10 while Conscripts could run units of 30 and with a single character screen an entire gunline. And if 30 wasn't enough, you could run 60 for only 180 points and bubblewrap your army cheaper than 6 units of Infantry.
They were better for specific roles and your refusal to accept that screams more of your bias in how strong the infantry squad is in your mind compared to how good it actually is.
Yes - conscripts costed less at the time but with min unit requirements you could take min detachments of infantry for cheaper. Basically that's all that matters right now.
No one cares about "right now" when talking about how strong Conscripts used to be. Quit using how effective a unit currently is to dismiss how good it used to be.
Xenomancers wrote: Ehhh - infantry were never worse than conscripts IMO. The points you save get wasted on a commissar - that infantry never needed to function.
They do more damage per points.
The have access to mortars.
They fill out detachments for cheaper.
Were undercosted then and are still now.
You could argue that one is better than than the other at the time based on what you wanted your army to do. However - Calling one inferior to the other is foolhardy.
They costed more, mortars aren't free and you could only run them in units of 10 while Conscripts could run units of 30 and with a single character screen an entire gunline. And if 30 wasn't enough, you could run 60 for only 180 points and bubblewrap your army cheaper than 6 units of Infantry.
They were better for specific roles and your refusal to accept that screams more of your bias in how strong the infantry squad is in your mind compared to how good it actually is.
Yes - conscripts costed less at the time but with min unit requirements you could take min detachments of infantry for cheaper. Basically that's all that matters right now.
No one cares about "right now" when talking about how strong Conscripts used to be. Quit using how effective a unit currently is to dismiss how good it used to be.
that is a good point - during basically index era 40k detachments didn't matter as much because there weren't stratagems. So just getting more raw bodies was more important. That explain why conscripts were almost always chosen over infantry - even though infantry are basically the exact same unit with better shooting when you factor in the required commisar for conscripts.
I'm not saying conscripts wern't OP - they obviously were. Just that Infantry weren't any less OP. They really weren't. Not even for screening - screening at the time was about spreading out to block as many deep strike zone as possible - smaller units do this better.
Xenomancers wrote: Ehhh - infantry were never worse than conscripts IMO. The points you save get wasted on a commissar - that infantry never needed to function.
They do more damage per points.
The have access to mortars.
They fill out detachments for cheaper.
Were undercosted then and are still now.
You could argue that one is better than than the other at the time based on what you wanted your army to do. However - Calling one inferior to the other is foolhardy.
They costed more, mortars aren't free and you could only run them in units of 10 while Conscripts could run units of 30 and with a single character screen an entire gunline. And if 30 wasn't enough, you could run 60 for only 180 points and bubblewrap your army cheaper than 6 units of Infantry.
They were better for specific roles and your refusal to accept that screams more of your bias in how strong the infantry squad is in your mind compared to how good it actually is.
Yes - conscripts costed less at the time but with min unit requirements you could take min detachments of infantry for cheaper. Basically that's all that matters right now.
No one cares about "right now" when talking about how strong Conscripts used to be. Quit using how effective a unit currently is to dismiss how good it used to be.
that is a good point - during basically index era 40k detachments didn't matter as much because there weren't stratagems. So just getting more raw bodies was more important. That explain why conscripts were almost always chosen over infantry - even though infantry are basically the exact same unit with better shooting when you factor in the required commisar for conscripts.
I'm not saying conscripts wern't OP - they obviously were. Just that Infantry weren't any less OP. They really weren't. Not even for screening - screening at the time was about spreading out to block as many deep strike zone as possible - smaller units do this better.
And yet we weren't seeing Infantry Squads at the top tables meaning there were other things in play that were making the Conscripts a better choice at the time.
Regardless, a 1ppm increase for Infantry would balance them more, and a points hike on Officers to address how Orders currently work would go a long way to fixing the army's balance.
What they did was ruin the psychic phase for every army that isn't Eldar (their spells are better than smite and never spammed psykers anyways) or TS(they still smite spam)
Xenomancers wrote: What they did was ruin the psychic phase for every army that isn't Eldar (their spells are better than smite and never spammed psykers anyways) or TS(they still smite spam)
My GSC isn't too affected since I want to be using the powers from the army list over Smite. I mean if I can Dominate a Castellan that's WAY better than using Smite.
Spoletta wrote: Thousand sons blasting the enemy with psyblows is somewhat better than cheap nobody psykers doing it. At least now it's thematic.
To be fair, a cult of Tzeentch unleashing massed (and highly unstable) psykers in the populace is thematic too, but it wasn't being used that way, it was being used to bring like 10 ML in a CSM list and it was stupid.
Then again most super competitive lists are kind of stupid because they don't really base themselves around the lore as much as what mechanically punches the hardest. There are plenty of fluffy lists that do well, but they're not as common sadly.
"What they did was ruin the psychic phase for every army that isn't Eldar (their spells are better than smite and never spammed psykers anyways) or TS(they still smite spam)"
It ruined the phase for what, 3 armies?
-R&H: Maelific spam was dumb. Good riddence.
-IG: Oops! Should they buff them to compensate?!?
-GK: Well, yeah, GK got boned.
It didn't impact, what, a dozen or so armies? So why single out Eldar?
Bharring wrote: "What they did was ruin the psychic phase for every army that isn't Eldar (their spells are better than smite and never spammed psykers anyways) or TS(they still smite spam)"
It ruined the phase for what, 3 armies?
-R&H: Maelific spam was dumb. Good riddence.
-IG: Oops! Should they buff them to compensate?!?
-GK: Well, yeah, GK got boned.
