- Rites of Banishment is getting removed or changed, seems GK are getting the regular Smite power
- armies with -1 to hit are getting changed to +1 cover save
Glad to see that (hopefully) GW saw sense and instead of increasing points costs of popular choices instead decreased the costs of unpopular choices.
Glad to see my wish for cheaper Custodian wardens and Allarus terminators was granted. The big one though if true is Trajaan Valoris being 175pts rather than 250pts. That is a MASSIVE reduction but sorely needed as he simply was too expensive to take.
Also good to see named characters getting cheaper. I haven't seen any apart from Rowboat Girlyman twice since I started playing 8th.
Reduced points won't make marines better.. they need to actually design units and abilities to not be terrible. Quick and dirty cost changes are pretty much the absolute minimum work that could be done (beyond doing nothing).
I personally want marines to be 13-15 pts a model but actually be 4x better than a damn guardsman instead of functionally worse.
the_scotsman wrote: no news on marine chapter tactics on vehicles...man, I am stumped if they don't include that.
Ignores Cover on Predators is far too broken you know that.
So is -1 to hit on a Fire Prism, but that has been a thing. Chapter Tactics absolutely need to apply to vehicles, because other factions' trait do. It's only fair I also disagree with you that converting -1 to hit traits into +1 Cover save is a bad decision. It will stop stacking -1 penalties from reaching outrageous/unfair levels against armies that aren't pure gunlines
Kirasu wrote: Reduced points won't make marines better.. they need to actually design units and abilities to not be terrible. Quick and dirty cost changes are pretty much the absolute minimum work that could be done (beyond doing nothing).
I personally want marines to be 13-15 pts a model but actually be 4x better than a damn guardsman instead of functionally worse.
I agree overall, but that ship has sailed. GW should have made all Marines have the Primaris statline from the start of 8E, but that didn't happen. We'll have to live with their minimum effort. And if that means hordes get more expensive, while Marines get cheaper, it may balance out to make a Marine better than 2-3 Guardsmen
I wonder if we'll see a subtle move to make Primaris units better than normal Marines (which are, admittedly, floundering at the moment). It would serve the greater goal...
PS: I think Space Marines should indeed have their usual Chapter Tactics available on all models. I believe they assumed it would be too powerful when the first codex was being written (same reason they have such limited and expensive stratagems). I think they've seen the absurdity of what came later and should hopefully realize it won't hurt letting the marines benefit a bit more from traits. I'm genuinely curious if we'll see more chapter traits rewritten.
I wonder if we'll see a subtle move to make Primaris units better than normal Marines (which are, admittedly, floundering at the moment). It would serve the greater goal...
PS: I think Space Marines should indeed have their usual Chapter Tactics available on all models. I believe they assumed it would be too powerful when the first codex was being written (same reason they have such limited and expensive stratagems). I think they've seen the absurdity of what came later and should hopefully realize it won't hurt letting the marines benefit a bit more from traits. I'm genuinely curious if we'll see more chapter traits rewritten.
yeah, at this point it's like
Oh no, ultramarine vehicles will be able to fall back and shoot at -1BS...kind of like how my Blood Axe vehicle can fall back, charge or shoot at full bs, and counts as being in cover at 18+".
oh no salamander vehicles will get reroll to hit and wound. Kind of like how my deffskull vehicle gets reroll to hit, wound, and damage, and a 6++.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I do believe that marine players did empty their clips into their own feet with all the crying that "X faction is just Marines +1 now!!!" in previous eds, and that's pooooossibly why all marine codexes and not just the first one had that stupid rule...but at this point it's just comical.
mhalko1 wrote: no nerfs on the IK is a bit disappointing.
Disappointing, but not surprising. That's their shiny new model, and I'm sure they have more variations in the pipeline. IK are probably the hottest seller out there right now as everyone has some sort of imperium or chaos army lying around, and every imperium/chaos army would benefit from bringing some flavor of IK.
the_scotsman wrote: no news on marine chapter tactics on vehicles...man, I am stumped if they don't include that.
Ignores Cover on Predators is far too broken you know that.
So is -1 to hit on a Fire Prism, but that has been a thing. Chapter Tactics absolutely need to apply to vehicles, because other factions' trait do. It's only fair
I also disagree with you that converting -1 to hit traits into +1 Cover save is a bad decision. It will stop stacking -1 penalties from reaching outrageous/unfair levels against armies that aren't pure gunlines
Kirasu wrote: Reduced points won't make marines better.. they need to actually design units and abilities to not be terrible. Quick and dirty cost changes are pretty much the absolute minimum work that could be done (beyond doing nothing).
I personally want marines to be 13-15 pts a model but actually be 4x better than a damn guardsman instead of functionally worse.
I agree overall, but that ship has sailed. GW should have made all Marines have the Primaris statline from the start of 8E, but that didn't happen.
We'll have to live with their minimum effort. And if that means hordes get more expensive, while Marines get cheaper, it may balance out to make a Marine better than 2-3 Guardsmen
the_scotsman wrote: no news on marine chapter tactics on vehicles...man, I am stumped if they don't include that.
Ignores Cover on Predators is far too broken you know that.
So is -1 to hit on a Fire Prism, but that has been a thing. Chapter Tactics absolutely need to apply to vehicles, because other factions' trait do. It's only fair I also disagree with you that converting -1 to hit traits into +1 Cover save is a bad decision. It will stop stacking -1 penalties from reaching outrageous/unfair levels against armies that aren't pure gunlines
Kirasu wrote: Reduced points won't make marines better.. they need to actually design units and abilities to not be terrible. Quick and dirty cost changes are pretty much the absolute minimum work that could be done (beyond doing nothing).
I personally want marines to be 13-15 pts a model but actually be 4x better than a damn guardsman instead of functionally worse.
I agree overall, but that ship has sailed. GW should have made all Marines have the Primaris statline from the start of 8E, but that didn't happen. We'll have to live with their minimum effort. And if that means hordes get more expensive, while Marines get cheaper, it may balance out to make a Marine better than 2-3 Guardsmen
-
I was being sarcastic about the Predator.
Totally missed that. My bad. Sarc is my second favorite type of -asm, but it's sometimes hard to recognize in text.
the_scotsman wrote: no news on marine chapter tactics on vehicles...man, I am stumped if they don't include that.
Ignores Cover on Predators is far too broken you know that.
So is -1 to hit on a Fire Prism, but that has been a thing. Chapter Tactics absolutely need to apply to vehicles, because other factions' trait do. It's only fair
I also disagree with you that converting -1 to hit traits into +1 Cover save is a bad decision. It will stop stacking -1 penalties from reaching outrageous/unfair levels against armies that aren't pure gunlines
Kirasu wrote: Reduced points won't make marines better.. they need to actually design units and abilities to not be terrible. Quick and dirty cost changes are pretty much the absolute minimum work that could be done (beyond doing nothing).
I personally want marines to be 13-15 pts a model but actually be 4x better than a damn guardsman instead of functionally worse.
I agree overall, but that ship has sailed. GW should have made all Marines have the Primaris statline from the start of 8E, but that didn't happen.
We'll have to live with their minimum effort. And if that means hordes get more expensive, while Marines get cheaper, it may balance out to make a Marine better than 2-3 Guardsmen
-
I was being sarcastic about the Predator.
Totally missed that. My bad.
Sarc is my second favorite type of -asm, but it's sometimes hard to recognize in text.
the_scotsman wrote: no news on marine chapter tactics on vehicles...man, I am stumped if they don't include that.
Ignores Cover on Predators is far too broken you know that.
So is -1 to hit on a Fire Prism, but that has been a thing. Chapter Tactics absolutely need to apply to vehicles, because other factions' trait do. It's only fair
I also disagree with you that converting -1 to hit traits into +1 Cover save is a bad decision. It will stop stacking -1 penalties from reaching outrageous/unfair levels against armies that aren't pure gunlines
Kirasu wrote: Reduced points won't make marines better.. they need to actually design units and abilities to not be terrible. Quick and dirty cost changes are pretty much the absolute minimum work that could be done (beyond doing nothing).
I personally want marines to be 13-15 pts a model but actually be 4x better than a damn guardsman instead of functionally worse.
I agree overall, but that ship has sailed. GW should have made all Marines have the Primaris statline from the start of 8E, but that didn't happen.
We'll have to live with their minimum effort. And if that means hordes get more expensive, while Marines get cheaper, it may balance out to make a Marine better than 2-3 Guardsmen
-
It’s certainly true that rule changes are required for marines – not just points changes. I’d like it if “The Holy Bolter” had some kind of effect in a game of 40k, for example.
In the meantime though, if my little dudes are going to have no effect, I’m glad not to have to pay so much for them. Wonder if Pedro will get cheaper.
I also play Tau and it’s good to see crisis suits coming down in points a bit. What they really need though is cheaper guns, which are the majority of their cost. It ought to be obvious that a gun is worth more on a 6-wound character with 2+ BS and a 20” move than on a 3-wound model with 4+ BS. On the other hand I’m hoping that nobody notices that my fire warriors now cost the same as ork boyz.
My knights will be happy. Lately I’ve mostly been using just Questoris knights, and only ones with avenger gatling cannons. I can happily have four of those at 1750, and may as well carry on doing so I think.
the_scotsman wrote: no news on marine chapter tactics on vehicles...man, I am stumped if they don't include that.
Ignores Cover on Predators is far too broken you know that.
So is -1 to hit on a Fire Prism, but that has been a thing. Chapter Tactics absolutely need to apply to vehicles, because other factions' trait do. It's only fair
I also disagree with you that converting -1 to hit traits into +1 Cover save is a bad decision. It will stop stacking -1 penalties from reaching outrageous/unfair levels against armies that aren't pure gunlines
Kirasu wrote: Reduced points won't make marines better.. they need to actually design units and abilities to not be terrible. Quick and dirty cost changes are pretty much the absolute minimum work that could be done (beyond doing nothing).
I personally want marines to be 13-15 pts a model but actually be 4x better than a damn guardsman instead of functionally worse.
I agree overall, but that ship has sailed. GW should have made all Marines have the Primaris statline from the start of 8E, but that didn't happen.
We'll have to live with their minimum effort. And if that means hordes get more expensive, while Marines get cheaper, it may balance out to make a Marine better than 2-3 Guardsmen
-
It’s certainly true that rule changes are required for marines – not just points changes. I’d like it if “The Holy Bolter” had some kind of effect in a game of 40k, for example.
In the meantime though, if my little dudes are going to have no effect, I’m glad not to have to pay so much for them. Wonder if Pedro will get cheaper.
I also play Tau and it’s good to see crisis suits coming down in points a bit. What they really need though is cheaper guns, which are the majority of their cost. It ought to be obvious that a gun is worth more on a 6-wound character with 2+ BS and a 20” move than on a 3-wound model with 4+ BS. On the other hand I’m hoping that nobody notices that my fire warriors now cost the same as ork boyz.
The guns are the same cost because the platforms are entirely different costs. I'm not saying Crisis Suits are good, but it's obvious that, after you cut their price like that, the guns don't need to be cheaper.
The change of -1 to +1 cover makes the custodes vexillus less useful and the -1 aura now a far weaker +1 cover. Will it be seeing a slight point drop as a result?
chnmmr wrote: The change of -1 to +1 cover makes the custodes vexillus less useful and the -1 aura now a far weaker +1 cover. Will it be seeing a slight point drop as a result?
As for the GK smite change.... wow if true.
I think this is specifically referring to army traits like Aliatoc, Alpha Legion, and Raven guard, not all -1 to hits in the whole game.
oni wrote: While I would like to see some this happen, I"m calling bullgak. I'll believe it when I see it in print.
The stuff from the facebook post comes from a video from French Wargame Studio (as another poster pointed out). They're always 100% accurate, as they receive codex and CA far in advance.
The last two sentences are old rumors, not linked to FWS.
Apparently (haven't watched the video myself, but saw the info on a French forum), the GSC codex should be released the last week of January.
They gave a lot of specific point costs (the video was live and they were responding to people's questions), and apparently the following army should be ~300-400pts cheaper:
chnmmr wrote: The change of -1 to +1 cover makes the custodes vexillus less useful and the -1 aura now a far weaker +1 cover. Will it be seeing a slight point drop as a result?
oni wrote: While I would like to see some this happen, I"m calling bullgak. I'll believe it when I see it in print.
The stuff from the facebook post comes from a video from French Wargame Studio (as another poster pointed out). They're always 100% accurate, as they receive codex and CA far in advance.
The last two sentences are old rumors, not linked to FWS.
Apparently (haven't watched the video myself, but saw the info on a French forum), the GSC codex should be released the last week of January.
