Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 14:48:08


Post by: Xenomancers


Did GW really just give Imperial fists +1 damage to all heavy weapons while in dev doctrine? LOL. Like...seriously? Is anyone going to play this game anymore?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 14:48:53


Post by: Sterling191


Well that didnt take long. (It's also purely against vehicles or buildings, but never let facts get in the way of good hysterical reaction).


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 14:49:23


Post by: Ratius


Go go Ork boys and Termagant spam!


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 14:51:19


Post by: Crimson


It basically means that there isn't much point of taking vehicles against IF unless you're playing IH.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 14:52:26


Post by: Grimskul


Frankly Xenomancer, I thought the SM supplement books would be a dream come true for you given how many times you've bemoaned SM as the crappiest faction and now with the recent buffs they've been getting I figured you'd be doing a jig, but I guess that would take away from the whinging you like doing so now its just flipped to complaining about how ridiculous it is.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 14:53:47


Post by: Bharring


Does this mean we'll see repeats of all the "CountsAs threads", but this time about how nobody is allowed to not like blue-and-toilet-seat Iron Hands being played as Imperial Fists?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 14:54:44


Post by: Sterling191


Bharring wrote:
Does this mean we'll see repeats of all the "CountsAs threads", but this time about how nobody is allowed to not like blue-and-toilet-seat Iron Hands being played as Imperial Fists?


Of course we are, as basically everyone correctly predicted several weeks ago.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Xenomancers wrote:
It is a fact that it is mostly vs vehicals that this maters so...clearly you are the one being hysterical. Hysterically defending broken rules.


Its not "mostly" against vehicles. It is entirely against vehicles and buildings. Which means if you're an army that relies on, say, battlesuits, or infantry, or monsters, you are entirely unaffected by this doctrine.



Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 14:57:01


Post by: Xenomancers


 Grimskul wrote:
Frankly Xenomancer, I thought the SM supplement books would be a dream come true for you given how many times you've bemoaned SM as the crappiest faction and now with the recent buffs they've been getting I figured you'd be doing a jig, but I guess that would take away from the whinging you like doing so now its just flipped to complaining about how ridiculous it is.
It was the crappiest faction. Now there is no telling. They could still be the worst faction at the end of the edition if they keep coming out with increasingly more ludacris rules. Blanket +1 damage as a free bonus ability to an already really powerful bonus ability. You think the game will end up being more balanced with all these insane bonuses floating around?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 14:58:10


Post by: Bharring


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Grimskul wrote:
Frankly Xenomancer, I thought the SM supplement books would be a dream come true for you given how many times you've bemoaned SM as the crappiest faction and now with the recent buffs they've been getting I figured you'd be doing a jig, but I guess that would take away from the whinging you like doing so now its just flipped to complaining about how ridiculous it is.
It was the crappiest faction. Now there is no telling. They could still be the worst faction at the end of the edition if they keep coming out with increasingly more ludacris rules. Blanket +1 damage as a free bonus ability to an already really powerful bonus ability. You think the game will end up being more balanced with all these insane bonuses floating around?

Marines still are, as "faction" is always defined as "Factions that aren't worse than Marines".


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 14:59:43


Post by: Xenomancers


Bharring wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Grimskul wrote:
Frankly Xenomancer, I thought the SM supplement books would be a dream come true for you given how many times you've bemoaned SM as the crappiest faction and now with the recent buffs they've been getting I figured you'd be doing a jig, but I guess that would take away from the whinging you like doing so now its just flipped to complaining about how ridiculous it is.
It was the crappiest faction. Now there is no telling. They could still be the worst faction at the end of the edition if they keep coming out with increasingly more ludacris rules. Blanket +1 damage as a free bonus ability to an already really powerful bonus ability. You think the game will end up being more balanced with all these insane bonuses floating around?

Marines still are, as "faction" is always defined as "Factions that aren't worse than Marines".
Get out of here. This is basically a new edition and you know it.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:03:21


Post by: Bharring


 Xenomancers wrote:
Bharring wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Grimskul wrote:
Frankly Xenomancer, I thought the SM supplement books would be a dream come true for you given how many times you've bemoaned SM as the crappiest faction and now with the recent buffs they've been getting I figured you'd be doing a jig, but I guess that would take away from the whinging you like doing so now its just flipped to complaining about how ridiculous it is.
It was the crappiest faction. Now there is no telling. They could still be the worst faction at the end of the edition if they keep coming out with increasingly more ludacris rules. Blanket +1 damage as a free bonus ability to an already really powerful bonus ability. You think the game will end up being more balanced with all these insane bonuses floating around?

Marines still are, as "faction" is always defined as "Factions that aren't worse than Marines".
Get out of here. This is basically a new edition and you know it.

And GK and Admech didn't count as factions pre-new-codex-release because... reasons?

The typical reason given is "because they're trash", with "trash" being defined as "worse than Marines".