It didn't impact, what, a dozen or so armies? So why single out Eldar?
GK got an exception to Smite, the problem is their baby smite doesn't really hit like the TS do. I almost wonder if the TS were going to be like the GK until GW saw the response to the baby smite and back-pedalled on doing the same thing twice.
Bharring wrote: "What they did was ruin the psychic phase for every army that isn't Eldar (their spells are better than smite and never spammed psykers anyways) or TS(they still smite spam)"
It ruined the phase for what, 3 armies?
-R&H: Maelific spam was dumb. Good riddence.
-IG: Oops! Should they buff them to compensate?!?
-GK: Well, yeah, GK got boned.
It didn't impact, what, a dozen or so armies? So why single out Eldar?
Yet ironically after the doubling in pts you did not see malefics anyways.
Xenomancers wrote: What they did was ruin the psychic phase for every army that isn't Eldar (their spells are better than smite and never spammed psykers anyways) or TS(they still smite spam)
My GSC isn't too affected since I want to be using the powers from the army list over Smite. I mean if I can Dominate a Castellan that's WAY better than using Smite.
That's true. In general though - it hurt most psykers. It especially jacked nids and daemons.
Bharring wrote: "What they did was ruin the psychic phase for every army that isn't Eldar (their spells are better than smite and never spammed psykers anyways) or TS(they still smite spam)"
It ruined the phase for what, 3 armies?
-R&H: Maelific spam was dumb. Good riddence.
-IG: Oops! Should they buff them to compensate?!?
-GK: Well, yeah, GK got boned.
It didn't impact, what, a dozen or so armies? So why single out Eldar?
Yet ironically after the doubling in pts you did not see malefics anyways.
Spoletta wrote: Thousand sons blasting the enemy with psyblows is somewhat better than cheap nobody psykers doing it. At least now it's thematic.
To be fair, a cult of Tzeentch unleashing massed (and highly unstable) psykers in the populace is thematic too, but it wasn't being used that way, it was being used to bring like 10 ML in a CSM list and it was stupid.
Then again most super competitive lists are kind of stupid because they don't really base themselves around the lore as much as what mechanically punches the hardest. There are plenty of fluffy lists that do well, but they're not as common sadly.
The kicker is that these super competitive lists are basing themselves mechanically on what punches the hardest in a separate tournament structure with missions that are not under GW control. I think we tend to forget that tournament specific mission packs, especially ITC, are pretty big in North America, and that skews almost every discussion without ever actually being addressed. It's a bigger factor that we give it credit for.
So I know the idea of 5 point Guardsmen has been talked to death, but with Ork Boyz going up to 7 points in their new codex, I think it about guarantees Guardsmen go to 5 points in Chapter Approved.
Spoletta wrote: Thousand sons blasting the enemy with psyblows is somewhat better than cheap nobody psykers doing it. At least now it's thematic.
To be fair, a cult of Tzeentch unleashing massed (and highly unstable) psykers in the populace is thematic too, but it wasn't being used that way, it was being used to bring like 10 ML in a CSM list and it was stupid.
Then again most super competitive lists are kind of stupid because they don't really base themselves around the lore as much as what mechanically punches the hardest. There are plenty of fluffy lists that do well, but they're not as common sadly.
The kicker is that these super competitive lists are basing themselves mechanically on what punches the hardest in a separate tournament structure with missions that are not under GW control. I think we tend to forget that tournament specific mission packs, especially ITC, are pretty big in North America, and that skews almost every discussion without ever actually being addressed. It's a bigger factor that we give it credit for.
To be fair, the ITC missions are mostly changes to how you score points for killing things or holding objectives. Being REALLY good at either regardless of how you score stuff can be indicative of a bigger problem.
Guardsmanwaffle wrote: So I know the idea of 5 point Guardsmen has been talked to death, but with Ork Boyz going up to 7 points in their new codex, I think it about guarantees Guardsmen go to 5 points in Chapter Approved.
Yeah I think we're about to see a lot of cheap infantry go up by a point or so. That's one of the only things I expect to see, along with some more new missions. Other than that I don't know what to expect.
Guardsmanwaffle wrote: So I know the idea of 5 point Guardsmen has been talked to death, but with Ork Boyz going up to 7 points in their new codex, I think it about guarantees Guardsmen go to 5 points in Chapter Approved.
Yeah I think we're about to see a lot of cheap infantry go up by a point or so. That's one of the only things I expect to see, along with some more new missions. Other than that I don't know what to expect.
My hope is more expanded rules. I'd love more subfaction rules for more armies as an example.
Guardsmanwaffle wrote: So I know the idea of 5 point Guardsmen has been talked to death, but with Ork Boyz going up to 7 points in their new codex, I think it about guarantees Guardsmen go to 5 points in Chapter Approved.
Yeah I think we're about to see a lot of cheap infantry go up by a point or so. That's one of the only things I expect to see, along with some more new missions. Other than that I don't know what to expect.
My hope is more expanded rules. I'd love more subfaction rules for more armies as an example.
I would definitely like to see expanded, more interactive, rules for terrain but I couldn't really express what exactly I would like. What sort of subfaction rules would you want?
Guardsmanwaffle wrote: So I know the idea of 5 point Guardsmen has been talked to death, but with Ork Boyz going up to 7 points in their new codex, I think it about guarantees Guardsmen go to 5 points in Chapter Approved.
Yeah I think we're about to see a lot of cheap infantry go up by a point or so. That's one of the only things I expect to see, along with some more new missions. Other than that I don't know what to expect.
My hope is more expanded rules. I'd love more subfaction rules for more armies as an example.