They gave a lot of specific point costs (the video was live and they were responding to people's questions), and apparently the following army should be ~300-400pts cheaper:
I see Wraithknight (obviously) eldrad, Yriel, and a bunch of warlocks in there. The warlock from the seer council definitely needs a drop, but solo warlocks...I dunno.
It’s certainly true that rule changes are required for marines – not just points changes. I’d like it if “The Holy Bolter” had some kind of effect in a game of 40k, for example.
Unfortunately the nerf to the holy bolter seems to be primarily to sell Primaris other their lesser brothers, so I don't expect any changes there.
Kawauso wrote: Is anyone else kind of relieved that Sisters are still about a year out?
Yes and no. On the one hand, I want to see them actually happen, on the other, giving themselves a good time frame to take feedback from the beta list and do a good job is better than rushing it out.
It's what they should have done with the Index lists instead of flying immediately into pushing out codex books.
Wait, why are they nerfing necrons? I don't play necrons but I certainly know they do not need a nerf at all! If anything they needed a few points here and there dropped!
and knights... don't get me started about knights. How "new" gw can sit there and be okay with knights is beyond me. I'm not saying they should be nerfed into oblivion but I would at least want to see a few points here and there to discourage their overall power like they did to Orks.
The other necron units will be fixed hopefully - but It makes sense that they want to try and tamp down any mono-builds out there by adjusting points of things that get over-used.
rollawaythestone wrote: The other necron units will be fixed hopefully - but It makes sense that they want to try and tamp down any mono-builds out there by adjusting points of things that get over-used.
Then they should also do this to Knights. I'm all for fixing an army but I hate it when GW nerfs one army that isn't even top tier and ignores a blatantly obvious flaw in the other. As I say, I am not a Necron player, but I really hope they get the adjustments they need to make their army better.
rollawaythestone wrote: The other necron units will be fixed hopefully - but It makes sense that they want to try and tamp down any mono-builds out there by adjusting points of things that get over-used.
Then they should also do this to Knights. I'm all for fixing an army but I hate it when GW nerfs one army that isn't even top tier and ignores a blatantly obvious flaw in the other. As I say, I am not a Necron player, but I really hope they get the adjustments they need to make their army better.
We haven't even seen the release yet. No reason to get all up in arms yet from a set of incomplete rumors.
oni wrote: While I would like to see some this happen, I"m calling bullgak. I'll believe it when I see it in print.
The stuff from the facebook post comes from a video from French Wargame Studio (as another poster pointed out). They're always 100% accurate, as they receive codex and CA far in advance.
The last two sentences are old rumors, not linked to FWS.
Apparently (haven't watched the video myself, but saw the info on a French forum), the GSC codex should be released the last week of January.
They gave a lot of specific point costs (the video was live and they were responding to people's questions), and apparently the following army should be ~300-400pts cheaper:
I see Wraithknight (obviously) eldrad, Yriel, and a bunch of warlocks in there. The warlock from the seer council definitely needs a drop, but solo warlocks...I dunno.
That really worries me, there are a lot of problem units in there (e.g., Dark Reapers, Rangers, Hemlocks). That's a big price drop when they're still present...
oni wrote: While I would like to see some this happen, I"m calling bullgak. I'll believe it when I see it in print.
The stuff from the facebook post comes from a video from French Wargame Studio (as another poster pointed out). They're always 100% accurate, as they receive codex and CA far in advance.
The last two sentences are old rumors, not linked to FWS.
Apparently (haven't watched the video myself, but saw the info on a French forum), the GSC codex should be released the last week of January.
They gave a lot of specific point costs (the video was live and they were responding to people's questions), and apparently the following army should be ~300-400pts cheaper:
I see Wraithknight (obviously) eldrad, Yriel, and a bunch of warlocks in there. The warlock from the seer council definitely needs a drop, but solo warlocks...I dunno.
That really worries me, there are a lot of problem units in there (e.g., Dark Reapers, Rangers, Hemlocks). That's a big price drop when they're still present...
Given the number of Wraith units in there I expect that the points reductions are concentrated in units that don't see competitive play (WLs, WWs, WKs etc). Cause while there is a small pod of Rangers and Reapers, the bulk of that shot is units that don't get out much these days.
Everything I see:
-Hemlock
-3x SC Serpent
-2xML WarWalker
-Reapers
-Warlocks
-Rangers
-Wraithknight
-Wraithlord
-Wraithguard with cannons
-Wraithguard with swords
-Dire Avengers
-*STORM* Guardians
-Farseer
-Yriel
(Where do you see Eldrad?)
As a whole, yes, that force should go down. I could see the Hemlock and Serpent going up, but what else? The WK alone needs to go down more than those need to go up. And it's not the only thing there that should go down.
regarding sisters being a year out, their CODEX is a year out, I could see GW releasing the sisters models in two waves, the first wave being a re-work of the old stuff in say spring with the new codex having new NEW units.
yeah I know it's not likely but lemme be optimistic damnit!
Yes and no. On the one hand, I want to see them actually happen, on the other, giving themselves a good time frame to take feedback from the beta list and do a good job is better than rushing it out.
It's what they should have done with the Index lists instead of flying immediately into pushing out codex books.
Radikus wrote: Some stuff popping up over on reddit. Cannot confirm source, so take it for what you will.
Intercessor down 1 - 18
Repulsor 185 - 210 down 25
Primaris captain 78 - 87 down 9
Captain in gravis 90 - 102 down 12
Twin las to 40 - 50 down 10
Land raider to 200 (redeemer 180) - 239 down 39 (244 down 64)
Be'Lakor 240 - 280 down 40
Terminators 23 - 26 down 3
Drop Pod 63 - 83 down 20
Also storm shields dropping in price (no numbers yet).
What are the current points cost, so we have some context?
Current points in red for context. All points are shown without weapon costs.
Some interesting possible changes. For example, a standard landraider, without changes to the Twin HB, is now 59 points cheaper. Not sure if it's enough to bring them back though.
In regards to the -1 to hit to +1 to cover, i REALLY hope this is in addition to the standard cover save, but i doubt it will be :/
Also, if that Eldar force is down 3-400 points, then it looks like i'm buying that xmas boxset after all!
I think Land Raiders have an opening. 247 for 4 LC shots. (Does this forebode 20 point lascannons?). Two of those for just under 500. If -1 to hit goes to +1 save you've got 2+ save LR 32 total wounds. Against a basic 450ish point knight seems pretty decent to me.
Is that 40pts WITH Powerfist and Stormbolter? or without? Because the new 23ppm looks like it's without. So with Termies would be 37ppm, which is only a 3 point drop. Hardly enough to make them worth taking
Is that 40pts WITH Powerfist and Stormbolter? or without? Because the new 23ppm looks like it's without. So with Termies would be 37ppm, which is only a 3 point drop. Hardly enough to make them worth taking
-
SS are rumored to go down. Other pieces could as well. 3 points is a good start.
I think Land Raiders have an opening. 247 for 4 LC shots. (Does this forebode 20 point lascannons?). Two of those for just under 500. If -1 to hit goes to +1 save you've got 2+ save LR 32 total wounds. Against a basic 450ish point knight seems pretty decent to me.
The problem is, i think i'd still rather rely on that one Knight over those 8 lascannon shots and 16 HB shots personally. Will be an interesting debate though once all the changes are known.
Is that 40pts WITH Powerfist and Stormbolter? or without? Because the new 23ppm looks like it's without. So with Termies would be 37ppm, which is only a 3 point drop. Hardly enough to make them worth taking
-
SS are rumored to go down. Other pieces could as well. 3 points is a good start.
True, if Powerfists go down it might work out. But without any rules/stat changes, Termies are only worth between 2-3x a regular Marine. Certainly worth more than 2 Marines, but not quite worth 3. And if Marines are going down in cost, Termies should go down by that much more. I really don't see anyone taking standard PF/SB Termies competitively for any more than 30-35ppm max. Which is a shame because Termies are awesome
Is that 40pts WITH Powerfist and Stormbolter? or without? Because the new 23ppm looks like it's without. So with Termies would be 37ppm, which is only a 3 point drop. Hardly enough to make them worth taking
-
SS are rumored to go down. Other pieces could as well. 3 points is a good start.
True, if Powerfists go down it might work out. But without any rules/stat changes, Termies are only worth between 2-3x a regular Marine. Certainly worth more than 2 Marines, but not quite worth 3. And if Marines are going down in cost, Termies should go down by that much more.
I really don't see anyone taking standard PF/SB Termies competitively for any more than 30-35ppm max.
Which is a shame because Termies are awesome
-
If it is 3 points for all terminators, i'd be happy with a 30 point drop on my 10 scarab terminators - couple of other drops elsewhere and it opens up options if i want to go crazy again.
(well, when i say happy, it's in regards to the options )
Is that 40pts WITH Powerfist and Stormbolter? or without? Because the new 23ppm looks like it's without. So with Termies would be 37ppm, which is only a 3 point drop. Hardly enough to make them worth taking
-
This is all love taps. Will make no difference. The LR might be playable at 250ish. 1 point drop on primaris marines? Get outta here man.
It's like they aren't paying attention. If these are accurate point.
A shinning spear is still cheaper than a terminator LOL. 34 compared to 37
Shinning spear still has more 3x the mobility/2x more firepower/About even protections based on what is shooting at it/ and spears still deal more damage in CC too/ still have better stratagems. The spear is still MUCH BETTER for less.
A little sad that SoB are so far out. I had a feeling they'd be mid-2019 at the earliest, but going all the way to the end of 2019... It's going to be a long wait. I guess that explains why we haven't seen any more tidbits on them. But, then again, we'll all have plenty of time to give good feedback on the Codex, and maybe the models will start coming out ahead of the Codex? Who knows?
The rest of the changes are more what I was hoping to see. Some rules changes, and a lot of points changes. Chapter Approved + the last Big FAQ = a better game overall, I hope.
Is that 40pts WITH Powerfist and Stormbolter? or without? Because the new 23ppm looks like it's without. So with Termies would be 37ppm, which is only a 3 point drop. Hardly enough to make them worth taking
Don't terminators already get stormshields for 5 points? Or is that Wolf Guard only? If that goes down more and then down on TWC and HQs...that'll be some sick savings because my lists run a lot of stormshields.
Is that 40pts WITH Powerfist and Stormbolter? or without? Because the new 23ppm looks like it's without. So with Termies would be 37ppm, which is only a 3 point drop. Hardly enough to make them worth taking
-
SS are rumored to go down. Other pieces could as well. 3 points is a good start.
If they drop power firsts and stuff that will annoy the other factions. XD
This is all love taps. Will make no difference. The LR might be playable at 250ish. 1 point drop on primaris marines? Get outta here man.
Tortoise wins the race. Otherwise we'd have to listen to people complain how GW is trying to sell Primaris twice as much as we will with 1 point.
Who cares - SS have been undercosted by like 7 points for about 1 1/2 years. They are finally raising their price by about half what they should. Primaris started at 20 a pop. No one played them. Dropped to 18 a pop - no one played them. Maybe they'll play them at 17? Give me a break man. It's a 14-15 point model at best. Plus - if primaris drop 1 point there is no way a tactical marine is going to reduce. So basically this is another waste CA.
This is all love taps. Will make no difference. The LR might be playable at 250ish. 1 point drop on primaris marines? Get outta here man.
Tortoise wins the race. Otherwise we'd have to listen to people complain how GW is trying to sell Primaris twice as much as we will with 1 point.
Who cares - SS have been undercosted by like 7 points for about 1 1/2 years. They are finally raising their price by about half what they should. Primaris started at 20 a pop. No one played them. Dropped to 18 a pop - no one played them. Maybe they'll play them at 17? Give me a break man. It's a 14-15 point model at best. Plus - if primaris drop 1 point there is no way a tactical marine is going to reduce. So basically this is another waste CA.
The context of other changes matter. 17 point primaris in a cheaper Repulsor. Cheaper Termies in a more efficient LR. Put that up against more expensive cultists, IS, spears, etc.
Oh gosh darn it to heck and back, if those marine changes indicate some of the Custard stuff (venerable LR) drops as well as the drop to whatshisname my Custards will be under 2k by enough I may need to buy a box of something
MistaGav wrote: It's something I guess but I really think it should be more than that.
We'll see. I'd rather see them make incremental changes and see what's what, rather than just making huge sweeping changes and having no idea what worked. This all looks sensible so far. LR and maybe even the Repulsor (depends on pts drops for the other guns) have become much better value. Assuming the Redemptor will get a drop too. My Primaris Crimson Fists are happy. Not top table happy, but in a much better place than they were if this is all true.