And then there's stuff like R&H, Ynnari, and Corsairs, but at least the reasoning for exlcuding them is not entirely transparent.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:05:46


Post by: Sterling191


 Xenomancers wrote:

It's not a personal attack. I said your actions were dumb - not you. You also didn't call me on anything. Nothing I said was inaccurate. You just clarified what I said better. Well done...they only get +1 damage against the units they need +1 damage against...So it's not broken...RIGHT.


"iTs NoT a PeRsOnAl AtTaCk To cAlL sOmEbOdY DUMB"

Mhmm, keep it coming.

And you're right, its not broken. Its a narrowly tailored doctrine that provides a specific bonus against a specific target when firing a specific weapon. Good of you to realize your initial overreaction.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:09:43


Post by: ERJAK


 Grimskul wrote:
Frankly Xenomancer, I thought the SM supplement books would be a dream come true for you given how many times you've bemoaned SM as the crappiest faction and now with the recent buffs they've been getting I figured you'd be doing a jig, but I guess that would take away from the whinging you like doing so now its just flipped to complaining about how ridiculous it is.


The problem is that he's still not winning games. Since the codex is good now he can't blame it on his faction anymore so he has to find SOMETHING to blame it all on and that something is other subfactions being better than his subfaction. Because it couldn't possibly be HIM that's the issue.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:15:31


Post by: Ordana


+1 dmg on heavy weapons and your first thought is how will tanks deal with it?
I'm more thinking about all those 2 dmg Heavy Bolters, Assault cannons, Grav cannons, the gatling and Plasma on a Repulsor. ect chewing through Primaris.

Assuming this is true its a deathknell for a lot of heavy infantry that rely on multiple wounds to survive.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:16:38


Post by: Sterling191


 Ordana wrote:
+1 dmg on heavy weapons and your first thought is how will tanks deal with it?
I'm more thinking about all those 2 dmg Heavy Bolters, Assault cannons, Grav cannons, the gatling and Plasma on a Repulsor. ect chewing through Primaris.

Assuming this is true its a deathknell for a lot of heavy infantry that rely on multiple wounds to survive.


The extra damage only applies if the target is a Vehicle or a Building.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:17:10


Post by: Xenomancers


ERJAK wrote:
 Grimskul wrote:
Frankly Xenomancer, I thought the SM supplement books would be a dream come true for you given how many times you've bemoaned SM as the crappiest faction and now with the recent buffs they've been getting I figured you'd be doing a jig, but I guess that would take away from the whinging you like doing so now its just flipped to complaining about how ridiculous it is.


The problem is that he's still not winning games. Since the codex is good now he can't blame it on his faction anymore so he has to find SOMETHING to blame it all on and that something is other subfactions being better than his subfaction. Because it couldn't possibly be HIM that's the issue.
This is completely false...I won my first 4 games as ultras and sa them down and I haven't even been playing with these rules because they are so busted. I've only been complaining about internal balance which is laughably bad. I am seriously concerned people are going to stop playing because of the level of absurdity of these rules.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:18:08


Post by: Amai


So maybe its not that broken after all. Seems still way stronger than Ultra marines even they should be the ultimate marines which is stupid.

I think Xenomancer is right on this that its better but i like to think it doesnt matter and makes the game more interesting. Its nice to have different kind of stuff and the marines are most of the time one group so -> Gives you more to choose from. It's not like you have to buy new models or anything, its a gift for marine players and you are complaining how dare you


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:19:38


Post by: a_typical_hero


The value of this doctrine is highly dependent on your opponent's list, which makes it less likely to stay relevant as time goes on and the meta changes.

That said, currently it is a good doctrine as I think Imperial Fists will get some use out of it in most games.


To really determine the whole power level of IF we need to see the remaining rules first and it is too soon to cry wolf.

Compare it to Iron Hands, where the most complains are about the interaction between relics, special character and stratagems.



Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:20:53


Post by: -Guardsman-


Some of you are not acting like the people Mr. Rogers knew you could be.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:23:31


Post by: Xenomancers


I'm not even a women so...whatever.

Lets get back on the topic of these busted rules.

What I find most hilarious is after the nerf to gman...they came out with an even dumber (free rule) which turns anti infantry weapons into the best anti tank weapons. Seriously...a razorback with TLAC is putting out the same damage as an avenger gatling cannon vs a vehicle. A 4 HB dread even gets double hits on 6's with each wound dealing 2 damage vs vehicles. This army also has blanket ignore cover so its already got a great buff vs infantry.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
a_typical_hero wrote:
The value of this doctrine is highly dependent on your opponent's list, which makes it less likely to stay relevant as time goes on and the meta changes.

That said, currently it is a good doctrine as I think Imperial Fists will get some use out of it in most games.


To really determine the whole power level of IF we need to see the remaining rules first and it is too soon to cry wolf.

Compare it to Iron Hands, where the most complains are about the interaction between relics, special character and stratagems.


What an interesting meta this will be...Ironhands vs crimson fists in the finals every match.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:37:54


Post by: Ordana


Sterling191 wrote:
 Ordana wrote:
+1 dmg on heavy weapons and your first thought is how will tanks deal with it?
I'm more thinking about all those 2 dmg Heavy Bolters, Assault cannons, Grav cannons, the gatling and Plasma on a Repulsor. ect chewing through Primaris.