I would definitely like to see expanded, more interactive, rules for terrain but I couldn't really express what exactly I would like. What sort of subfaction rules would you want?
Mostly some new options for factions (like an extra tomb world, craft world, Sept, give a couple successor chapters a bonus, maybe some Renegade specific options for CSM, ect). Basically just more alternate ways to run armies, maybe with a focus on different things. Like maybe a Tau Sept who gives bonuses to Kroot and Vespid models, or rules for Tau human Auxillaries, or Ork Freebootas, ect.
I guess they could add rules for different brotherhoods for Grey Knights, but am not sure about it. If the tsons smite was kept normal, because of how bad the GK baby smite was, one should expect that the GK would be put up to date in some rules fix. 2 FAQs and a CA, and it did not happen. So I guess GK are an exeption to all rules.
Stuff like rules for a scout or all ASsault company would be interesting though. If they made the pre requisits to playing those sub lists very high in points, to an almost pre build army level, they could give them both interesting and balanced rules, without worrying that a sudden buff to assault marines or bikers is going to break the game.
Karol wrote: I guess they could add rules for different brotherhoods for Grey Knights, but am not sure about it. If the tsons smite was kept normal, because of how bad the GK baby smite was, one should expect that the GK would be put up to date in some rules fix. 2 FAQs and a CA, and it did not happen. So I guess GK are an exeption to all rules.
Stuff like rules for a scout or all ASsault company would be interesting though. If they made the pre requisits to playing those sub lists very high in points, to an almost pre build army level, they could give them both interesting and balanced rules, without worrying that a sudden buff to assault marines or bikers is going to break the game.
You can do an all Scout Army, since they're usually lead by regular Captains anyways. I'd argue thematically Reivers could slip into the mix since they use similar skill sets. Plus Scout Bikes and Land Speeder Storms. All you're missing as a Heavy Support choice to make it to a Brigade level.
All Assault Marines would require you to take the less good FA focused detachment as your main army core. Plus Assault Marines aren't that good at anything beyond being mobile infantry.
As for the GK lack of changes, CA 2017 was likely sent to the prinerts three months before we got it in December, meaning it was written only 5 months into the edition at the most. Not enough to really address anything.
As for the FAQs, those only changed existing rules for armies outside of adjusting core mechanics for the game. New GK rules don't really fit in there.
Well I was thinking more in line of stuff with models that exist, but used in a different ways. So maybe a mixed scout+ravers lists, where both type of units get the old deep strike? And no I don;t know if it would make a good list. Some sort of terminator phalanx list, where you have to use 4-6 units of termintors, only termintor HQs and models, but get some cool rules to actually make people want to buy those 7 boxs of terminators and play with that army. What if in such an army you would have to take a 50/50 stormshield and shoty terminator mix. but the shoty termintors would get the shield bonus as if they had hammer termintors within a certain, small, range.
A jump pack only or bike only army, for marines/eldar or orcs. Some sort of high court for necrons, where the regular guards are necron lords in stats. Or a necron lists based around multiple barrages and other fast moving stuff, and not just spaming destroyers.
ClockworkZion wrote: Scouts don't deep strike, they have a special deployment instead.
I know that. But a CA or some other sort of "book with sub section army builds" could let them do that. a specific organisation chart that lets say makes someone take 4 units of scouts and 4 units of ravers. They gain the deep strike rules, again no idea if that would help. It could go even further, in army list shaping by adding more obligatory units to the detachment. Maybe each scout unit has to come with a speeder, maybe 2 or more scout biker units have to be taken. And all of those could get some extra rule here and there, the units would have rules and points costs based around the codex ones, so any of the extra rules wouldn't create problems for the core game, as they would be linked to the detachment. I think as long as the detachment ended up as a 1500-1700 pts obligatory investment, it could be made more balanced then any codex list. And they could do stuff for other armies too. An eldar aspect warrior army, that is something else then reapers and s spears. Stuff like that.
I disagree. Scouts have a superior deployment option to deep strike and if you were desperate to deep strike instead, drop pods exist. They're not good right now, but they exist
I really feel like the inquisition are very limited due to only having hq units and a few vanguard units. I feel like a good change for them in chapter approved 2018 would be them being allowed to be plugged into any imperial detachment again. I feel like it is very in line with the fluff and how their characters work and maybe it could make them playable on the tabletop again because right now it’s really not worth sacrificing a whole detachment to field Eisenhorn or Greyfax despite how cool they are
Something I'd like to see (though am not expecting with this CA) is for more dedicated transports to be viable. There are exceptions obviously, but generally they seem to be far too expensive for any value they provide. That may also help some alpha strike problems if infantry are more effectively able to hide.
Vaktathi wrote: Something I'd like to see (though am not expecting with this CA) is for more dedicated transports to be viable. There are exceptions obviously, but generally they seem to be far too expensive for any value they provide. That may also help some alpha strike problems if infantry are more effectively able to hide.
Agreed, even though Rhinos are "reasonable" at 72 points with a Storm Bolter... I NEVER take them. Because that 72 points is just about 4 missile launchers (which are also "meh")... That 72 points is a Company Ancient or Apothecary and some random gear for a character. I love my Rhinos, and want to feel like taking them isn't a complete waste of points.
Vaktathi wrote: Something I'd like to see (though am not expecting with this CA) is for more dedicated transports to be viable. There are exceptions obviously, but generally they seem to be far too expensive for any value they provide. That may also help some alpha strike problems if infantry are more effectively able to hide.