We need to see all the changes together to judge this though, out of context these are just little tasty morsels to amuse us.
The Cultist change would surprise / anger me. Cultists are already the same cost as IG infantry but much worse (6+ save and not 5+, inability to get orders, less weapon options etc.).
Virules wrote: The Cultist change would surprise / anger me. Cultists are already the same cost as IG infantry but much worse (6+ save and not 5+, inability to get orders, less weapon options etc.).
Except they are INSANELY efficient due to keyword interactions and the CSM stratagems. Where IG get next to no benefits from their stratagems the CSM stratagems are amazing. VotLW, Endless Cacophony and Tide of Traitors. Not to mention the Legion traits. Or the interaction with the God-specific psychic powers.
That's always been the problem with cultists. They are FAR too good for their points cost. At damn near a 3:1 ratio with CSM they outperform their CSM counterparts by a mile. Especially if you stick them in an IW or Abaddon bubble.
No, Cultists needed this nerf. Don't try to compare them to guardsmen. That's like an IG player trying to compare themselves to Genestealers. Different roles within different armies. Cultists are meant to be chaff. Currently they're functioning as the Workhorse of the CSM army. And that's a problem.
A point or two change on Marines is welcome, but isn't going to do much on its own. They would also need decreases to a lot of special weapons costs, and some sort of increase to their default offensive power (bolters and CCWs) and something to make them more durable. And probably better chapter traits, and traits on vehicles. And even then it's marginal.
Virules wrote: The Cultist change would surprise / anger me. Cultists are already the same cost as IG infantry but much worse (6+ save and not 5+, inability to get orders, less weapon options etc.).
Except they are INSANELY efficient due to keyword interactions and the CSM stratagems. Where IG get next to no benefits from their stratagems the CSM stratagems are amazing. VotLW, Endless Cacophony and Tide of Traitors. Not to mention the Legion traits. Or the interaction with the God-specific psychic powers.
That's always been the problem with cultists. They are FAR too good for their points cost. At damn near a 3:1 ratio with CSM they outperform their CSM counterparts by a mile. Especially if you stick them in an IW or Abaddon bubble.
No, Cultists needed this nerf. Don't try to compare them to guardsmen. That's like an IG player trying to compare themselves to Genestealers. Different roles within different armies. Cultists are meant to be chaff. Currently they're functioning as the Workhorse of the CSM army. And that's a problem.
Agreed. And with Guardsmen also very likely getting bumped in cost, it's a moot point to complain about Cultists in comparison to Guardsmen. Personally I am excited if all this comes true. Marines and CSM should only be a bit more than twice the cost of Guardsmen/Cultists, but have been 3x that cost this edition. Hopefully the 1-2 punch of MEQs getting slightly cheaper combined with chaff units getting a slight bump in points finally evens the scales. I wanna see people fielding MEQs as their core army again, rather than Cultists and Guard battalions
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: The guns are the same cost because the platforms are entirely different costs. I'm not saying Crisis Suits are good, but it's obvious that, after you cut their price like that, the guns don't need to be cheaper.
I could agree with that position - if the IG didn't pay different prices for BS3+ for some weapons.
If pricing for some weapons is affected by BS - as well as having different prices for the bodies themselves - shouldn't that theoretically be true for all armies?
oni wrote: While I would like to see some this happen, I"m calling bullgak. I'll believe it when I see it in print.
That's my general position on rumours these days - if it isn't via WHC, or from an event, take them with an entire mine of salt
Xenomancers wrote: looks like love taps. That would be fine if they did 1 week updates. But we have to wait 6 more months for another CA.
I think I saw someone mention 15/12 - but, as with everything, take that with a decent spoonful of salt
chaos45 wrote: really hoping standard tactical marine profile dropped to 10-11 pts per model.
If you price a Tactical marine at 10 points, what the heck do you price a Storm Trooper at?
+++
As an aside, unrelated to any of the above quotes, I'm just glad there was that confirmation (from somewhere on Facebook) that CA2018 will feature a complete list of all points changes from their most recent source (be it Index or Codex), rather than putting you in the position of taking both CA books with you.
So far I am liking what I am seeing in terms of price reductions for some of the Space Marine units. Hopefully they reduce the prices of the non-Primaris units as well. But as of right now, I am down 15 pts through Intercessors alone. That almost makes me want to retire my Sternguard. Time will tell.
Cultist to 5 points? I can see that, but only if IG are also 5 points. Cultists are objectively worse before applying any of the army buffs (Sv6+ v. Sv 5+, no access to good heavy weapons, and one less leadership) and quite frankly, I think other than alpha legion, the Guard Regimental abilities are better than any of the CSM Legion abilities for a 4 or 5 point model. I also don't think you should factor in stratagems etc because it is already hard enough to get points to be in an agreeable place, and saying "well this unit should be more because some other ability outside of the Units abilities and stats make it better" because by that logic anything that can have -1 to hit should be more expensive, and how do you price it when not using those abilities (currently all extra abilities are in fact free). Overall, though 8th edition really favors cheap numerous models, so both Cultists and Guardsmen will still be really good even at 5 points.
I am hoping that Rubrics go down a point or two (no specific mention so far) as other marine units have gotten drops it looks like. Terminators losing 3 points I don't think is enough to make them usable, probably should have been more like 6 points. I also hope SoT get maybe a 4 point drop as they are not 2 or 3 points better than a regular terminator.
Bel'kor down to 240 is good (he is currently 280) and would be a fair price if he had the stats of a normal Daemon prince, but he doesn't (one less ST and Sv4+ although 2 more attacks). As such I still think he is to expensive, especially since he ruins your god specific abilities if he is in a detachment and has no access to buff spells.
Curious to see if DPs went up in price.
Also, twin laser to 40? If the single lasor is at 20 that means a tri-las predator is 170, which is a steal.
At least this looks to be a bigger sweeping change than last year's CA and hopefully it will balance thing a bit better and make lists a bit more diverse.
Yea...
I do not think that Scion and Tac should cost the same.
Tac has +1 BS, S, T, Sv. I honestly do not think that deepstrike and weapon with lower range and S which cannot be deepstriked into rapid fire range compensates for stat difference. Not mentioning useless stratagems
I mean I get it, Cultists are a very good unit for their points. But ... what are CSMs supposed to take for troops? If the hike isn't accompanied by a cut for CSMs it'll be a bit harsh, considering how that codex is starting to lag behind now. I'd have preferred it if they'd just cut them off from votlw, which is what powers them up so crazily.
Happy to see cuts to termis, LRs, Intercessors, Repulsors. All great units that need some love. Suspect it won't be enough, but they're at least buffing the right units in the SM faction I guess.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And I gotta say, these cuts are going to stack very well on DW armies. Could amount to a couple of 100 points in some lists...
Also, twin laser to 40? If the single lasor is at 20 that means a tri-las predator is 170, which is a steal.
I don't think we'll see Lascannons down to 20ppm, and if we do, it would be weird for a Twin-Las to be 40ppm.
GW have realized that Twin-weapons are not equal in worth to 2 Single weapons of the same type, if only because you don't have the option to split your fire.
I could see Lascannons dropping from 25 to 22-23ppm, but not 20. But we'll see. Lascannons would certainly be reasonable at 20ppm
I've got my fingers crossed for Metlas & MMs to go down considerably
Yep, and lascannons are one of the few weapons which doesn't receive the twin-linked discount. It's always been a bit odd. I don't think some missile launchers do either (for the Eldar etc.).
I think a minor discount is reasonable on twin-linked weapons, much in the way you pay 20 for heavy bolters, and what, 17 for twin-linked heavy bolters? Seems about right to me. It's a good change which could be spread around a bit to various armies. I believe if I want to take twin-missile launchers for the Wave Serpent it's a full 50 points, etc.
Repulsor going down 25 points and twin-las ten points makes las armed Repulsor 35 points cheaper. That's not insignificant. I hope Redemptor get's a point cut too, it is way overpriced.
Elbows wrote: Yep, and lascannons are one of the few weapons which doesn't receive the twin-linked discount. It's always been a bit odd. I don't think some missile launchers do either (for the Eldar etc.).
I think a minor discount is reasonable on twin-linked weapons, much in the way you pay 20 for heavy bolters, and what, 17 for twin-linked heavy bolters? Seems about right to me. It's a good change which could be spread around a bit to various armies. I believe if I want to take twin-missile launchers for the Wave Serpent it's a full 50 points, etc.
I don't believe that a singular Ork ranged weapon gets any discount for being twin linked.
A bit bummed Knights and Custodes were barely changed, but the -1 to hit armies going away alone more than makes up for that and is worth this CA. Good thing I still have my Deathshroud
Crimson wrote: Repulsor going down 25 points and twin-las ten points makes las armed Repulsor 35 points cheaper. That's not insignificant. I hope Redemptor get's a point cut too, it is way overpriced.
It costs more an an armiger, the redemptor badly needs a point cut. The repulsor cut is spicy, especially if other stuff on it gets cuts too.
Crimson wrote: Repulsor going down 25 points and twin-las ten points makes las armed Repulsor 35 points cheaper. That's not insignificant. I hope Redemptor get's a point cut too, it is way overpriced.
that's definitely a good point. Mine's magnetized but I do think I would be more apt to run a Repulsor now. And I fully agree on the Redemption. It is making me want the Space Marine Supremacy Force now.
I think the Marine las cannon should be 20 points. The codex creep has been massive from when it was worth 25. The missile launcher should also be worth less - or really, the frag version buffed to 2d6/3d3 or something so its vaguely worth its points in some circumstances.
Not happy on the intercessors. I guess 17 vs 16 points (about as much as could be hoped for) isn't massive - but yeah, they are crap now, and I can't see why anyone would say they are okay if you save 5 points on an min squad. 16 was my limit for "try it and see" - they wouldn't be "good" until they hit 15 or even 14.
You can say "look at the other savings" - but if scouts continue to be the go to troop choice I don't see how that matters. Take your scouts and then take more of the non-troops stuff. If basic Marines have gone down to 12 they are still going to be bad.
Obviously if literally all infantry barring MEQ (i.e. including Scouts) were to get a points increase this might change things - but there is no obvious indication thats going to be the case.
As Xenomancers says this feels like tinkering around the edges. Some people might like that. "I bought my army at the start of 6th edition, and I'll be damned if I have to buy something new now we are in 8th" syndrome. Me - I'd like a more considerable meta change. Shining spears going up 3 points, terminators going down 3 points is not it.
If it turns out they have buffed Eldar Soup because Phil Kelly turned up in the studio that day I'll have mixed feelings.
Intercessors only getting a 1 point reduction isn't the best, but combined with the repulsor price drop it makes them a bit more viable for stuff other than gunline/securing objectives in your deployment zone. Put ten in a repulsor, and scoot it from objective to objective. It's still expensive, and not getting special/heavy weapons still sucks, but it's an improvement.
I really want to see if powerfists/chainfists have been reduced. If they have been, terminators in general are gonna be fantastic for taking objectives.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Intercessors are amazing at 17 points, because it means I save a point on my Deathwatch squads.
Deathwatch Intercessors don't need a point drop. They're way more than two points' worth better than the vanilla ones.
Just because they're better than the Vanilla ones it doesn't mean they don't need a price drop. They're at minimum a 20 point model right now. That's a LOT.
These are interesting rumors, but I think a key thing here is that it sounds like they were listening to the players in that a lot of the things have been oft-requested. I might not agree with all of them, but the SM fanboys have been very...outspoken...about their desire for points drops and it sounds like they've been heard. Even the Tau crisis suits - probably the main complaint for that faction - are getting a little love. I'm a fan of small buffs/adjustments around the fringes, but with the caveat that they be done more frequently.
The Eldar points drop hint is also interesting, considering most of the units in that pic are already fairly decent. I'm (sarcastically) hoping those 300-400 points will just all come off the wraithknight so I can run both of mine again.
I wonder if stygies VIII will get a tactic different to the one all the other -1 to hit armies are getting since they already get a army wide cover with canticles.
As someone invested into the god hammer land raiders, tactical marines, and terminators, I'm really excited for the points drops! I always feel outclassed and like I'm fighting an uphill battle every game.
kastelen wrote: I wonder if stygies VIII will get a tactic different to the one all the other -1 to hit armies are getting since they already get a army wide cover with canticles.
I wonder if that will be a thing as well, although I have a feeling nothing will change (aka that canticle will effectively be useless for Stygies). On the other hand, I really hope Dragoons don't go up in points... I just bought 6!
ivangterrace wrote: As someone invested into the god hammer land raiders, tactical marines, and terminators, I'm really excited for the points drops! I always feel outclassed and like I'm fighting an uphill battle every game.