Assuming this is true its a deathknell for a lot of heavy infantry that rely on multiple wounds to survive.


The extra damage only applies if the target is a Vehicle or a Building.
Heavy weapons get +1 dmg to vehicles.
Mmm, sounds worse then the other marine chapters. To situational and tank's already are not all that viable with in a Meta where you want to be able to 1 round kill a Knight.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:43:04


Post by: Crimson


 Ordana wrote:

Mmm, sounds worse then the other marine chapters. To situational and tank's already are not all that viable with in a Meta where you want to be able to 1 round kill a Knight.

So given that tanks already aren't that viable (unless you're IH) do you think it is good idea to introduce a trait which makes them utterly worthless? Extreme rock-paper-scissors just doesn't produce enjoyable match ups.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:43:36


Post by: Sterling191


 Xenomancers wrote:
I
Seriously...a razorback with TLAC is putting out the same damage as an avenger gatling cannon vs a vehicle.


At fifty percent less range, with no mobility, and on a hilariously squishy platform. Oh and its not a bolt weapon, so no propagating hilarity. For 44 points versus 75 on the Avenger, that seems about right.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I
A 4 HB dread even gets double hits on 6's with each wound dealing 2 damage vs vehicles. This army also has blanket ignore cover so its already got a great buff vs infantry.


The ignore cover is nothing new. An IF quad HB contemptor mortis dread with full aura support (Captain + Lieutenant) is putting on average...7 damage through on a T7/3+ target. Take away those auras, or move the firing unit, or change the underlying platform or target, and that number drops precipitously.

IFs are an offensive army. So far as we know, theyve gotten nothing to shore up the durability problem that Marines still face in 8th.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:56:19


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


The Super Doctrines were a bad idea. The bloat alone of the number of Strats, Warlord Traits, and Relics is bad as is for the game, now we gotta deal with this crap outside of White Scars as, let's be honest, the game is already kinda decided by then.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:57:03


Post by: Insectum7


I saw the author of this thread and instantly knew what it was going to be.

-Guardsman- wrote:
Some of you are not acting like the people Mr. Rogers knew you could be.


Exalted.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 15:59:39


Post by: Crimson


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The Super Doctrines were a bad idea. The bloat alone of the number of Strats, Warlord Traits, and Relics is bad as is for the game, now we gotta deal with this crap outside of White Scars as, let's be honest, the game is already kinda decided by then.

Yes. And they also ruined the interesting decision making the doctrine system would have otherwise offered.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:01:03


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Crimson wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The Super Doctrines were a bad idea. The bloat alone of the number of Strats, Warlord Traits, and Relics is bad as is for the game, now we gotta deal with this crap outside of White Scars as, let's be honest, the game is already kinda decided by then.

Yes. And they also ruined the interesting decision making the doctrine system would have otherwise offered.

I'm all for the rules being used as is, but the fact I'm considering not going with the Super Doctrines actually says a lot about how I feel GW is handling this right now.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:02:19


Post by: Orodhen


The super doctrine is kinda situational. Some competitive army lists use little to no vehicles (Orks, GSC, etc). As to buildings, I'm not sure why they even exist at this point, I haven't seen anyone use them in my years of playing.

I hope we don't have to slog through these posts each time a new marine rule gets revealed, it's already getting old.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:09:07


Post by: Xenomancers


 Ordana wrote:
Sterling191 wrote:
 Ordana wrote:
+1 dmg on heavy weapons and your first thought is how will tanks deal with it?
I'm more thinking about all those 2 dmg Heavy Bolters, Assault cannons, Grav cannons, the gatling and Plasma on a Repulsor. ect chewing through Primaris.

Assuming this is true its a deathknell for a lot of heavy infantry that rely on multiple wounds to survive.


The extra damage only applies if the target is a Vehicle or a Building.
Heavy weapons get +1 dmg to vehicles.
Mmm, sounds worse then the other marine chapters. To situational and tank's already are not all that viable with in a Meta where you want to be able to 1 round kill a Knight.

Knights are vehicles. LOL. Imperial fist army is just going to be full of HB and AC and they will obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease. Much like an army buffed by gman without spending 400 points on a buff champion.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:12:26


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Orodhen wrote:
The super doctrine is kinda situational. Some competitive army lists use little to no vehicles (Orks, GSC, etc). As to buildings, I'm not sure why they even exist at this point, I haven't seen anyone use them in my years of playing.

I hope we don't have to slog through these posts each time a new marine rule gets revealed, it's already getting old.

Spoiler:
Amai wrote:
So you are suggesting me womens are acting in that way ?

How can you be sure ?

In my blog i have written an article about assumptions -> I wil highlight that people are mostly acting based on assumptions and are not aware of it. This is truth on most of the people even they would think themselve highly intellectual it doesnt matter they still fall for their assumptions.

Probably some of, or most of the scientists are like that too and thats one of the reason they are not advancing on their research -> because they act on assupmtions and fail to recognize that.