Agreed, even though Rhinos are "reasonable" at 72 points with a Storm Bolter... I NEVER take them. Because that 72 points is just about 4 missile launchers (which are also "meh"... That 72 points is a Company Ancient or Apothecary and some random gear for a character. I love my Rhinos, and want to feel like taking them isn't a complete waste of points.
Correct me if i am wrong but most transports from orkz over imperium to chaos suffer from A: beeing groundbound and B: At the same time beeing terribly priced.
I am sorry to say this but a Chaos Rhino or any rhino for that matter is not worth a minor HQ in price. --> this same logic applies to orkz and many melee armies which relied on transports. Transports are dead, those armies will struggle if they don't get a way to get over the distance.
On the other hand a lot of flying transports not only get the flying advantage but for some reason are also cheaper. (Tau in this case are the exception.)
I mean last edition, was a chimera at 55pts (65pts for imperium) really that broken?
Vaktathi wrote: Something I'd like to see (though am not expecting with this CA) is for more dedicated transports to be viable. There are exceptions obviously, but generally they seem to be far too expensive for any value they provide. That may also help some alpha strike problems if infantry are more effectively able to hide.
Agreed, even though Rhinos are "reasonable" at 72 points with a Storm Bolter... I NEVER take them. Because that 72 points is just about 4 missile launchers (which are also "meh"... That 72 points is a Company Ancient or Apothecary and some random gear for a character. I love my Rhinos, and want to feel like taking them isn't a complete waste of points.
Correct me if i am wrong but most transports from orkz over imperium to chaos suffer from A: beeing groundbound and B: At the same time beeing terribly priced.
I am sorry to say this but a Chaos Rhino or any rhino for that matter is not worth a minor HQ in price. --> this same logic applies to orkz and many melee armies which relied on transports. Transports are dead, those armies will struggle if they don't get a way to get over the distance.
On the other hand a lot of flying transports not only get the flying advantage but for some reason are also cheaper. (Tau in this case are the exception.)
I mean last edition, was a chimera at 55pts (65pts for imperium) really that broken?
Not just the Tau, look at how the Stormraven stacks up against a Land Raider. Sure it's T7, W14 instead of T8, W16, but Airborne and Hard to Hit help offset those, and it can carry 12 Marines and a Dread * instead of 10 Marines and it's 50 points cheaper for roughly the same weapon load on top of that.
If Marines could deploy from a flier after it moves like Guard can do ** then the Stormraven by itself could almost bring Marines up to par.
* GW should really really add "or 10 Primaris marines" to the Stormraven's transport options. Primaris are the same size as a Terminator and not being able to use all the transports is stupid, but the Stormraven fits their fluff/theme better than the others so it's extra dumb that they can't ride in one.
** If there's a list of things that from a thematic standpoint Marines should be able to do and Guard shouldn't jumping out of a flying transport after it moves should be at the very top of the list. Seriously, feth IG.
Vaktathi wrote: Something I'd like to see (though am not expecting with this CA) is for more dedicated transports to be viable. There are exceptions obviously, but generally they seem to be far too expensive for any value they provide. That may also help some alpha strike problems if infantry are more effectively able to hide.
Agreed, even though Rhinos are "reasonable" at 72 points with a Storm Bolter... I NEVER take them. Because that 72 points is just about 4 missile launchers (which are also "meh"... That 72 points is a Company Ancient or Apothecary and some random gear for a character. I love my Rhinos, and want to feel like taking them isn't a complete waste of points.
Correct me if i am wrong but most transports from orkz over imperium to chaos suffer from A: beeing groundbound and B: At the same time beeing terribly priced.
I am sorry to say this but a Chaos Rhino or any rhino for that matter is not worth a minor HQ in price. --> this same logic applies to orkz and many melee armies which relied on transports. Transports are dead, those armies will struggle if they don't get a way to get over the distance.
On the other hand a lot of flying transports not only get the flying advantage but for some reason are also cheaper. (Tau in this case are the exception.)
I mean last edition, was a chimera at 55pts (65pts for imperium) really that broken?
Not just the Tau, look at how the Stormraven stacks up against a Land Raider. Sure it's T7, W14 instead of T8, W16, but Airborne and Hard to Hit help offset those, and it can carry 12 Marines and a Dread * instead of 10 Marines and it's 50 points cheaper for roughly the same weapon load on top of that.
If Marines could deploy from a flier after it moves like Guard can do ** then the Stormraven by itself could almost bring Marines up to par.
* GW should really really add "or 10 Primaris marines" to the Stormraven's transport options. Primaris are the same size as a Terminator and not being able to use all the transports is stupid, but the Stormraven fits their fluff/theme better than the others so it's extra dumb that they can't ride in one.
** If there's a list of things that from a thematic standpoint Marines should be able to do and Guard shouldn't jumping out of a flying transport after it moves should be at the very top of the list. Seriously, feth IG.
Sounds like people are jealous that they don’t have access to the best transport, the Taurox Prime. Militarum Tempestus once again flexes on the marines.
1. Make them cheaper.
2. Make them more fragile as a result.
3. Let units jump out of them after the Transport moved not before and then psychic/shoot/assault.
I'd say a Rhino should go back to being about 35 points - but in exchange it should probably only have 5~ wounds. Maybe this would be too much of a death trap (those 1/6 casualties do add up) but you can't price 10 wounds at T7/3+ save at low enough points to be attractive.
Then again I can see the argument against this - because say Khorne Berzerkers etc would get 12" from the Rhino, 3" jump out, and then only need an 9" charge to cover 24" in the first turn.