^^ I hear you. I have a couple of armies, but my marine list has stayed Primaris free. I am on the point of pimping my chapter with the new hotness, but, simply, I can't face the idea of painting another 30 marines. I do want standard marine lists to be viable without Guilliman.
kastelen wrote: I wonder if stygies VIII will get a tactic different to the one all the other -1 to hit armies are getting since they already get a army wide cover with canticles.
I wonder if that will be a thing as well, although I have a feeling nothing will change (aka that canticle will effectively be useless for Stygies). On the other hand, I really hope Dragoons don't go up in points... I just bought 6!
You could always deep strike them with lucius in units of 3. Maybe if the tactic is different to the others it's that the bonus to cover is +2 instead of just +1?
Vector Strike wrote: A bit bummed Knights and Custodes were barely changed, but the -1 to hit armies going away alone more than makes up for that and is worth this CA. Good thing I still have my Deathshroud
Love myself some marine points drop
Knights and custodes aren't THAT bad. There's a reason why you never see mono armies of either.
The problem is soup, which GW seems very unwilling to fix.
Betting all the -1s to hit become similar to the Jormangandr Hive Fleet, but probably better as they can still run and charge, maintaining their cover.
Here's to hoping that Swarmlord also sees a drop in points. He's good, but he's still expensive, and he's not as much of a force multiplier like Guilliman is. If anything, I'd really like to see Deathleaper un-'fixed' back to his Index version.
I dunno how I feel about people talking about 5ppm Termigants. I don't care for it, but I'm not sure it'd actually change much for Tyranids in Matched play. Guess it'd be alright if warriors went down in points....
First up... maybe stupid, but lads that -1point on I ntercessors is a free power weapon on quite a melee capable sgt... try not to think of it as an insultingly small drop, and instead as free wargear boosting their versatility?
points drops for tactical marines? please god yes I've been painting them hand over fist due to my love of the aesthetic, but boy could they use a minor boost rn
Also, twin laser to 40? If the single lasor is at 20 that means a tri-las predator is 170, which is a steal.
I don't think we'll see Lascannons down to 20ppm, and if we do, it would be weird for a Twin-Las to be 40ppm.
GW have realized that Twin-weapons are not equal in worth to 2 Single weapons of the same type, if only because you don't have the option to split your fire.
I could see Lascannons dropping from 25 to 22-23ppm, but not 20. But we'll see. Lascannons would certainly be reasonable at 20ppm
I've got my fingers crossed for Metlas & MMs to go down considerably
-
Welocme to the ork codex.... where a rokkit on a BS5+ model is 12pts and twin rokkits are 24pts. We're lucky our kustom shooters are now only like 2pts or something considering they're also a twin version of a free upgrade.
While a point or two off won't make a huge difference for Primaris or regular marines, a point or two off Chaos Cult marines could make the difference.
kastelen wrote: I wonder if stygies VIII will get a tactic different to the one all the other -1 to hit armies are getting since they already get a army wide cover with canticles.
What if these things stack? That would mean +3 to armor saves if you are in cover, which would make them insanely good against anything that isn't AP2 or better.
kastelen wrote: I wonder if stygies VIII will get a tactic different to the one all the other -1 to hit armies are getting since they already get a army wide cover with canticles.
What if these things stack? That would mean +3 to armor saves if you are in cover, which would make them insanely good against anything that isn't AP2 or better.
Canticles gives you cover if you dont have it already, so at most +2 for stygies at range 12" +
kastelen wrote: I wonder if stygies VIII will get a tactic different to the one all the other -1 to hit armies are getting since they already get a army wide cover with canticles.
Unless I'm misunderstanding the leak there shouldn't be a problem there; the trait gives an additional bonus to saves when in cover (so a +2 in cover, basically) while the canticle simply makes your entire army count as being in cover.
AdMech having pretty consistent access to a 2+ save is pretty good.
Vector Strike wrote: A bit bummed Knights and Custodes were barely changed, but the -1 to hit armies going away alone more than makes up for that and is worth this CA. Good thing I still have my Deathshroud
Love myself some marine points drop
Knights and custodes aren't THAT bad. There's a reason why you never see mono armies of either.
The problem is soup, which GW seems very unwilling to fix.
The no-Fly on charge in the last FAQ helped a lot vs Custodes anyway, but Knights are still a problem. And I've seen mono-knight armies (ok, they had a bunch of IG just for CP -but those barely made 100p of the list) and they were terrifying
kastelen wrote: I wonder if stygies VIII will get a tactic different to the one all the other -1 to hit armies are getting since they already get a army wide cover with canticles.
Unless I'm misunderstanding the leak there shouldn't be a problem there; the trait gives an additional bonus to saves when in cover (so a +2 in cover, basically) while the canticle simply makes your entire army count as being in cover.
AdMech having pretty consistent access to a 2+ save is pretty good.
I wouldn't be surprised if the trait is changed to be 'if a unit isn't in cover and is more than 12" away from enemy unit it automatically receives the benefit of cover.'
+1 to cover save would be insane for certain units and certain builds (Rangers have 2+ save in cover for example). In the case of Stygies I guess you'd use other canticles rather than the one that does nothing because of your trait.
Pretty happy to see a point drop for terminators, and primaris troops. I wanted to add a squad of TH/SS Term's to my BT army, and it sounds like (if we can believe the rumors) those will be a good amount cheaper for a squad. Looking forward to that!
Also - No one has said anything about the possible point drop of the drop pods. Any thoughts on that? I think for 65 point (w/ SB) that would be more enticing.
I am also interested to see the possible point drops for named characters. I feel like I get a steal for my Emperor's Champion.... making him cheaper would almost feel like cheating.
I guess I am alone in thinking that having a 17ppm Primaris troop is a good thing? Must be the fact I don't play in tournaments.
All in all, I think GW is listening to the player base with the changes - again, assuming that list was accurate - and even if some of the units didnt drop as much as some would want... I say baby steps is ok.
Godhammer and crusader are both at 200 now
Predators & dreads down ? points (on top of the twin LC drop)
If they don't drop the Vindicator's price, I will be pissed. Hopefully the Dread price drop is good, I really want to run an Angry Washing Machine again.
Godhammer and crusader are both at 200 now
Predators & dreads down ? points (on top of the twin LC drop)
If they don't drop the Vindicator's price, I will be pissed. Hopefully the Dread price drop is good, I really want to run an Angry Washing Machine again.
Vindicators are the right price, just the rules are terrible. Denolisher cannon needs something like 2d3 shots standard at least.
Points changes are just the laziest fix for them and a lot of other stuff.
Godhammer and crusader are both at 200 now
Predators & dreads down ? points (on top of the twin LC drop)
If they don't drop the Vindicator's price, I will be pissed. Hopefully the Dread price drop is good, I really want to run an Angry Washing Machine again.
Vindicators are the right price, just the rules are terrible. Denolisher cannon needs something like 2d3 shots standard at least.
Points changes are just the laziest fix for them and a lot of other stuff.
I can't speak with certainty, but if you're expecting changes beyond points changes for units or weapons, you're going to be disappointed.
Godhammer and crusader are both at 200 now
Predators & dreads down ? points (on top of the twin LC drop)
If they don't drop the Vindicator's price, I will be pissed. Hopefully the Dread price drop is good, I really want to run an Angry Washing Machine again.
Vindicators are the right price, just the rules are terrible. Denolisher cannon needs something like 2d3 shots standard at least.
Points changes are just the laziest fix for them and a lot of other stuff.
I can't speak with certainty, but if you're expecting changes beyond points changes for units or weapons, you're going to be disappointed.
It was mentioned that there is a good chance that there will be datasheets changes too.
Godhammer and crusader are both at 200 now
Predators & dreads down ? points (on top of the twin LC drop)
If they don't drop the Vindicator's price, I will be pissed. Hopefully the Dread price drop is good, I really want to run an Angry Washing Machine again.
Vindicators are the right price, just the rules are terrible. Denolisher cannon needs something like 2d3 shots standard at least.
Points changes are just the laziest fix for them and a lot of other stuff.
I can't speak with certainty, but if you're expecting changes beyond points changes for units or weapons, you're going to be disappointed.
It was mentioned that there is a good chance that there will be datasheets changes too.
I see here a good occasion for Kommandos to find their heavy weapons back...
Godhammer and crusader are both at 200 now
Predators & dreads down ? points (on top of the twin LC drop)
If they don't drop the Vindicator's price, I will be pissed. Hopefully the Dread price drop is good, I really want to run an Angry Washing Machine again.
Vindicators are the right price, just the rules are terrible. Denolisher cannon needs something like 2d3 shots standard at least.
Points changes are just the laziest fix for them and a lot of other stuff.
I can't speak with certainty, but if you're expecting changes beyond points changes for units or weapons, you're going to be disappointed.
I know, just annoying that its its likely to be the eay way out, if it even does happen! The vindi should be at the danger level of a las pred, but even at 110/115 points the random shots make it such a gamble.
Vector Strike wrote: And I've seen mono-knight armies (ok, they had a bunch of IG just for CP -but those barely made 100p of the list) and they were terrifying
Then it wasn't a mono-Knight army, now was it? That 100 points of Guard providing another 5 CPs is a HUGE effect, especially when combined with some of the more devastating stratagems (Order of Companions, anyone?).
Honestly, all this ould have been avoided if GW had of waited a year before bringing out the codex. I saw the index as a beta for 8th edition and the marines codex came out a few weeks after what should have been a few months of solid testing.
Godhammer and crusader are both at 200 now
Predators & dreads down ? points (on top of the twin LC drop)
If they don't drop the Vindicator's price, I will be pissed. Hopefully the Dread price drop is good, I really want to run an Angry Washing Machine again.
Vindicators are the right price, just the rules are terrible. Denolisher cannon needs something like 2d3 shots standard at least.
Points changes are just the laziest fix for them and a lot of other stuff.
They are priced correctly for 2d3 shots, yes. But at 1d6 shots, they are way too variable. I do hope the rumors are right and GW is reevaluating former blast weapon shots. I would love to see several weapons get shots changed.
I'd really like for ten rubrics with an icon of flame, two flamers and a soulreaper to not cost 250+ points. So a point drop on them would be very, very appreciated. But so far all anyone has posted has been space marine and cultist changes...
cole1114 wrote: I'd really like for ten rubrics with an icon of flame, two flamers and a soulreaper to not cost 250+ points. So a point drop on them would be very, very appreciated. But so far all anyone has posted has been space marine and cultist changes...
There is a bit of a dichotomy in the SM armies that GW seems to be attempting to avoid. On one hand, the bulk of the army's Troops should be, you know, the actual basic Troop unit (Tactical/Intercessor, Rubric, Plague, or Chaos Marines), with their secondary Troops being used as additional Troops (Scouts, Tzaangors, Poxwalkers, Cultists) forming a lesser portion. The problem is, since the basic Troops suck for their points, people just run a ton of the secondary Troops.
But honestly, I think the secondary Troops offer enough bonuses on their own that they shouldn't be much less expensive than the basic Troops. Scouts could be 10-11 pts, Tactical Marines could be 11-13 pts. I am not overly familiar with the stats of the other Troops to relate them to their basic counterparts.
Cultists at 5 points are still a steal, and people will still run 80+ of them. IG, Fire Warriors, etc can all follow suite.
I dont want to see Marines get so cheap that people run 100 of them, that just doesnt make sense for the "elite" troops of the setting. Raising other troops still balances the game again but maintains sanity.
Malkyr wrote: Cultists at 5 points are still a steal, and people will still run 80+ of them. IG, Fire Warriors, etc can all follow suite.
I dont want to see Marines get so cheap that people run 100 of them, that just doesnt make sense for the "elite" troops of the setting. Raising other troops still balances the game again but maintains sanity.
The thing is, is a Chaos Space Marine really worth 2.5x Cultists? That's where the whole breakdown comes up.
casvalremdeikun wrote: The thing is, is a Chaos Space Marine really worth 2.5x Cultists? That's where the whole breakdown comes up.
Heavens no. As long as Abaddon and the IW warlord trait are in the book to remove morale tests Cultists would be balanced at 6 or 7 points per model. People would absolutely still run them if Cultists were 7 and Marines were 12.
Am i the only one thinking that december 15th is a bad release date, so close to christmas ? I am waiting for CA, not buying anything until its out. Will my stuff arrive before christmas, when i order december 15th ?
Last Year, they announced on 11/19 you could Pre-Order Chapter Approved on 11/25 for purchase on 12/2. Sure makes a 12/15 release date a very different choice than last year.