Someone can be highly advanced in mechanics, physics, mathematics or in some other intellectual way and still do not understand at the slightest how their own mind work even its the one they are using to do all that stuff. Might also be the other way around, that the people who are said to have "their feet on the ground" understand their mind the best and the most intelligent people understand it less than others as they are fixated on things that do not relate / outside of themselves. Like the rules in the 40k or the newest space marine faction.

I might be wrong of course but i think i am not.

And of course even understanding how ones mind work do not help if one cannot use it properly. When thinking people from that perspective, most of the people seem crazy. Especially the ones calling themselfs normal and are almost constantly part of some mass hpynosis / suggestion kind of thing that their surroundings impliment on them without being aware of it and the ones being aware of it at least are. There are probably only few people in the whole world and most of them surely in Asia who can use their mind even in a decent way and are not misled by it.

When thinking it this way the whole process seems utterly stupid:
-You read something from the internet, there is only text in your monitor and you make some imaginative assumption and act based on that thinking its the ultra marine truth (how can it be anything else ?)

Then you probably try to infect other people with our illusion and get them to think like that too, creating a miniscule mass hypnosis / suggestion kind of thing that is totally derived from reality. (at least from other than yours)

The basic concept is that nothing cannot be real in anywhere else than in your head. (as it is not in anywhere else)




I myself have no idea whatsoever why people write in the internet what they do. Is it a bad thing ?


(If you are refering to when i called women in this country michievous and liars -> That is truth in my head and a warning to people who associate with them. Keeping that in mind gives you an advantage as you know they try to cheat on you at some point or / use lies on a dailiy basis. Almost all of them are so good at it that you wont probably notice and they do not have any consciense about doing that so you cannot predict it on an instinct as it is normal for them and you take it as so. Normally you can notice that something is off if the person feels bad about lying to you. But not if the person that is lying thinks it is normal and thats the way its supposed to be. Actually the whole social concept where m from is based on lies and if you do not use lies you will get harshly punished by society for it. There are also only few people i know that do not use lies, and one of them is a woman at least. Other are Jehovas Witneses. They have a code they follow that prohibts lying but they form a society that lives outside the normal society and follow their own rules, such as not to lie but in normal society its entirely ok and part of normal communication. Maybe it would be truthful to say that men lie too but woman are better in it and do it more often. If you say otherwise, i am not believing you and think you do not know what you are talking about. But still, the most outrageous and successive liars are probably still men, as it is in most cases in the world, that the worlds best are almost always men in all things. That is also a fact. Men are also more violent physically, and woman are often more violent mentally it all comes to how they are physically different and women have developed lying as part of their survival skills. Maybe the whole concept of "being best" is a masculine thing as most of the thing woman are best on are something there are not competitions to be best of and maybe its also more important for males to be "better" when they compete for females. It all comes down to pretty basic and primitive stuff.)

BTW i also said that men in here are shy and pathetic but i wont see you saying i hate men. I take it that women have supressed you to defend them on their behalf even there is nothing to defend -> As in attack anyone who compromises their power or superiority. What that makes you ? a pawn perhaps ?

Are... are you ok?

It really isn't as situational as people are making it out to be. Crimson Fist Chapter Tactic is situational, for example, as that depends on ALL of your opponent's army construction. However, all Marine armies bring Heavy Weapons of some kind, and very few armies (Primarch Spam, Tyranids without allied Cults I guess) don't use at least a few vehicles.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:12:41


Post by: Klickor


It is really powerful even if against only vehicles. This means that you can load up on anti Infantry weapons and they still work well against vehicle. Usually anti tank weapons means you have less anti infantry weapons but this removes that weakness. Cost of opportunity is a thing.

You might think that its bad against infantry lists but you are wrong. Sure it might not directly do anything against non vehicles but thanks to it you will have more heavybolters in your list than any other marine player due to everyweapon is a anti tank weapon.

Heavy bolters and stalker pattern rifles will be really really good. With exploding 6s and ignores cover and ap 2-3 they will trash any infantry 36" away while still being really threatening against tanks and knights. I met 30 IF intercessors armed with the heavy weapon and chapter master+ lt in a guard list and they melted my marines. Now with supplement they will be even worse to face.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:21:48


Post by: Dudeface


So, when can we expect the blue ultra-iron-imperial-fist-hand-marines?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:27:32


Post by: Sterling191


 Xenomancers wrote:


Knights are vehicles. LOL. Imperial fist army is just going to be full of HB and AC and they will obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease. Much like an army buffed by gman without spending 400 points on a buff champion.


A fully boosted BS2+ quad HB CMortis does a whopping...5 wounds to a knight. A stationary (because I'm feeling generous) Asscannon razorback does a staggering...4.

Yup, them vees are just melting away.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:37:03


Post by: Xenomancers


Sterling191 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:


Knights are vehicles. LOL. Imperial fist army is just going to be full of HB and AC and they will obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease. Much like an army buffed by gman without spending 400 points on a buff champion.


A fully boosted BS2+ quad HB CMortis does a whopping...5 wounds to a knight. A stationary (because I'm feeling generous) Asscannon razorback does a staggering...4.