1. Anything can kill a transport now
2. They're still too slow because delivery requires two movement phases, and potentially facing two shooting phases
3. Auras from characters inside transports don't do anything
4. Unlike past editions, you don't often need them to get into range to shoot or assault because you have unit choices that do it better and faster without the transport tax
5. They become super juicy targets if they are also heavily armed, like Land Raiders, Blackstars, Stormravens, and Repulsors. They are always worth killing because it's like potentially 3 birds with one stone. You kill a tank, cause casualties to an important unit, and strand that unit out of position.
Keep it so you cannot embark and disembark in the same turn, but change the rules so that you can disembark before or after the transport moves, but if it's after, the unit that disembarks cannot move (but can still shoot/charge).
Alternatively, many more flying gunship transports need the grav chute insertion rule from the Valkyries.
They should also all get a stratagem or a way to be able to pop smoke and shoot in the same turn.
They definitely need to stop being so expensive, especially the gunboats.
There needs to be a case for some assault transports that can still fire after getting into the thick of it.
Tyel wrote: I think transports just need to be re-imagined.
1. Make them cheaper.
2. Make them more fragile as a result.
3. Let units jump out of them after the Transport moved not before and then psychic/shoot/assault.
I'd say a Rhino should go back to being about 35 points - but in exchange it should probably only have 5~ wounds. Maybe this would be too much of a death trap (those 1/6 casualties do add up) but you can't price 10 wounds at T7/3+ save at low enough points to be attractive.
Then again I can see the argument against this - because say Khorne Berzerkers etc would get 12" from the Rhino, 3" jump out, and then only need an 9" charge to cover 24" in the first turn.
12 + 3.5 + 3 + 6 = 24.5 They don't even need to charge to make 24", which is why you don't need to disembark after move.
If there's a list of things that from a thematic standpoint Marines should be able to do and Guard shouldn't jumping out of a flying transport after it moves should be at the very top of the list. Seriously, feth IG.
Bad attitude.
If someone should have the capability for a Vietnam aircav list then it should be guard.
Spacemarines should have planetary invasion as their specialisation (drop pods, teleporting, etc.)
Problem is atm a sm player needs to sell his left Ball in pts to field them and I as a csm player needs to sell both Balls for a kahibrys or however you pronounce it to have something comparable and to get it from fw.
Did we mention fw resin sucks?
fraser1191 wrote: Ork Blood axes "kultur" is flat out better than Ultramarines CT, not that they are the same but they're similar.
I dunno I suppose orks being able to fall back and shoot still at 5 is a little more fair than a marine falling back and still hitting on a 3.
Though I find the ability to fall back and shoot is odd for orks. Is this also the only other time this ability has been given as a CT?
White Scars can fall back and charge. That's about it though.
The Ork one is strictly superior. Hell if it weren't for Orks being bad for several editions we'd have complaints, just like with Imperial Guard.
Yes if you look at earlier tactics they generally had two abilities more or less, such as +1Ld and fall back and shoot. I think some of the Ork kulturs are the first ones to have 3 buffs
Is it possible given how much the traits have continued to become more diverse and powerful that perhaps CA will give Word Bearers a trait for the first time in 8th?
Lemondish wrote: I think there are huge issues with transports...
1. Anything can kill a transport now
2. They're still too slow because delivery requires two movement phases, and potentially facing two shooting phases
3. Auras from characters inside transports don't do anything
4. Unlike past editions, you don't often need them to get into range to shoot or assault because you have unit choices that do it better and faster without the transport tax
5. They become super juicy targets if they are also heavily armed, like Land Raiders, Blackstars, Stormravens, and Repulsors. They are always worth killing because it's like potentially 3 birds with one stone. You kill a tank, cause casualties to an important unit, and strand that unit out of position.
Keep it so you cannot embark and disembark in the same turn, but change the rules so that you can disembark before or after the transport moves, but if it's after, the unit that disembarks cannot move (but can still shoot/charge).
Alternatively, many more flying gunship transports need the grav chute insertion rule from the Valkyries.
They should also all get a stratagem or a way to be able to pop smoke and shoot in the same turn.
They definitely need to stop being so expensive, especially the gunboats.
There needs to be a case for some assault transports that can still fire after getting into the thick of it.
Transports in previous editions died to a single shot from an AT gun - they were fine if you were a Marine player and got as many as you wanted free but but for those who had to pay for them - they were not good.
We have the cover strategm for fist turn which works the same as smoke and shoot.
Tyel wrote: I think transports just need to be re-imagined.
1. Make them cheaper.
2. Make them more fragile as a result.
3. Let units jump out of them after the Transport moved not before and then psychic/shoot/assault.
I'd say a Rhino should go back to being about 35 points - but in exchange it should probably only have 5~ wounds. Maybe this would be too much of a death trap (those 1/6 casualties do add up) but you can't price 10 wounds at T7/3+ save at low enough points to be attractive.
Then again I can see the argument against this - because say Khorne Berzerkers etc would get 12" from the Rhino, 3" jump out, and then only need an 9" charge to cover 24" in the first turn.
Best way to solve this would probably be to get the Assault Vehicle rule back on expensive stuff like Land Raiders. It prevents CC specialists from getting a cheap boost from a low-tier transport. On the other hand, investing in a big Land Raider should pay off more than it does now.
Lemondish wrote: I think there are huge issues with transports...