Cultists are a problem because nobody knows how to price force multipliers. They’d be ok if they weren’t immune to morale
I think the crazy thing is that they count as chaos marines and get all the bonuses of their legions (especially when vehicles driven by actual CSMs don’t, but that’s a whole other thing). They should be like Gretchen in the ork book, without legion bonuses or stratagems. How the hell are these guys veterans of the long war?
Mandragola wrote: Cultists are a problem because nobody knows how to price force multipliers. They’d be ok if they weren’t immune to morale
I think the crazy thing is that they count as chaos marines and get all the bonuses of their legions (especially when vehicles driven by actual CSMs don’t, but that’s a whole other thing). They should be like Gretchen in the ork book, without legion bonuses or stratagems. How the hell are these guys veterans of the long war?
I wouldn't be surprised if their keywords were stripped.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Huh, they weren't before? That was odd.
Not sure how much that would change things though. I guess tactical missions and stratagems can affect it now.
Oh man, drip-fed leaks like this feel a little like Christmas! I REALLY want to see Ad-mech get some love. Everything but Cawl, Bro-Bots, and Dunecrawlers are just really mediocre-to-down-right-awful.
It's weird. If someone has the book so they can post pics, then just post everything.
"Leaks" like this are usually regulated by the company in order to generate hype. Revealing the contents of the entire book is a good way to lose your job.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Huh, they weren't before? That was odd.
Not sure how much that would change things though. I guess tactical missions and stratagems can affect it now.
Immune to haywire.
Was it a vehicle before? No one uses a stormsurge at my FLGS, so I don't know.
I think people are overlooking an important element here. The Stormsurge post confirms that Chapter Approved will have updated datasheets for certain units.
EricDominus wrote: So... now drones can cover stormsurge... and he is also immune to haywire now...
GreeeeeeeeeeeeeAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTT
I have to stick up for the T'au on this one - these changes are justified. I mean, it's not like drones are hard to kill and the army that uses haywire the most spams blasters/dark lances anyway, so these little buffs aren't exactly game breaking.
But, who wants to bet the Drakhuri blasters get nerfed to D3 damage again? Or get bumped up in points? Same for dark lances.
The "leak" above for the Stormsurge, if it's accurate - is a full replacement Datasheet. Did we see that at all in the first Chapter Approved? It's been so long I don't actually remember. If the above image is real, that's kind of a big deal. I know they had created Land Raiders, and added Fortification datasheets in the first book. I don't think they had any "fixed" or "replaced" unit datasheets though. We've seen a few Forgeworld units added via the FAQs, but again, never a "fixed" or changed one. That means there could be more hope for actual fixed units, instead of just price changes or minor changes to some wording.
The "leak" above for the Stormsurge, if it's accurate - is a full replacement Datasheet. Did we see that at all in the first Chapter Approved? It's been so long I don't actually remember. If the above image is real, that's kind of a big deal. I know they had created Land Raiders, and added Fortification datasheets in the first book. I don't think they had any "fixed" or "replaced" unit datasheets though. We've seen a few Forgeworld units added via the FAQs, but again, never a "fixed" or changed one. That means there could be more hope for actual fixed units, instead of just price changes or minor changes to some wording.
There weren't any fixed datasheets in Chapter Approved, no. They did a similar thing with Horrors in an FAQ, though.
The "leak" above for the Stormsurge, if it's accurate - is a full replacement Datasheet. Did we see that at all in the first Chapter Approved? It's been so long I don't actually remember. If the above image is real, that's kind of a big deal. I know they had created Land Raiders, and added Fortification datasheets in the first book. I don't think they had any "fixed" or "replaced" unit datasheets though. We've seen a few Forgeworld units added via the FAQs, but again, never a "fixed" or changed one. That means there could be more hope for actual fixed units, instead of just price changes or minor changes to some wording.
They did print an updated Kharadron warscroll in the 2017 General's Handbook, so there is some precedent, and that was the only one in that book.
The "leak" above for the Stormsurge, if it's accurate - is a full replacement Datasheet. Did we see that at all in the first Chapter Approved? It's been so long I don't actually remember. If the above image is real, that's kind of a big deal. I know they had created Land Raiders, and added Fortification datasheets in the first book. I don't think they had any "fixed" or "replaced" unit datasheets though. We've seen a few Forgeworld units added via the FAQs, but again, never a "fixed" or changed one. That means there could be more hope for actual fixed units, instead of just price changes or minor changes to some wording.
When the last CA went to print, 8th had only been out for a very short time and only a handful of codexes had been released. I'd expect most, if not all, of the points changes were a result of Mournival feedback rather than players. This time there's a lot more scope to include player input.
What I like most about this is that some points have remained the same; implying that we're going to get the full updated versions of codex pages rather than just a list of changes like the last CA.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
Every time I watch my DE friend play my Tau friend that's how it goes down...
"I'm gonna fire my dark Lance at your Ghostkeel at - 2 to hit. I hit! I wounded!"
"on a 2+ it'll go on my stealth drone..."
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
Every time I watch my DE friend play my Tau friend that's how it goes down...
"I'm gonna fire my dark Lance at your Ghostkeel at - 2 to hit. I hit! I wounded!"
"on a 2+ it'll go on my stealth drone..."
Your DE friend play very badly ...
He have to kill the drone with multi shoot weapons, then kill the drone that give -1 to hit to the ghost (easy), then kill the ghost.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
If you're going to have to roll a 4+ for either the Shield (result: no effect) or Saviour Protocols (result: dead drone) why bother with the drone at all?
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
If you're going to have to roll a 4+ for either the Shield (result: no effect) or Saviour Protocols (result: dead drone) why bother with the drone at all?
Because you get to do both. Failed your 4++? Ok let your drone try.
If stormsurges are really battlesuits, and not far more expensive, I might even finish painting mine.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
If you're going to have to roll a 4+ for either the Shield (result: no effect) or Saviour Protocols (result: dead drone) why bother with the drone at all?
You can do both. The order is you take your save, if you fail you take savior protocol, if that passes then the drone receives a mortal wound, which could be ignored if the drone is a shield drone. Savior protocols are still good, its just not as much as a given as it is on a 2+, especially when there's shield drones involved.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
If you're going to have to roll a 4+ for either the Shield (result: no effect) or Saviour Protocols (result: dead drone) why bother with the drone at all?
Because you get to do both. Failed your 4++? Ok let your drone try.
If stormsurges are really battlesuits, and not far more expensive, I might even finish painting mine.
I don't think it works like that. You cant fail your save then transfer it to the drone.
You have to roll a 4+ to transfer the wound to the drone. If that fails you can role to save it yourself.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
If you're going to have to roll a 4+ for either the Shield (result: no effect) or Saviour Protocols (result: dead drone) why bother with the drone at all?
Because you get to do both. Failed your 4++? Ok let your drone try.
If stormsurges are really battlesuits, and not far more expensive, I might even finish painting mine.
I don't think it works like that. You cant fail your save then transfer it to the drone. You have to roll a 4+ to transfer the wound to the drone. If that fails you can role to save it yourself.
I'm, pretty sure Savior Protocols can be taken after saves.
Edit : Huh, they clarified it in the FAQ. I guess the Tau player at my FLGS hasn't read it yet.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
If you're going to have to roll a 4+ for either the Shield (result: no effect) or Saviour Protocols (result: dead drone) why bother with the drone at all?
Because you get to do both. Failed your 4++? Ok let your drone try.
If stormsurges are really battlesuits, and not far more expensive, I might even finish painting mine.
I don't think it works like that. You cant fail your save then transfer it to the drone.
You have to roll a 4+ to transfer the wound to the drone. If that fails you can role to save it yourself.
Nope, pretty sure Savior Protocols can be taken after saves.
Unless it has been updated in an FAQ somewhere, Savior Protocols states that you roll after a SEPT Infantry or SEPT Battlesuit unit has been wounded by an enemy attack, not after you fail a saving throw. The roll is done between being successfully wounded and rolling your save. If you fail the Savior Protocol roll, you take the wound and roll your save as normal. So you can get both rolls, but only if you fail to pass it off first.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
If you're going to have to roll a 4+ for either the Shield (result: no effect) or Saviour Protocols (result: dead drone) why bother with the drone at all?
Because you get to do both. Failed your 4++? Ok let your drone try.
If stormsurges are really battlesuits, and not far more expensive, I might even finish painting mine.
I don't think it works like that. You cant fail your save then transfer it to the drone. You have to roll a 4+ to transfer the wound to the drone. If that fails you can role to save it yourself.
Nope, pretty sure Savior Protocols can be taken after saves.
Unless it has been updated in an FAQ somewhere, Savior Protocols states that you roll after a SEPT Infantry or SEPT Battlesuit unit has been wounded by an enemy attack, not after you fail a saving throw. The roll is done between being successfully wounded and rolling your save. If you fail the Savior Protocol roll, you take the wound and roll your save as normal. So you can get both rolls, but only if you fail to pass it off first.
Actually, I just read the FAQ and it clarifies the order. You roll savior protocol, then saves.
Still doesn't mean savior on a 4+ is useless though. You still have a 50% chance of stopping an attack that deals multiple damage and reduce it to a single mortal wound, which can be negated by a shield drone on a 5+. That's still pretty good. The shield generator would be useful if you fail the savior roll. You basically get two, possibly 3 common layers of protection, which is more than what most other armies get.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
If you're going to have to roll a 4+ for either the Shield (result: no effect) or Saviour Protocols (result: dead drone) why bother with the drone at all?
Because you get to do both. Failed your 4++? Ok let your drone try.
If stormsurges are really battlesuits, and not far more expensive, I might even finish painting mine.
I don't think it works like that. You cant fail your save then transfer it to the drone.
You have to roll a 4+ to transfer the wound to the drone. If that fails you can role to save it yourself.
Nope, pretty sure Savior Protocols can be taken after saves.
Unless it has been updated in an FAQ somewhere, Savior Protocols states that you roll after a SEPT Infantry or SEPT Battlesuit unit has been wounded by an enemy attack, not after you fail a saving throw. The roll is done between being successfully wounded and rolling your save. If you fail the Savior Protocol roll, you take the wound and roll your save as normal. So you can get both rolls, but only if you fail to pass it off first.
Actually, I just read the FAQ and it clarifies the order.
You roll savior protocol, then saves.
Still doesn't mean savior on a 4+ is useless though. You still have a 50% chance of stopping an attack that deals multiple damage and reduce it to a single mortal wound, which can be negated by a shield drone.
That's still pretty good. The shield generator would be useful if you fail the savior roll.
But if you made the 4+ for SP to work, that same 4+ would have completely negated the attack with the Shield Generator, saving you the cost of a drone.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
Every time I watch my DE friend play my Tau friend that's how it goes down...
"I'm gonna fire my dark Lance at your Ghostkeel at - 2 to hit. I hit! I wounded!"
"on a 2+ it'll go on my stealth drone..."
Your DE friend play very badly ...
He have to kill the drone with multi shoot weapons, then kill the drone that give -1 to hit to the ghost (easy), then kill the ghost.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: [
Unless it has been updated in an FAQ somewhere, Savior Protocols states that you roll after a SEPT Infantry or SEPT Battlesuit unit has been wounded by an enemy attack, not after you fail a saving throw. The roll is done between being successfully wounded and rolling your save. If you fail the Savior Protocol roll, you take the wound and roll your save as normal. So you can get both rolls, but only if you fail to pass it off first.
Actually, I just read the FAQ and it clarifies the order.
You roll savior protocol, then saves.
Still doesn't mean savior on a 4+ is useless though. You still have a 50% chance of stopping an attack that deals multiple damage and reduce it to a single mortal wound, which can be negated by a shield drone on a 5+.
That's still pretty good. The shield generator would be useful if you fail the savior roll. You basically get two, possibly 3 common layers of protection, which is more than what most other armies get.
Wonder if grot screen gets changed as well almost right away. How that works is that you roll to hit, to wound, to save and roll how many damage if it's like d3 or d6 damage. Then for each damage you suffer you roll and on 2+ it kills grot(on 1 it goes to original model).
Though as it's not unit but strategem maybe that working on 2+ isn't considered too bad. Also multi wound weapons goes through grots and orks very easily.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
Every time I watch my DE friend play my Tau friend that's how it goes down...
"I'm gonna fire my dark Lance at your Ghostkeel at - 2 to hit. I hit! I wounded!"
"on a 2+ it'll go on my stealth drone..."
Your DE friend play very badly ...
He have to kill the drone with multi shoot weapons, then kill the drone that give -1 to hit to the ghost (easy), then kill the ghost.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
If you're going to have to roll a 4+ for either the Shield (result: no effect) or Saviour Protocols (result: dead drone) why bother with the drone at all?