Yup, them vees are just melting away.

So it does about the same as 4 lascannons? You seem to be missing the point. You also aren't giving rerolls...because why would a marine player put their entire army in a reroll hits aura...


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:38:12


Post by: Sterling191


 Xenomancers wrote:
Sterling191 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:


Knights are vehicles. LOL. Imperial fist army is just going to be full of HB and AC and they will obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease. Much like an army buffed by gman without spending 400 points on a buff champion.


A fully boosted BS2+ quad HB CMortis does a whopping...5 wounds to a knight. A stationary (because I'm feeling generous) Asscannon razorback does a staggering...4.

Yup, them vees are just melting away.

So it does about the same as 4 lascannons? You seem to be missing the point. You also aren't giving rerolls...because why would a marine player put their entire army in a reroll hits aura...


Rerolls for both hits and wounds were factored into the equation. Try again.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:40:22


Post by: An Actual Englishman


I think these rules are borderline broken to be honest. Marines have become too strong.

It wouldn't be too bad if it was just a few rules, but the layers upon layers of buffs that Marines have received put them squarely on top with very little reasonable competition outside of their own supplements.

It's all well and good claiming that other factions will get brought up to their level with their 'v2' codexes but at the moment nothing indicates this. It's also extremely unlikely, as unless other factions get supplements, they just can't compete. I just don't get it - how can anyone think that it's balanced for a single faction to be able to take unlimited relics, have a ton more stratagems than others and get army-wide, massive buffs? Surely this doesn't even pass the laughter test? Surely common sense tells you this isn't balanced?

I don't begrudge Marines their time in the sun, they definitely deserve it. This is too much though. Way too much. It's like someone wish listed a bunch of rules into reality or something. The worst thing isn't the relative power either, one thing will always be better than another, it's the fact that it feels (yet again) that Marines are playing a different game to the rest of us. It was like this for the 18 months while I waited for the Ork dex, every faction with a codex was playing the game fully while I had to make do with a bum basic index and like 3 stratagems. It wasn't fun, not because I lost but because it was just boring. Players like agency and the ability to make decisions (it's fun), why do Marine players get to make triple the decisions I get to make?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:44:53


Post by: Amai


Yeah thats why it would as good be made so that all the others can take them now too as it will surely be added later on. It can be easily arranged with the gaming group and it seems fair ?

That certainly would be better in game perspective to release all in full package. I really wish gw would act without marketing strategies.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:48:01


Post by: VladimirHerzog


 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I think these rules are borderline broken to be honest. Marines have become too strong.

It wouldn't be too bad if it was just a few rules, but the layers upon layers of buffs that Marines have received put them squarely on top with very little reasonable competition outside of their own supplements.

It's all well and good claiming that other factions will get brought up to their level with their 'v2' codexes but at the moment nothing indicates this. It's also extremely unlikely, as unless other factions get supplements, they just can't compete. I just don't get it - how can anyone think that it's balanced for a single faction to be able to take unlimited relics,



Honestly at this point, if i end up playing against iron hands, i probably will just concede the game to them. The marines supplements have completely turned me off of playing "competitively". So if i get paired agaisnt an iron hands player during our weekly games at my lgs, im gonna be sad. I don't want to feel like a deick because i tell a guy that i wont play him because of his army, but i also dont want to have 0 fun in the game.

Getting effectively tabled before getting my first turn from Mortars + character dreads + repulsors + all that BS is a gakky way to lose a game.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 16:55:24


Post by: Dudeface


 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I think these rules are borderline broken to be honest. Marines have become too strong.

It wouldn't be too bad if it was just a few rules, but the layers upon layers of buffs that Marines have received put them squarely on top with very little reasonable competition outside of their own supplements.

It's all well and good claiming that other factions will get brought up to their level with their 'v2' codexes but at the moment nothing indicates this. It's also extremely unlikely, as unless other factions get supplements, they just can't compete. I just don't get it - how can anyone think that it's balanced for a single faction to be able to take unlimited relics, have a ton more stratagems than others and get army-wide, massive buffs? Surely this doesn't even pass the laughter test? Surely common sense tells you this isn't balanced?

I don't begrudge Marines their time in the sun, they definitely deserve it. This is too much though. Way too much. It's like someone wish listed a bunch of rules into reality or something. The worst thing isn't the relative power either, one thing will always be better than another, it's the fact that it feels (yet again) that Marines are playing a different game to the rest of us. It was like this for the 18 months while I waited for the Ork dex, every faction with a codex was playing the game fully while I had to make do with a bum basic index and like 3 stratagems. It wasn't fun, not because I lost but because it was just boring. Players like agency and the ability to make decisions (it's fun), why do Marine players get to make triple the decisions I get to make?


Unlimited relics may become normal in the next round of codex releases, supplements aren't essential if the traits in the codex are good enough.

I think if the combat doctrines didn't include bonus ap ontop, it wouldn't feel quite such a spike, it's just too much stuff layered.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 17:01:23


Post by: The_Real_Chris


 VladimirHerzog wrote:
Honestly at this point, if i end up playing against iron hands, i probably will just concede the game to them.