1. Anything can kill a transport now
2. They're still too slow because delivery requires two movement phases, and potentially facing two shooting phases
3. Auras from characters inside transports don't do anything
4. Unlike past editions, you don't often need them to get into range to shoot or assault because you have unit choices that do it better and faster without the transport tax
5. They become super juicy targets if they are also heavily armed, like Land Raiders, Blackstars, Stormravens, and Repulsors. They are always worth killing because it's like potentially 3 birds with one stone. You kill a tank, cause casualties to an important unit, and strand that unit out of position.
My Sisters seems to be doing fine with transport this edition. Give me a little extra protection and a little extra mobility.
Tyel wrote: I think transports just need to be re-imagined.
1. Make them cheaper.
2. Make them more fragile as a result.
3. Let units jump out of them after the Transport moved not before and then psychic/shoot/assault.
I'd say a Rhino should go back to being about 35 points - but in exchange it should probably only have 5~ wounds. Maybe this would be too much of a death trap (those 1/6 casualties do add up) but you can't price 10 wounds at T7/3+ save at low enough points to be attractive.
Then again I can see the argument against this - because say Khorne Berzerkers etc would get 12" from the Rhino, 3" jump out, and then only need an 9" charge to cover 24" in the first turn.
Actually, without changing the way disembarkation works currently, you'd be looking at 12"+3"+6" so 21". It'd be a 3" charge from 24" out. Also, the lowest number of wounds you could possibly give a rhino style transport and have it still be usable is 7. Allowing a D6 damage weapon to pop it instantly would make it largely worthless.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
NurglesR0T wrote: I think transports are fine rule wise, only issue with them is the cost.
I agree for light/medium transports. Land raiders and other heavy tank/transport hybrids need some help though.
NurglesR0T wrote: I think transports are fine rule wise, only issue with them is the cost.
Drop Pods need a rework of some kind, not just a points drop though. I honestly wouldn't take one even if they were only 50 points.
Also, not all transports need a points drop (*coughwaveserpentcough*), but I agree that most do. Rhinos could stand to get about 10 points cheaper, maybe 15. Tau Devilfish need to come down more like 30 from where they are now.
Can you elaborate? I'm a 5th edition Drukhari player with no models left. I'm looking at 8th edition. I've been warned not to buy models until after Chapter Approved because whatever army list I create may get drastically changed. I'd like to know what people think may get changed and why.
Can you elaborate? I'm a 5th edition Drukhari player with no models left. I'm looking at 8th edition. I've been warned not to buy models until after Chapter Approved because whatever army list I create may get drastically changed. I'd like to know what people think may get changed and why.
In theory, grotesque, disintegrator cannons, talos and blasters will be hit with the nerf bat. Most likely via points increase. Possible rework of prophet of flesh. But who knows what GW will actually do, they might just let it go and 'monitor' them for spring FAQ.
fraser1191 wrote: Disintegrator cannons are Assault 3, S5, ap - 3, 2D oh and 36"
All for the low cost of 15 pts
This gun basically makes marines moot
It hurts Primaris and characters more than your regular Marines due to the biggest point of it being the D2. I mean why pay so much for 2 wounds when a gun that's cheaper than you can drop you in a single round?
fraser1191 wrote: Disintegrator cannons are Assault 3, S5, ap - 3, 2D oh and 36"
All for the low cost of 15 pts
This gun basically makes marines moot
It hurts Primaris and characters more than your regular Marines due to the biggest point of it being the D2. I mean why pay so much for 2 wounds when a gun that's cheaper than you can drop you in a single round?
Right?
I stand by my statement that Primaris were designed for 7th. They would have been devastating and probably worth 20 ppm like when they came out
fraser1191 wrote: Disintegrator cannons are Assault 3, S5, ap - 3, 2D oh and 36"
All for the low cost of 15 pts
This gun basically makes marines moot
It hurts Primaris and characters more than your regular Marines due to the biggest point of it being the D2. I mean why pay so much for 2 wounds when a gun that's cheaper than you can drop you in a single round?
Right?
I stand by my statement that Primaris were designed for 7th. They would have been devastating and probably worth 20 ppm like when they came out
I can believe it. At the very least they were playtested first in 7th and then adjusted/released in 8th.
Tyel wrote: The extra wound would have gone further in 7th - but it doesn't stop Intercessors from having a crap gun for their points.
A 27 point Scatbike says hi.
The only crap gun the Intercessors have access to is the Stalker due to being Heavy 1 instead of Heavy 2 or Rapid 1. Marines in general, due to their lower durability this edition, need a points adjustment or a special rule to fix their durability.
ClockworkZion wrote: The only crap gun the Intercessors have access to is the Stalker due to being Heavy 1 instead of Heavy 2 or Rapid 1. Marines in general, due to their lower durability this edition, need a points adjustment or a special rule to fix their durability.
Not really convinced.
A Gauss flayer isn't exactly great on a Necron Warrior - never mind on a model costing 50% more. Even allowing for a slightly longer rapid fire range.
The assault version offers a slightly better return than a tactical marine with bolter outside 12" - but a considerably inferior return inside 12". Which given the tactical marine's with bolter does about half the damage of competitive infantry guns (and is some of the worst shooting in the game for its points outside 12") isn't exactly good.
This might be okay if they were vaguely competent in close combat - so they had a 1-2 punch. Except for that many points they are pretty terrible at that too (better than marines, but again, marines are terrible).
In light of Ork gripes compare an intercessor to 2.6-2.7 shoota boys (which are generally not considered great). You are more vulnerable to small arms - but on the other hand you can't get nuked by high AP D2 weapons.
In exchange you get over 50% (inside 18" - which is fairly common in the current game) more damage from shooting than the assault version - and nearly 3 times the melee punch, even before you get the buff for being in a squad of 20.