Because you get to do both. Failed your 4++? Ok let your drone try.
If stormsurges are really battlesuits, and not far more expensive, I might even finish painting mine.
I don't think it works like that. You cant fail your save then transfer it to the drone.
You have to roll a 4+ to transfer the wound to the drone. If that fails you can role to save it yourself.
Nope, pretty sure Savior Protocols can be taken after saves.
Unless it has been updated in an FAQ somewhere, Savior Protocols states that you roll after a SEPT Infantry or SEPT Battlesuit unit has been wounded by an enemy attack, not after you fail a saving throw. The roll is done between being successfully wounded and rolling your save. If you fail the Savior Protocol roll, you take the wound and roll your save as normal. So you can get both rolls, but only if you fail to pass it off first.
Actually, I just read the FAQ and it clarifies the order.
You roll savior protocol, then saves.
Still doesn't mean savior on a 4+ is useless though. You still have a 50% chance of stopping an attack that deals multiple damage and reduce it to a single mortal wound, which can be negated by a shield drone.
That's still pretty good. The shield generator would be useful if you fail the savior roll.
But if you made the 4+ for SP to work, that same 4+ would have completely negated the attack with the Shield Generator, saving you the cost of a drone.
If they were mutually exclusive you'd have a point. But they are not.
You have a 50% chance of SP, followed by a 50% of stopping the attack with a shield. That's about a 75% of avoiding damage.
If you just take the shield generator that's a 50% chance of taking a lascannon to the face. Pretty sure crisis suits are worth more than drones.
But if you made the 4+ for SP to work, that same 4+ would have completely negated the attack with the Shield Generator, saving you the cost of a drone.
50% negation chance with just the Shield Generator vs 75% with Drone + Shield Generator.
But if you made the 4+ for SP to work, that same 4+ would have completely negated the attack with the Shield Generator, saving you the cost of a drone.
50% negation chance with just the Shield Generator vs 75% with Drone + Shield Generator.
Plus with the shield drones FNP you might not even lose the drone.
So that lucky D6 lascannon shot will do feck all.
cuda1179 wrote: I wanted a Ghostkeel to round out my 36 stealth suits, this just cements it.
With the 180 points you will have saved on your Stealth suits you will be able to afford one, maybe two lol.
Actually, I just read the FAQ and it clarifies the order.
You roll savior protocol, then saves.
Still doesn't mean savior on a 4+ is useless though. You still have a 50% chance of stopping an attack that deals multiple damage and reduce it to a single mortal wound, which can be negated by a shield drone on a 5+.
That's still pretty good. The shield generator would be useful if you fail the savior roll. You basically get two, possibly 3 common layers of protection, which is more than what most other armies get.
Wonder if grot screen gets changed as well almost right away. How that works is that you roll to hit, to wound, to save and roll how many damage if it's like d3 or d6 damage. Then for each damage you suffer you roll and on 2+ it kills grot(on 1 it goes to original model).
Though as it's not unit but strategem maybe that working on 2+ isn't considered too bad. Also multi wound weapons goes through grots and orks very easily.
I doubt it. The codex just came out. You have to use command points for it anyway and it protects one unit, as opposed to savior protocols which can protect every unit if there's a drone nearby.
Imagine if the wording for Grot shields was that it affects every unit in your army that takes a wound. That's pretty much SP.
Makes Shield Generators more worthwhile if you can't count on drones. This may tempt people into not bothering to clear drone chaff first, which is a mistake, but people will still do it.
If you're going to have to roll a 4+ for either the Shield (result: no effect) or Saviour Protocols (result: dead drone) why bother with the drone at all?
Because you get to do both. Failed your 4++? Ok let your drone try.
If stormsurges are really battlesuits, and not far more expensive, I might even finish painting mine.
I don't think it works like that. You cant fail your save then transfer it to the drone.
You have to roll a 4+ to transfer the wound to the drone. If that fails you can role to save it yourself.
Nope, pretty sure Savior Protocols can be taken after saves.
Unless it has been updated in an FAQ somewhere, Savior Protocols states that you roll after a SEPT Infantry or SEPT Battlesuit unit has been wounded by an enemy attack, not after you fail a saving throw. The roll is done between being successfully wounded and rolling your save. If you fail the Savior Protocol roll, you take the wound and roll your save as normal. So you can get both rolls, but only if you fail to pass it off first.
Actually, I just read the FAQ and it clarifies the order.
You roll savior protocol, then saves.
Still doesn't mean savior on a 4+ is useless though. You still have a 50% chance of stopping an attack that deals multiple damage and reduce it to a single mortal wound, which can be negated by a shield drone on a 5+.
That's still pretty good. The shield generator would be useful if you fail the savior roll. You basically get two, possibly 3 common layers of protection, which is more than what most other armies get.
I don't disagree at all. SP being on a 4+ is fine. Does it hurt being nerfed by so much? Of course it does. But having it be on a 2+ was probably too powerful, especially with it being extended to new units like the Stormsurge. Besides, to balance it out almost all of our battlesuits got a points reduction, save for the Riptide, though if we're being honest it is undercosted currently. So while we will protect less wounds of Battlesuits with Drones, we will have overall more wounds worth of Battlesuits on the board to compensate.
Hopefully there's way more changes to the Storm surge than just adding a few new keywords to it. That in itself is not gonna make it a better pick than a riptide. It needs more dakka and a solid points reduction among other things.
X078 wrote: Hopefully there's way more changes to the Storm surge than just adding a few new keywords to it. That in itself is not gonna make it a better pick than a riptide. It needs more dakka and a solid points reduction among other things.
Well, the Riptide will be 220 points base. How much is a stormsurge?
grouchoben wrote: I haven't seen many Tau lists dominating though. This nerf seems a bit harsh, unless its to balance other changes, that is.
More of a frustration in mid-level play kind of nerf than being OP at top tables, I think. It's not fun being unable to shoot anything until every drone has been cleared from the board.
GW has already given up on Tau at top tables because they're a single-book army.
X078 wrote: Hopefully there's way more changes to the Storm surge than just adding a few new keywords to it. That in itself is not gonna make it a better pick than a riptide. It needs more dakka and a solid points reduction among other things.
Well, the Riptide will be 220 points base. How much is a stormsurge?
Around the 330 mark without anything, no shield no nothing, and with (the current state) mediocre cheaper gun.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Shield drones in particular were/are extremely OP with it being 2+
OP would imply they were smashing it at the top tables which was not really the case.
What they were was frustrating, T'au were sometimes winning by frustrating their opponent. If any of this is true then it looks like T'au get less frustrating to play against but more dangerous as the points drops and having less reason to take zillions of shield drones will put more guns on the table.
Spoletta wrote: Guys the rumors about Tau (all of them) were proven false.
To be fair, from what I have seen so far not everything Tau related is fake. The initial leak about Crisis Suit points being around 30 ppm came from the same source that gave all the Marine leaks as well. This source is apparently highly reputable and seems to be accepted without too much salt. The later ones (notably the Stormsurge datasheet) are coming from a source that people are now saying fabricated these pics.
So, unless we have evidence that the initial source also lied and fabricated everything (something which I have seen no evidence for yet), at the very least the Crisis and Farsight points drops seem to be accurate. With that in mind, I don't think we can rule out that the points adjustments we have seen as fake.
The rumors about Tau (all of them) have NOT been proven false, certain elements of them have been claimed (with some potential evidence) to be faked, while others have not. Unless there is evidence online somewhere I have not seen that proves every single leak we have seen thus far to be false.
Spoletta wrote: Guys the rumors about Tau (all of them) were proven false.
To be fair, from what I have seen so far not everything Tau related is fake. The initial leak about Crisis Suit points being around 30 ppm came from the same source that gave all the Marine leaks as well. This source is apparently highly reputable and seems to be accepted without too much salt. The later ones (notably the Stormsurge datasheet) are coming from a source that people are now saying fabricated these pics.
So, unless we have evidence that the initial source also lied and fabricated everything (something which I have seen no evidence for yet), at the very least the Crisis and Farsight points drops seem to be accurate. With that in mind, I don't think we can rule out that the points adjustments we have seen as fake.
The rumors about Tau (all of them) have NOT been proven false, certain elements of them have been claimed (with some potential evidence) to be faked, while others have not. Unless there is evidence online somewhere I have not seen that proves every single leak we have seen thus far to be false.
Yeah sorry, i should have specified that i meant the Tau leaks outside the first batch of leaks. Those are highly likely.
Wait, do you mean on this forum, or elsewhere? Because you posted the thing about the Stormsurge, some other guy posted the thing about the drones and someone else posted that joke image.
Spoletta wrote: Guys the rumors about Tau (all of them) were proven false.
Where's the proof? We see images, and people claiming these images are fake. That's not definitive proof.
According to the thread they originated from on B&C: Yep those are 100% fake. The guy who made those sent this picture to our local tau community. He intended to make a joke for them. So i'm sorry i posted those here. Though those about space marines aren't made by him, so those can be true.
A lot of talk about tau, but what about pts changes to Chaos space marines, is there any info yet?, they really need pts adjustments in a lot of stuff.
quzzaq wrote: A lot of talk about tau, but what about pts changes to Chaos space marines, is there any info yet?, they really need pts adjustments in a lot of stuff.
*agrees in dust*
plsgw give my rubicks cubes a points drop so I can buy more of them.
quzzaq wrote: A lot of talk about tau, but what about pts changes to Chaos space marines, is there any info yet?, they really need pts adjustments in a lot of stuff.
*agrees in dust*
plsgw give my rubicks cubes a points drop so I can buy more of them.
they really shouldn't cost 250+ points for 6 with boltguns, 2 with flamers, 1 with cannon, and an icon of flame.
they should be at least cheaper than thirty tzaangors with an icon and brayherd.
Castellan knight needs to increase in points, stompa needs to decrease, and all titans need to return to their original points and/or get better designed rules.
MajorWesJanson wrote: Castellan knight needs to increase in points, stompa needs to decrease, and all titans need to return to their original points and/or get better designed rules.
Gotta disagree on Castellan. Have you tried fighting one without Cawl's Wrath, re-roll 1's strat and an innate 4++? It actually feels kinda weak. It's the relic/strat/Warlord Trait that's a problem, not the actual datasheet.
With a rumored new Keeper of Secrets coming I'm hoping to see a points drop with the greater demons. Such nice models yet they hardly see a competitive table. I would love to get mine out of the display case and into a tourney but that's not gonna happen at their current points and rules.
MajorWesJanson wrote: Castellan knight needs to increase in points, stompa needs to decrease, and all titans need to return to their original points and/or get better designed rules.
Gotta disagree on Castellan. Have you tried fighting one without Cawl's Wrath, re-roll 1's strat and an innate 4++? It actually feels kinda weak. It's the relic/strat/Warlord Trait that's a problem, not the actual datasheet.
This mostly proves the point Relics aren't something that should've ever been free. That's purely bad design.
MajorWesJanson wrote: Castellan knight needs to increase in points, stompa needs to decrease, and all titans need to return to their original points and/or get better designed rules.
Gotta disagree on Castellan. Have you tried fighting one without Cawl's Wrath, re-roll 1's strat and an innate 4++? It actually feels kinda weak. It's the relic/strat/Warlord Trait that's a problem, not the actual datasheet.
This mostly proves the point Relics aren't something that should've ever been free. That's purely bad design.
Not really, it just needs a competent team to understand that some combos are just too good and shouldn't be included. For example, a warlord trait for +1 Invuln on say a harlequin warlord (since Sol can't take trait, no way to get 2++) would not be the same as +1 invuln on knight. You just have to know that.
-pts drop for rubric, scarab, exalted sorc, predator, vindicator, helbrute, heldrake, forgefiend, land raider (sounds like that's happening so yay)
-Nerf ahriman DP shaman and enlightened with spears
-pts drop for screamers flamers and lords of change
There is a perfectly functional book I'm tsons screaming to get out of the hell of hero hammer it's trapped in.
Really enlightened with spears? I have them and they are not worth what TS pay now and don’t need a nerf. I wish I was in your meta cause they die to a stiff breeze if your opponent targets them with anything
MajorWesJanson wrote: Castellan knight needs to increase in points, stompa needs to decrease, and all titans need to return to their original points and/or get better designed rules.
Gotta disagree on Castellan. Have you tried fighting one without Cawl's Wrath, re-roll 1's strat and an innate 4++? It actually feels kinda weak. It's the relic/strat/Warlord Trait that's a problem, not the actual datasheet.
This mostly proves the point Relics aren't something that should've ever been free. That's purely bad design.
Yeah, who would have tought that one model vs the same model but with +1S and +1D in his weapon, reroll 1's and 4++ for the same cost would bee much more powerfull...