Well I did beat them... Admittedly the guy near wiped me out, but in the process forgot about the objectives so I won on VPs.

But yes if I wanted an anti-tank squadron in my army I would be tempted to make it an IF one.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 17:05:34


Post by: NoiseMarine with Tinnitus


Simply cries in R&H.



Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 17:56:00


Post by: An Actual Englishman


 VladimirHerzog wrote:
Honestly at this point, if i end up playing against iron hands, i probably will just concede the game to them. The marines supplements have completely turned me off of playing "competitively". So if i get paired agaisnt an iron hands player during our weekly games at my lgs, im gonna be sad. I don't want to feel like a deick because i tell a guy that i wont play him because of his army, but i also dont want to have 0 fun in the game.

Getting effectively tabled before getting my first turn from Mortars + character dreads + repulsors + all that BS is a gakky way to lose a game.

With you brother.

Dudeface wrote:
Unlimited relics may become normal in the next round of codex releases, supplements aren't essential if the traits in the codex are good enough.

I think if the combat doctrines didn't include bonus ap ontop, it wouldn't feel quite such a spike, it's just too much stuff layered.

Man the reason I think supplements are stupid/required for all factions ASAP are because of the tons of stratagems they give the faction. Stratagems are the key to a competitive build and it's bogus that SM get twice as much as literally everyone else.

As well as the multiple layers of AP, Damage etc that you've already mentioned.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 17:59:59


Post by: Xenomancers


 An Actual Englishman wrote:
 VladimirHerzog wrote:
Honestly at this point, if i end up playing against iron hands, i probably will just concede the game to them. The marines supplements have completely turned me off of playing "competitively". So if i get paired agaisnt an iron hands player during our weekly games at my lgs, im gonna be sad. I don't want to feel like a deick because i tell a guy that i wont play him because of his army, but i also dont want to have 0 fun in the game.

Getting effectively tabled before getting my first turn from Mortars + character dreads + repulsors + all that BS is a gakky way to lose a game.

With you brother.

Dudeface wrote:
Unlimited relics may become normal in the next round of codex releases, supplements aren't essential if the traits in the codex are good enough.

I think if the combat doctrines didn't include bonus ap ontop, it wouldn't feel quite such a spike, it's just too much stuff layered.

Man the reason I think supplements are stupid/required for all factions ASAP are because of the tons of stratagems they give the faction. Stratagems are the key to a competitive build and it's bogus that SM get twice as much as literally everyone else.

As well as the multiple layers of AP, Damage etc that you've already mentioned.

Yeah - exactly what I am saying. Totally in agreement that space marines are so far ahead of every army right now that it is bonkers. Seriously to the point where you shouldn't actually play against them casually and in tournaments you should just be playing them because they are OP extraordinar. What will the next books be like? Well - given GW's history...I'd say probably more OP.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 18:08:43


Post by: generalchaos34


I was under the impression everyone was scared of IH, knights, and Caladius tanks these days. Wouldn't this curb some of those things and force people to take more varied lists? Im dying to see the return of the classic "Take all comers" list instead of these heavy duty niche lists that use some borderline unfair combination of rules to smash their opponents. I personally love playing against quirky and fun lists at tournaments because I just dont know what to expect. Sure you can play 20 Caladius+32+Knight lists or you can play against an all harlequin list that seriously screws you up or an all knight melee list that is vulnerable yet hard hitting.

I hope that all all armies get some nice Mono only rules to give them some real flavor. Mono only armies like our Xenos pals Necrons, Tau, and Orks really need a little boost to even them out.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 18:22:23


Post by: Maelstrom808


My necrons would normally welcome our new power armored +1 damage overlords, but after our best vehicle with QS got kicked in the junk with the fits/sits ITC ruling...not so much.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 18:23:49


Post by: Crimson


 generalchaos34 wrote:
I was under the impression everyone was scared of IH, knights, and Caladius tanks these days. Wouldn't this curb some of those things and force people to take more varied lists? Im dying to see the return of the classic "Take all comers" list instead of these heavy duty niche lists that use some borderline unfair combination of rules to smash their opponents. I personally love playing against quirky and fun lists at tournaments because I just dont know what to expect. Sure you can play 20 Caladius+32+Knight lists or you can play against an all harlequin list that seriously screws you up or an all knight melee list that is vulnerable yet hard hitting.

I am afraid that this will have an opposite effect. In a meta you might face the Imperial Fists you either need to take the most obscenely durable vehicles or not bother with vehicles at all.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 18:24:59


Post by: vict0988


I think attacking someone for wishing for a fair and balanced ruleset for his faction is weird, that should be what everyone wants, being top dog isn't great, it makes all you victories taste sour. I've seen so many people say that 8th is easy and doesn't feel good to win, I felt that way a thousand times in 7th, such an easy game as far as I remember. I don't remember playing with full-power Decurion in more than a handful of games.

 Crimson wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The Super Doctrines were a bad idea. The bloat alone of the number of Strats, Warlord Traits, and Relics is bad as is for the game, now we gotta deal with this crap outside of White Scars as, let's be honest, the game is already kinda decided by then.