Marine whinging has been done to death - but right now I don't think Tacticals are worth more than 10-11, and basic Primaris no more than 14-15.
Intercessors have 30" range bolt rifles with a -1 standard for 0 points. It costs 1 point to take a 24" 0AP Assault 2 version and 2 points for the 36" -2AP Heavy 1 version.
Basically, the gun itself on an Intercessor isn't the problem, it's the Intercessor who is the problem.
fraser1191 wrote: Disintegrator cannons are Assault 3, S5, ap - 3, 2D oh and 36"
All for the low cost of 15 pts
This gun basically makes marines moot
It also invalidates dark lances from dark eldar so internal balance is off. Against say T8 lance goes only little bit further while costing more and is less flexible. There's basically no reason to not take them.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Intercessors could go to 16-17 and we likely wouldn't get complaints.
Well if kill team is anything to base off of intercessors will be 15 and Tacs will be 12. Reivers will be 16 too so there's that, not that people are clamoring to use reivers
Can you elaborate? I'm a 5th edition Drukhari player with no models left. I'm looking at 8th edition. I've been warned not to buy models until after Chapter Approved because whatever army list I create may get drastically changed. I'd like to know what people think may get changed and why.
I'm in the same boat to be honest. I haven't played DE since 5th and I really want to start my army up again, but I've learned the hard way with 8th ed. Don't buy anything until after Chapter Approved comes out, otherwise you're just throwing money at GW while they invalidate your army.
Basically what others have said.
Disintegrators are too good. Talos, Grotesques are fairly under costed. You could also make a case for warriors being under costed. Prophets of Flesh is really powerful for a free buff. It might change to re-roll 1's on their invulnerable saves instead of flat +1.
Thats on top of the 3 nerfs they received with the FAQ including fething over flying assault units, making Agents of Vect 4 CP and nerfing Labyrinthian Cunning.
Disintegrators will probably go up 5 points. They will either be the same cost as Dark Lances or slightly more expensive.
I am not sure about Grotesques going that much. Maybe a point or two. The problem lies with Prophets of Flesh, not the unit.
Talos might also see a slight point increase. Maybe 10 points or so. Again, the problem lies with Prophets of Flesh 4++ save.
I don't see Blasters going up. Blasters are good but the DE lists winning are using Covens for the most part with Triple Ravagers, not blasters en masse.
Ravagers will probably go up a little if they don't point dissies accordingly.
If they don't repoint the Ravager my guess is that Scourges might go down in price just to make them an equal alternative to Ravagers.
Hellions recosted to a lower pricetag.
Venoms will stay the same.
My hope is also that Drazhar goes down a little bit along with Incubi.
My expectation is that people have way too high expectations for what's going to be changed. Expecting nearly the entire game to be recosted is folly.
Tyranids have like 1/2 the dex unplayably bad for example, but I expect I'll be lucky to see a single points cost adjustment, Tyranids just aren't going to be on GW's radar.
Expect changes to the most debated things, e.g. GK and some Marine units on side of the spectrum, and also Ynnari, DE, Knights, and Guard on the other side, and then throw in a handful of other things that may or may not have even been an issue but did come up during GW's playing sessions.
SHUPPET wrote: My expectation is that people have way too high expectations for what's going to be changed. Expecting nearly the entire game to be recosted is folly.
Tyranids have like 1/2 the dex unplayably bad for example, but I expect I'll be lucky to see a single points cost adjustment, Tyranids just aren't going to be on GW's roster.
Expect changes to the most debated things, e.g. GK and some Marine units on side of the spectrum, and also Ynnari, DE, Knights, and Guard on the other side.
Queue rage for when people inevitably don't get everything they were looking for.
I agree, I think only the most egregious (and things like already mediocre FW index units that no one complained about) will get nerfed, and the rest will stay exactly the same.
In my experience, GW destroys everything I love in the lore and on the table. I have no faith that one of the several armies that I play will remain viable. I'm fairly certain it will be crushed, just like all my other armies.
SHUPPET wrote: My expectation is that people have way too high expectations for what's going to be changed. Expecting nearly the entire game to be recosted is folly.
Tyranids have like 1/2 the dex unplayably bad for example, but I expect I'll be lucky to see a single points cost adjustment, Tyranids just aren't going to be on GW's roster.
Expect changes to the most debated things, e.g. GK and some Marine units on side of the spectrum, and also Ynnari, DE, Knights, and Guard on the other side.
Queue rage for when people inevitably don't get everything they were looking for.
I'm going to remember this post and link it to the predictable ragers who do just that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Brutus_Apex wrote: In my experience, GW destroys everything I love in the lore and on the table. I have no faith that one of the several armies that I play will remain viable. I'm fairly certain it will be crushed, just like all my other armies.
What other armies? You have CSM in your profile picture at the very least, and thats one of the top dexes in the game right now.
What other armies? You have CSM in your profile picture at the very least, and thats one of the top dexes in the game right now.
Regular csm? And here i thought death guard and TS were the ones keeping them in the top tables.
Heck alpha legion went from hero to zero rulewise.
Black Legion and Iron Warriors are very powerful with fearless cultists, VotLW and Tide of Traitors. The three dexes keep each other at the top tables, CSM is probably in the middle of them.
CSM are the best they've been in a very long while. However, I consider it a failure if the two main units in the codex aren't ever taken, namely actual chaos marines and terminators. If those aren't the focal point of a Marine army, why are you even playing Marines at all?
That being said, I've been waiting roughly 15 years for new models. So theres that.
Same goes for Sisters of Battle, Black Templars.
Grey Knights are just a huge joke.