MajorWesJanson wrote: Castellan knight needs to increase in points, stompa needs to decrease, and all titans need to return to their original points and/or get better designed rules.
(Added emphasis to quote.)
I wouldn't be expecting any changes to Codex Ork units, given the book only came out a week or two ago - which should be after CA2018 was locked down for print.
The changes I would love to see (being a Deathwatch and Tau player)
Corvus dropped by about 20 points and to gain access to POTMS which would make it awesome again, shortly more unrealistic wish is for it to be able to carry primaris, stormraven should be able to as well.
Combi meltas to drop in points for Deathwatch vets, they are ludicrously expensive.
Battle suit weapons to be decreased in cost slightly and to be cost less in general as a suit of 3 bare bones suits with flamers costs 207 points!! Absolutely nuts costing there.
Drudge Dreadnought wrote: What we really need for Land Raiders is for assault ramps to come back. And for marines to have any good melee units to put in them.
JohnnyHell wrote: Because it’s not a mechanic they want in 8th, seemingly. Old rule from old ruleset not being in new ruleset is a choice the designers made.
It was a bad choice. They took away the rules that made landraiders and terminators viable, and now nobody uses them. Same with...75% of other marine units. I'm amazed they aren't doing anything due to greed alone. Marines aren't selling anywhere near what they could be.
Landraiders dropping to <300pts is interesting. They benefit from beta DS rules too, stoppin them being tied up in cc so easily. They still suffer from being Castallan piñatas, but prepared positions make them 4+ against lascannons on T1. There's some hope for them yet imo.
MajorWesJanson wrote: Castellan knight needs to increase in points, stompa needs to decrease, and all titans need to return to their original points and/or get better designed rules.
Gotta disagree on Castellan. Have you tried fighting one without Cawl's Wrath, re-roll 1's strat and an innate 4++? It actually feels kinda weak. It's the relic/strat/Warlord Trait that's a problem, not the actual datasheet.
This mostly proves the point Relics aren't something that should've ever been free. That's purely bad design.
Yeah, who would have tought that one model vs the same model but with +1S and +1D in his weapon, reroll 1's and 4++ for the same cost would bee much more powerfull...
Indeed. Anyone who thinks relics are balanced when some are blatantly far more powerful/useful than others, and are ok with them being free are obviously using one of the armies with better relics and not not as interested in a balanced game.
-pts drop for rubric, scarab, exalted sorc, predator, vindicator, helbrute, heldrake, forgefiend, land raider (sounds like that's happening so yay)
-Nerf ahriman DP shaman and enlightened with spears
-pts drop for screamers flamers and lords of change
There is a perfectly functional book I'm tsons screaming to get out of the hell of hero hammer it's trapped in.
Really enlightened with spears? I have them and they are not worth what TS pay now and don’t need a nerf. I wish I was in your meta cause they die to a stiff breeze if your opponent targets them with anything
Rumormill has it that 1k sons is getting a smite nerf of some sort, while GK are getting a smite buff of some sort. My thoughts are they are going to make both armies smite work differently from the norm, but still always succeed on a 5+... then maybe allow them the ability to cast psychic powers a second time? Maybe change the spells to have differing effects, ala Eldar? A common complaint from GK players at least is limited spell selection for an army where everyone can cast spells.
Slagmar wrote: With a rumored new Keeper of Secrets coming I'm hoping to see a points drop with the greater demons. Such nice models yet they hardly see a competitive table. I would love to get mine out of the display case and into a tourney but that's not gonna happen at their current points and rules.
Agreed.
Each greater daemon probably needs at least a 50 point drop if not more.
JohnnyHell wrote: Because it’s not a mechanic they want in 8th, seemingly. Old rule from old ruleset not being in new ruleset is a choice the designers made.
It was a bad choice. They took away the rules that made landraiders and terminators viable, and now nobody uses them. Same with...75% of other marine units. I'm amazed they aren't doing anything due to greed alone. Marines aren't selling anywhere near what they could be.
Uh Land Raiders weren't ever viable in the first place, and honestly this is the first edition I've seen where Terminators were even remotely durable.
MajorWesJanson wrote: Castellan knight needs to increase in points, stompa needs to decrease, and all titans need to return to their original points and/or get better designed rules.
Gotta disagree on Castellan. Have you tried fighting one without Cawl's Wrath, re-roll 1's strat and an innate 4++? It actually feels kinda weak. It's the relic/strat/Warlord Trait that's a problem, not the actual datasheet.
This mostly proves the point Relics aren't something that should've ever been free. That's purely bad design.
Not really, it just needs a competent team to understand that some combos are just too good and shouldn't be included. For example, a warlord trait for +1 Invuln on say a harlequin warlord (since Sol can't take trait, no way to get 2++) would not be the same as +1 invuln on knight. You just have to know that.
That's an issue with the team throwing as many different Households as they could in the codex. If you have that many things to balance, you'll never be done. That's why Super Smash Brothers is always one of the worst balanced fighting games (and this new one will be even worse). Too many options IS a bad thing sometimes.
Knights can have a +1 Invul trait and that's okay. They don't get that in melee after all. This IS your Warlord and he's expensive after all, but some people DO go for more offensive Warlors traits. This is something that can be balanced. However, Relics being done this same way is garbage, as there are too many variations between weapons and other items. When the Aquila and the Ollanius mask are both the same cost, which one do you go for?
Slagmar wrote: With a rumored new Keeper of Secrets coming I'm hoping to see a points drop with the greater demons. Such nice models yet they hardly see a competitive table. I would love to get mine out of the display case and into a tourney but that's not gonna happen at their current points and rules.
Agreed.
Each greater daemon probably needs at least a 50 point drop if not more.
Doubly agreed. I wanna run a Great Unclean one and feel like I'm not gimping myself on purpose, lol
-pts drop for rubric, scarab, exalted sorc, predator, vindicator, helbrute, heldrake, forgefiend, land raider (sounds like that's happening so yay)
-Nerf ahriman DP shaman and enlightened with spears
-pts drop for screamers flamers and lords of change
There is a perfectly functional book I'm tsons screaming to get out of the hell of hero hammer it's trapped in.
Really enlightened with spears? I have them and they are not worth what TS pay now and don’t need a nerf. I wish I was in your meta cause they die to a stiff breeze if your opponent targets them with anything
Rumormill has it that 1k sons is getting a smite nerf of some sort, while GK are getting a smite buff of some sort. My thoughts are they are going to make both armies smite work differently from the norm, but still always succeed on a 5+... then maybe allow them the ability to cast psychic powers a second time? Maybe change the spells to have differing effects, ala Eldar? A common complaint from GK players at least is limited spell selection for an army where everyone can cast spells.
Insta - popping and removing an average of 100 points of models on a 2 or 12 on a psychic test wasn't enough of a smite nerf lol?
I really hope they don't shaft the whole army because dps ahriman and shamans are broken.
Inquisitor Kallus wrote: Indeed. Anyone who thinks relics are balanced when some are blatantly far more powerful/useful than others, and are ok with them being free are obviously using one of the armies with better relics and not not as interested in a balanced game.
"Well, my army's fine...…"
I don't think anyone thinks they are balanced - but I'd still be suspect on applying points (because its just another method of producing good/situational/trash never take this).
What I'd like is GW to make a small pool of relics which are all worth roughly the same amount of points (say 25-30) on top of whatever gear you need to buy to unlock the option.
Its obviously stupid though when some relics are clearly worth 50~ points, and others might be worth about 5 - or less.
I'm just wondering with the rumoured character changes in points etc then seeing Abaddon with no change at all thinking are black legion getting a book cos why change abaddon now only to change him again early 2019....
Motograter wrote: I'm just wondering with the rumoured character changes in points etc then seeing Abaddon with no change at all thinking are black legion getting a book cos why change abaddon now only to change him again early 2019....
The chances of getting a Black Legion codex is practically zero. You're more likely to get an Ultramarines codex before you get a Black Legion one. Not sure where this idea keeps coming from. If anything, the next Chaos codex releases will be Emperors Children and World Eaters - though if they are going down the route of all/most Chaos Primarchs returning, then, it's likely the Primarchs will just get a "Ynnari style" release.
How do we know that Abaddon isn't getting a chance in CA?
Motograter wrote: I'm just wondering with the rumoured character changes in points etc then seeing Abaddon with no change at all thinking are black legion getting a book cos why change abaddon now only to change him again early 2019....
Given that Imperial Fists are getting an upgrade sprue, and they had an add-on book in 6/7e, I think they might be getting an add-on book for 8e. It stands to reason that the other SM Legions/Chapters that had add-ons might get one as well. That would mean maybe Black Legion, Iron Hands, and Crimson Slaughter. But time will tell.
I hope we see some more rumors soon. I want to know what to do with my Space Marines!
Motograter wrote: I'm just wondering with the rumoured character changes in points etc then seeing Abaddon with no change at all thinking are black legion getting a book cos why change abaddon now only to change him again early 2019....
The chances of getting a Black Legion codex is practically zero. You're more likely to get an Ultramarines codex before you get a Black Legion one. Not sure where this idea keeps coming from. If anything, the next Chaos codex releases will be Emperors Children and World Eaters - though if they are going down the route of all/most Chaos Primarchs returning, then, it's likely the Primarchs will just get a "Ynnari style" release.
How do we know that Abaddon isn't getting a chance in CA?
JohnnyHell wrote: Because it’s not a mechanic they want in 8th, seemingly. Old rule from old ruleset not being in new ruleset is a choice the designers made.
It was a bad choice. They took away the rules that made landraiders and terminators viable, and now nobody uses them. Same with...75% of other marine units. I'm amazed they aren't doing anything due to greed alone. Marines aren't selling anywhere near what they could be.
Uh Land Raiders weren't ever viable in the first place, and honestly this is the first edition I've seen where Terminators were even remotely durable.
When did you start playing? Land Raider Rush was a staple marine list in 5th ed. Back when Land Raiders cost ~250pts. And, ya know, had assault ramps. We also had multiple armies that could field viable wing lists. Terminators have lost a lot of relative durability vs common threats compared to past editions. And have lost most of their relative offensive power.
JohnnyHell wrote: Because it’s not a mechanic they want in 8th, seemingly. Old rule from old ruleset not being in new ruleset is a choice the designers made.
It was a bad choice. They took away the rules that made landraiders and terminators viable, and now nobody uses them. Same with...75% of other marine units. I'm amazed they aren't doing anything due to greed alone. Marines aren't selling anywhere near what they could be.
Uh Land Raiders weren't ever viable in the first place, and honestly this is the first edition I've seen where Terminators were even remotely durable.
When did you start playing? Land Raider Rush was a staple marine list in 5th ed. Back when Land Raiders cost ~250pts. And, ya know, had assault ramps. We also had multiple armies that could field viable wing lists. Terminators have lost a lot of relative durability vs common threats compared to past editions. And have lost most of their relative offensive power.
I started playing in 4th, and 5th made them mediocre, not good.
JohnnyHell wrote: Because it’s not a mechanic they want in 8th, seemingly. Old rule from old ruleset not being in new ruleset is a choice the designers made.
It was a bad choice. They took away the rules that made landraiders and terminators viable, and now nobody uses them. Same with...75% of other marine units. I'm amazed they aren't doing anything due to greed alone. Marines aren't selling anywhere near what they could be.
Uh Land Raiders weren't ever viable in the first place, and honestly this is the first edition I've seen where Terminators were even remotely durable.
When did you start playing? Land Raider Rush was a staple marine list in 5th ed. Back when Land Raiders cost ~250pts. And, ya know, had assault ramps. We also had multiple armies that could field viable wing lists. Terminators have lost a lot of relative durability vs common threats compared to past editions. And have lost most of their relative offensive power.
I started playing in 4th, and 5th made them mediocre, not good.
Okay bro, we can call it whatever you want. I don't remember ever seeing a landraider fielded in 4th, but i wasn't following the meta much then. But that's not the point. In 5th, people fielded land raiders regularly and it worked. They were seen in tournament lists too. And now they aren't.
JohnnyHell wrote: Because it’s not a mechanic they want in 8th, seemingly. Old rule from old ruleset not being in new ruleset is a choice the designers made.
It was a bad choice. They took away the rules that made landraiders and terminators viable, and now nobody uses them. Same with...75% of other marine units. I'm amazed they aren't doing anything due to greed alone. Marines aren't selling anywhere near what they could be.
Uh Land Raiders weren't ever viable in the first place, and honestly this is the first edition I've seen where Terminators were even remotely durable.