Yes. And they also ruined the interesting decision making the doctrine system would have otherwise offered.

Doctrines being always on was a bad idea from the start, it gives a huge incentive to stay in dev doctrine all game. Then two thirds of Chapters get an incentive to move out of dev doctrine ASAP to get to a different doctrine and stay there all game, without that it'd just be dev doctrine the codex, so the doctrine benefits are actually needed to fix a fundamentally terrible concept. Dormant doctrines activatable for 1CP one turn and 2CP to activate the same one again would have been an interesting system, with choice and would give reasons for people to build tactical and assault elements into their armies to make the most of all three 1CP doctrines. The codex astartes is meant to show how Guilliman wanted Marines to field varied lists so they don't get blindsided by any one thing, meanwhile, Iron Hands build parking lots and flying circuses while Ultramarines have no dedicated melee units. It's terrible design because it's anti-fluff, it actively discourages building fluffy battle company lists or fluffy first company lists for Iron Hands for example.

The balance remains to be seen once all of them have been released, there might be some internal rock-paper-scissoring going on, which would be fine if it was just for SM vs SM battles, but this isn't Horus Heresy where these rules that massively change how each sub-faction builds their lists might be more appreciated, It's too easy to get by simply not souping, which I guess was the name of the game previously, yay for less soup at least. So far Ultra successors, Iron Hands and White Scars have succeeded, a nerf to Feirros and the stupid stone relic then each SM sub-faction might keep opportunities open for White Scars and Ultras and allow Raven Guard to have some time in the limelight.

As a Necron player I'm not too happy about the Imperial Fists doctrine, not that it's the most craziest OP option, it's just really good against Quantum Shielding because it obviously benefits 1 and 2 damage weapons more than 3 and D6 damage weapons which I doubt IF players will take anymore. I'd rather it just doubled damage because Monoliths are gak anyways, I rarely use Doom Scythes and there is no way that a Seraptek Heavy Construct is going to survive regardless of whether it's a bunch of heavy bolters with damage 2 or a bunch of lascannons with 2d6 damage.

*Edit, I thought it affected all weapons not just heavy weapons. I guess you wouldn't want more than one possible IF list, it not affecting regular bolters is good news for me at least.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 18:30:13


Post by: Sterling191


 vict0988 wrote:

As a Necron player I'm not too happy about the Imperial Fists doctrine, not that it's the most craziest OP option, it's just really good against Quantum Shielding because it obviously benefits 1 and 2 damage weapons more than 3 and D6 damage weapons which I doubt IF players will take anymore. I'd rather it just doubled damage because Monoliths are gak anyways, I rarely use Doom Scythes and there is no way that a Seraptek Heavy Construct is going to survive regardless of whether it's a bunch of heavy bolters with damage 2 or a bunch of lascannons with 2d6 damage. It's also not terribly fluffy or makes any sense, since when did bolters or heavy bolters become the preferred anti-tank weapon of the Imperial Fists? Thunder hammers? Who needs them when you can have your 2D lightning claw with your storm shield, because that's the fluffiest IF melee weapon right? I know thunder hammers still deal twice as much damage, but 6 pt 2D power claw>40 pt 4D thunder hammer. At least it does affect melee weapons, something that I think is nice, will IF players bring melee other than Assault Cents and Aggressors though? I doubt it.


The doctrine damage bonus applies only to Heavy type weapons. It has zero effect on melee weapons.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 18:32:23


Post by: Continuity


 Xenomancers wrote:
Sterling191 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:


Knights are vehicles. LOL. Imperial fist army is just going to be full of HB and AC and they will obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease. Much like an army buffed by gman without spending 400 points on a buff champion.


A fully boosted BS2+ quad HB CMortis does a whopping...5 wounds to a knight. A stationary (because I'm feeling generous) Asscannon razorback does a staggering...4.

Yup, them vees are just melting away.

So it does about the same as 4 lascannons? You seem to be missing the point. You also aren't giving rerolls...because why would a marine player put their entire army in a reroll hits aura...


EDIT: lol nevermind I completely misread


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 18:33:04


Post by: SeanDrake


Hahahaha I called it in the last Xeno thread his um would be blue fist before they ever got to be blue IH.

With all the knee jerking going on recently there must be a lot of people walking around like John Cleese

While we have not seen all there stuff yet fists don’t seem more than high mid tier just among the marines.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 18:50:03


Post by: Xenomancers


 Continuity wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Sterling191 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:


Knights are vehicles. LOL. Imperial fist army is just going to be full of HB and AC and they will obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease. Much like an army buffed by gman without spending 400 points on a buff champion.


A fully boosted BS2+ quad HB CMortis does a whopping...5 wounds to a knight. A stationary (because I'm feeling generous) Asscannon razorback does a staggering...4.

Yup, them vees are just melting away.

So it does about the same as 4 lascannons? You seem to be missing the point. You also aren't giving rerolls...because why would a marine player put their entire army in a reroll hits aura...