Dark Eldar fans had do wait about 12 or so years for a wonderful update, only to be smacked down again in 6th and 7th with possibly the most abysmally bad codex ever written.
Horus Heresy, almost entirely unsupported currently. Although I understand that there are other factors there, including the untimely death of Alan Merritt.
Of course this all pales in comparison to the ultimate betrayal. The death of Warhammer Fantasy, for which I will never forgive them.
What other armies? You have CSM in your profile picture at the very least, and thats one of the top dexes in the game right now.
Regular csm? And here i thought death guard and TS were the ones keeping them in the top tables.
Heck alpha legion went from hero to zero rulewise.
Black Legion and Iron Warriors are very powerful with fearless cultists, VotLW and Tide of Traitors. The three dexes keep each other at the top tables, CSM is probably in the middle of them.
That to me isn't a CSM army. I'm hopeful for the day where a CSM army has actual viable CSM (part of the marine broader marine issue which has been discussed to death already)
It is a real shame that the actual CSM models are as weak as they are... Chaos Raptors are some of my favorite models in the whole line and they're just... well they're not good, that's for sure.
Brutus_Apex wrote:CSM have are the best they've been in a very long while. However, I consider it a failure if the two main units in the codex aren't ever taken, namely actual chaos marines and terminators. If those aren't the focal point of a Marine army, why are you even playing Marines at all?
That being said, I've been waiting roughly 15 years for new models. So theres that.
Same goes for Sisters of Battle, Black Templars.
Grey Knights are just a huge joke.
Dark Eldar fans had do wait about 12 or so years for a wonderful update, only to be smacked down again in 6th and 7th with possibly the most abysmally bad codex ever written.
Horus Heresy, almost entirely unsupported currently. Although I understand that there are other factors there, including the untimely death of Alan Merritt.
Of course this all pales in comparison to the ultimate betrayal. The death of Warhammer Fantasy, for which I will never forgive them.
Phew, you've really had a bad run of luck with those armies. Sisters aren't too bad at least!
What other armies? You have CSM in your profile picture at the very least, and thats one of the top dexes in the game right now.
Regular csm? And here i thought death guard and TS were the ones keeping them in the top tables.
Heck alpha legion went from hero to zero rulewise.
Black Legion and Iron Warriors are very powerful with fearless cultists, VotLW and Tide of Traitors. The three dexes keep each other at the top tables, CSM is probably in the middle of them.
That to me isn't a CSM army. I'm hopeful for the day where a CSM army has actual viable CSM (part of the marine broader marine issue which has been discussed to death already)
Very few top armies get to pick and choose their iconic units. There is still a few good power armor units at least. You said that they were carried by Tsons and DG however, and that's a two way thing.
What other armies? You have CSM in your profile picture at the very least, and thats one of the top dexes in the game right now.
Regular csm? And here i thought death guard and TS were the ones keeping them in the top tables.
Heck alpha legion went from hero to zero rulewise.
Black Legion and Iron Warriors are very powerful with fearless cultists, VotLW and Tide of Traitors. The three dexes keep each other at the top tables, CSM is probably in the middle of them.
That to me isn't a CSM army. I'm hopeful for the day where a CSM army has actual viable CSM (part of the marine broader marine issue which has been discussed to death already)
Very few top armies get to pick and choose their iconic units. There is still a few good power armor units at least. You said that they were carried by Tsons and DG however, and that's a two way thing.
Agreed on the first point, very few armies do indeed get little choice in what is iconic and fluffy and what actually works in the game.
Disintegrators will probably go up 5 points. They will either be the same cost as Dark Lances or slightly more expensive.
I am not sure about Grotesques going that much. Maybe a point or two. The problem lies with Prophets of Flesh, not the unit.
Talos might also see a slight point increase. Maybe 10 points or so. Again, the problem lies with Prophets of Flesh 4++ save.
I don't see Blasters going up. Blasters are good but the DE lists winning are using Covens for the most part with Triple Ravagers, not blasters en masse.
Ravagers will probably go up a little if they don't point dissies accordingly.
If they don't repoint the Ravager my guess is that Scourges might go down in price just to make them an equal alternative to Ravagers.
Hellions recosted to a lower pricetag.
Venoms will stay the same.
My hope is also that Drazhar goes down a little bit along with Incubi.
This seems about right. I could see both Ravagers and Dissies going up in price to be honest. In most Eldar soup lists you always see the exact same thing, an Archon, 3 Dissie Ravagers, maybe a flier, Black Heart Kabal.
I on top of the Agents of Vect price increase at some point they could get rid of the whole 6+++ to vehicles thing too, have it just affect units that normally get PfP. As is there are still too many reasons to pick Black Heart over any other Kabal.
The main thing I'm not clear on is if they are even going to bother trying to fix Incubi, Beasts, Mandrakes, and to a lesser extent, Hellions. Some could maybe be manageable with a simple point decrease (Hellions/Mandrakes), but Incubi and Beasts need something else probably.
On the Harlequin side my biggest concern is that they might nerf Skyweavers too much and basically invalidate Harlequins as a mono-viable force in the process. The Flip Belt nerf hurt on that front already, weaken Skyweavers too much and really the main thing they'd have left would be Soaring Spite fusion drive-by Troupes. I guess that's one big issue with only having one option per force org slot, nerf one unit and the whole army could go down the toilet.
Haywire is sort of in a weird position right now, it's value got artificially inflated when Knights started showing up in every Imperial list. If GSC and Orks bring hordes into a dominant role in the meta, then Haywire (and subsequently Skyweavers) value drops back down again.