When did you start playing? Land Raider Rush was a staple marine list in 5th ed. Back when Land Raiders cost ~250pts. And, ya know, had assault ramps. We also had multiple armies that could field viable wing lists. Terminators have lost a lot of relative durability vs common threats compared to past editions. And have lost most of their relative offensive power.
I remember when Avatars of Khaine got Exarch powers and were immune to certain weapons and Marines were toughness 3.........
JohnnyHell wrote: Because it’s not a mechanic they want in 8th, seemingly. Old rule from old ruleset not being in new ruleset is a choice the designers made.
It was a bad choice. They took away the rules that made landraiders and terminators viable, and now nobody uses them. Same with...75% of other marine units. I'm amazed they aren't doing anything due to greed alone. Marines aren't selling anywhere near what they could be.
Uh Land Raiders weren't ever viable in the first place, and honestly this is the first edition I've seen where Terminators were even remotely durable.
When did you start playing? Land Raider Rush was a staple marine list in 5th ed. Back when Land Raiders cost ~250pts. And, ya know, had assault ramps. We also had multiple armies that could field viable wing lists. Terminators have lost a lot of relative durability vs common threats compared to past editions. And have lost most of their relative offensive power.
I remember when Avatars of Khaine got Exarch powers and were immune to certain weapons and Marines were toughness 3.........
I remember when people on here could make an argument without being disingenuous.
JohnnyHell wrote: Because it’s not a mechanic they want in 8th, seemingly. Old rule from old ruleset not being in new ruleset is a choice the designers made.
It was a bad choice. They took away the rules that made landraiders and terminators viable, and now nobody uses them. Same with...75% of other marine units. I'm amazed they aren't doing anything due to greed alone. Marines aren't selling anywhere near what they could be.
Uh Land Raiders weren't ever viable in the first place, and honestly this is the first edition I've seen where Terminators were even remotely durable.
When did you start playing? Land Raider Rush was a staple marine list in 5th ed. Back when Land Raiders cost ~250pts. And, ya know, had assault ramps. We also had multiple armies that could field viable wing lists. Terminators have lost a lot of relative durability vs common threats compared to past editions. And have lost most of their relative offensive power.
I started playing in 4th, and 5th made them mediocre, not good.
Okay bro, we can call it whatever you want. I don't remember ever seeing a landraider fielded in 4th, but i wasn't following the meta much then. But that's not the point. In 5th, people fielded land raiders regularly and it worked. They were seen in tournament lists too. And now they aren't.
They really weren't. People were just excited that their Land Raider didn't die to a stiff breeze so everyone wanted to bust out their models.
They weren't great. You need to stop looking through them rose tinted glasses you got on.
These rumors point to a change in how toughness and saves are pointed. Throughout this edition anything T7+ or 2+/3+ has been overcosted, this CA could be an edition-wide adjustment to that flaw.
Hopefully this means cheaper vehicles, MEK, TEK, and daemons.
JohnnyHell wrote: Because it’s not a mechanic they want in 8th, seemingly. Old rule from old ruleset not being in new ruleset is a choice the designers made.
It was a bad choice. They took away the rules that made landraiders and terminators viable, and now nobody uses them. Same with...75% of other marine units. I'm amazed they aren't doing anything due to greed alone. Marines aren't selling anywhere near what they could be.
Uh Land Raiders weren't ever viable in the first place, and honestly this is the first edition I've seen where Terminators were even remotely durable.
When did you start playing? Land Raider Rush was a staple marine list in 5th ed. Back when Land Raiders cost ~250pts. And, ya know, had assault ramps. We also had multiple armies that could field viable wing lists. Terminators have lost a lot of relative durability vs common threats compared to past editions. And have lost most of their relative offensive power.
I started playing in 4th, and 5th made them mediocre, not good.
Okay bro, we can call it whatever you want. I don't remember ever seeing a landraider fielded in 4th, but i wasn't following the meta much then. But that's not the point. In 5th, people fielded land raiders regularly and it worked. They were seen in tournament lists too. And now they aren't.
They really weren't. People were just excited that their Land Raider didn't die to a stiff breeze so everyone wanted to bust out their models.
They weren't great. You need to stop looking through them rose tinted glasses you got on.
I never argued that they were great. I argued that they were viable, and that they were used. They weren't the top of the meta, but they were a solid 'B' list from any marine codex except Chaos (due to lack of hammer+shield assault terminators.) And now they have gotten worse.
I started in 3rd and Land Raiders have only ever been something you take because you liked the model not because you thought it would help you win. But my opinion might be skewed because I played Tau from 3rd to middle 5th and then Necrons from 6th to 7th. However, I've faced a lot of Land Raiders, a lot of terminators and both have never been viable from my perspective on the other side of the table.
I've also have had Dark Angels from 3rd to 8th. So everytime I see Land Raiders and Terminators lined up against me I'd feel a second of doubt before I remember that those things usually fail to make it to 6th turns.
I'd like to see some changes to soup and cheapo units that generate CP's, but not necessarily in price increases.
It's the mechanic that needs fixing. Maybe link CP's generated to points invested in a battalion? Make CP's only affect certain keywords. I'm not sure how to handle it, but full elite armies seem to be handicapped. But, as it's a core mechanic, perhaps that's too far of a change.
It just seems weird for large god machines and/or the finest soldiers in the Imperium to need 200pts of IG to help them out.
I've read a while ago that most monsters/unpopular units might get a point drop, but don't remember where that came from and if it's reliable.
That'd be really nice, but a few other slight changes to some might help. Trygons and Mawlocs being T6, while Carnifexes are T7 bothers me. They need to go up. And this is going to sounds controversial, but I believe everything that provides synapse should get at least a 5+ invuln if it doesn't already have one.
Slagmar wrote: With a rumored new Keeper of Secrets coming I'm hoping to see a points drop with the greater demons. Such nice models yet they hardly see a competitive table. I would love to get mine out of the display case and into a tourney but that's not gonna happen at their current points and rules.
Agreed.
Each greater daemon probably needs at least a 50 point drop if not more.
I'd personally prefer the Greater Daemons to be stat buff to be effectively a Questoris Knight equivalent. But I know CA isn't for stat bumps.
(But seriously, compare the Axe Bloodthrister to a Knight Gallant and weep)
If you want to make comparisons in the Daemon book and be sad about it, compare a Screamer to a Shining Spear.
What do you think a point of WS, a Shuriken Catapult, the Laser Lance shooting attack, auto 6 advance, a 3+ armor save, half a dozen incredible strategems, access to Ynnari nonsense and way better Psychic shenanigans should cost?
Did you guess zero points? Because a Screamer is just a Shining Spear without all of that and costs the exact same.
Actually, I really don't know how they are going to balance this. Let's say they reduce the basic space marines by 1 pt, or even 2, then they need to literally tweak almost every base troop choice relative to space marine?
Necrons, nids, all loyalist and CSM troop choices, Eldar? Sisters ? Because relative to a basic space amrine that costs say 11 points, a lot of troop choices then all need to be changed.
Also, what about cult marines? What about sternguard and chosen? What about havocs, devastators, assault marines (chaos or loyalist).
At this point, they are literally changing the points for tons of units across troop, FA, heavy and elite choices already. If they only reduce the points of space marines (csm and loyalist) of the basic troop choice. Then a lot of other things in other slots, as well as other factions then all start looking expensive.
A ton of stuff are all basically balanced around the basic 13 point troop choice space marine. Changing that basic space marine involves changing the points of a ton of other stuff or at least considering it. Everything from havocs, assault marines, devastators, chosen, sternguard, cult marines, other faction troop choices all need to be reconsidered and balanced.
Basically, do you have to draw a line in the sand to say, all these are below shouldn't be reduced in cost, they may even need to be increased because they are "horde units" (like orcs, cultists, conscripts, infantry) and all these above this line are candidates for point reductions (necron warriors, all marines, sisters of battle? etc etc). And if you draw this line, then I don't know where eldar fit in here either because I don't play eldar.
I've read a while ago that most monsters/unpopular units might get a point drop, but don't remember where that came from and if it's reliable.
That'd be really nice, but a few other slight changes to some might help. Trygons and Mawlocs being T6, while Carnifexes are T7 bothers me. They need to go up. And this is going to sounds controversial, but I believe everything that provides synapse should get at least a 5+ invuln if it doesn't already have one.
Oh there's a lots of stuff that could need major fixing and redesign, but at a minimum I would settle for a meaningfull points drop
Why the Toxicrene does not have a -1 to be hit (even just for himself, no need for an aura as we got that covered already), or why big fighty monster have so poor WS (that degrade) and usually low attacks. The Maleceptor is a relatively bad psyker too with its poor psychic overload ability. We could go on and on :p
Slagmar wrote: With a rumored new Keeper of Secrets coming I'm hoping to see a points drop with the greater demons. Such nice models yet they hardly see a competitive table. I would love to get mine out of the display case and into a tourney but that's not gonna happen at their current points and rules.
Agreed.
Each greater daemon probably needs at least a 50 point drop if not more.
I'd personally prefer the Greater Daemons to be stat buff to be effectively a Questoris Knight equivalent. But I know CA isn't for stat bumps.
(But seriously, compare the Axe Bloodthrister to a Knight Gallant and weep)
Ditto. Funny how much there's complaining about price of 40k armies yet also people are glamouring for point drops rather than ability buffs which has effect of making 40k even more of an expensive game. Plus makes manouvering less and less meaningful...
Eldenfirefly wrote: Actually, I really don't know how they are going to balance this. Let's say they reduce the basic space marines by 1 pt, or even 2, then they need to literally tweak almost every base troop choice relative to space marine?
Necrons, nids, all loyalist and CSM troop choices, Eldar? Sisters ? Because relative to a basic space amrine that costs say 11 points, a lot of troop choices then all need to be changed.
Also, what about cult marines? What about sternguard and chosen? What about havocs, devastators, assault marines (chaos or loyalist).
At this point, they are literally changing the points for tons of units across troop, FA, heavy and elite choices already. If they only reduce the points of space marines (csm and loyalist) of the basic troop choice. Then a lot of other things in other slots, as well as other factions then all start looking expensive.
A ton of stuff are all basically balanced around the basic 13 point troop choice space marine. Changing that basic space marine involves changing the points of a ton of other stuff or at least considering it. Everything from havocs, assault marines, devastators, chosen, sternguard, cult marines, other faction troop choices all need to be reconsidered and balanced.
Basically, do you have to draw a line in the sand to say, all these are below shouldn't be reduced in cost, they may even need to be increased because they are "horde units" (like orcs, cultists, conscripts, infantry) and all these above this line are candidates for point reductions (necron warriors, all marines, sisters of battle? etc etc). And if you draw this line, then I don't know where eldar fit in here either because I don't play eldar.
I would say that things that use the body of a space marine tactical, but aren't a space marine tactical, don't necessarily need to change just because Tacs go down a bit. Devs/Havocs/Chose/Sternguard/etc are all so vastly different from each other that honestly it doesn't make any sense to pair them up just because the chassis are the same. If those units are good at their battlefield role for the cost(they're not but if they were) then they're going to get taken. In fact, I don't actually think there's anything special really about tactical marines in regards to balance(except maybe against the suspiciously similar SoB Battle sister squad). Tacticals suck for their cost, so they should go down. That has no affect on any other unit in the game(again, except for MAYBE battle sister squads) until they go down TOO much and become op.
Think about it this way, you're not gonna drop the cost of a predator every time the rhino goes down are you? Or drop the Hemlock because the Crimson Hunter comes down?
Even if we are talking Battle Sister Vs Tactical marines, which are VERY similar units(MUCH more similar than Tacs and Sternguard or Tacs and Devastators); Battle sisters are currently the better value per point so you could drop tacticals down to 12 and it would just put them on even footing.
All faction characters get cheaper - Ghazghkull goes up
Orks get a counter to minus hit modifiers, and pay for it as a result - minus hit modifiers go away
No army pays for tactics+stratagems (with the rumor other factions will also increase in points) - Ork Boyz do, other factions still don't (minus chaos cultists)
Loafing wrote: I'd personally prefer the Greater Daemons to be stat buff to be effectively a Questoris Knight equivalent. But I know CA isn't for stat bumps.
(But seriously, compare the Axe Bloodthrister to a Knight Gallant and weep)
Ditto. Funny how much there's complaining about price of 40k armies yet also people are glamouring for point drops rather than ability buffs which has effect of making 40k even more of an expensive game. Plus makes manouvering less and less meaningful...
Yeah, I play Necrons mainly and I'd much prefer my models to perform better with some rules changes rather than just bringing the points down and needing more of them on the table. Though as mentioned above GW would probably prefer to make changes like that in a new codex rather than in CA.