You can't make an assertion that an IF army that spams HB and AC will "obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease" and then suddenly whip out 4 lascannon when the numbers prove you wrong

Sounds like some playground pretend-fight to me.

If you are going to be snide at least be right. Lascannons average about 1 damage to a vehicle with bs 3+.
Twin las 2x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3)x3.5 = 2.06
a Twin heavy bolter that does 2 damage to a vehicle does
6x(2/3)(1/3)(2/3)x2 = 1.78 (this doesn't even factor in 6's generating 2 hits which actually puts it a little over a LC) that turns it to 2.22 average damage.

Twin HB is 17 and a twin LC is 40....which is the more effective anti tank weapon? You don't have to answer - it's a rhetorical question.

Basically I am right and you are wrong. Imperial fists HB is more effective against tanks than a lascannon...So they don't even have to take lascannons - all they have to do is take anti infantry and they have a TAC list. It's just how I ran Ultramarines before they nerfed Gman...everyone said it was OP then. Now it's knee jerking though. Even though Imperial fists get this for free. FREE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SeanDrake wrote:
Hahahaha I called it in the last Xeno thread his um would be blue fist before they ever got to be blue IH.

With all the knee jerking going on recently there must be a lot of people walking around like John Cleese

While we have not seen all there stuff yet fists don’t seem more than high mid tier just among the marines.
They aren't as good as Ironhands cause defense wins in the end almost always and ironhands have a lot of goof offensive buffs too. Imperial fists auto win vs any opponent with lots of armor though so...there is a real issue with that to if you are like...using vehicles. Unless your ironhands...


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 19:01:18


Post by: ManTube


Kinda funny how everyone gets mad at Xeno for complaining about marine power levels being too low, and now when he does something principled and complains about the buffs for his own faction being ridiculous, people still call him a whiner..

I agree that all the new bonuses are quite silly. The game already plays like rocket tag with massive lethality to the point that most games are pretty much decided by turn 2 or 3. This doesn't help. I want to play a game where my models actually spend a little time on the table, being positioned and moving around, rather than just unpacking a physical manifestation of an efficient math formula and then removing most everything in short order.

Hell, some of my group has already been discussing just doubling the wounds for everything across the board to make the game less of a meat grinder. With this addition, we may end up doing that or perhaps moving towards 50PL apocalypse, which I've heard does 40k better than 40k does. I would normally hope that 9th edition would roll around and scale back all the damage, but with the new continuous update, chapter-approved style of things, I imagine we will just see more bloat and power creep until the game collapses and forces a refresh.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 19:39:42


Post by: Bharring


ManTube wrote:
Kinda funny how everyone gets mad at Xeno for complaining about marine power levels being too low, and now when he does something principled and complains about the buffs for his own faction being ridiculous, people still call him a whiner..

I agree that all the new bonuses are quite silly. The game already plays like rocket tag with massive lethality to the point that most games are pretty much decided by turn 2 or 3. This doesn't help. I want to play a game where my models actually spend a little time on the table, being positioned and moving around, rather than just unpacking a physical manifestation of an efficient math formula and then removing most everything in short order.

Hell, some of my group has already been discussing just doubling the wounds for everything across the board to make the game less of a meat grinder. With this addition, we may end up doing that or perhaps moving towards 50PL apocalypse, which I've heard does 40k better than 40k does. I would normally hope that 9th edition would roll around and scale back all the damage, but with the new continuous update, chapter-approved style of things, I imagine we will just see more bloat and power creep until the game collapses and forces a refresh.

It's not the direction of his opinion that sparks umbrage. It's the extremism and ... questionable... claims.

If someone says "I'm so hungry I'll starve to death today, if I don't get food", then eats a hot dog, then says "I'm so stuffed, I need to lie down", they're not principled. They're either hyperbolic or clueless. Probably both.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 19:52:52


Post by: Daedalus81


Bharring wrote:
ManTube wrote:
Kinda funny how everyone gets mad at Xeno for complaining about marine power levels being too low, and now when he does something principled and complains about the buffs for his own faction being ridiculous, people still call him a whiner..

I agree that all the new bonuses are quite silly. The game already plays like rocket tag with massive lethality to the point that most games are pretty much decided by turn 2 or 3. This doesn't help. I want to play a game where my models actually spend a little time on the table, being positioned and moving around, rather than just unpacking a physical manifestation of an efficient math formula and then removing most everything in short order.

Hell, some of my group has already been discussing just doubling the wounds for everything across the board to make the game less of a meat grinder. With this addition, we may end up doing that or perhaps moving towards 50PL apocalypse, which I've heard does 40k better than 40k does. I would normally hope that 9th edition would roll around and scale back all the damage, but with the new continuous update, chapter-approved style of things, I imagine we will just see more bloat and power creep until the game collapses and forces a refresh.

It's not the direction of his opinion that sparks umbrage. It's the extremism and ... questionable... claims.

If someone says "I'm so hungry I'll starve to death today, if I don't get food", then eats a hot dog, then says "I'm so stuffed, I need to lie down", they're not principled. They're either hyperbolic or clueless. Probably both.


^^^

*scurries back to do more data entry*


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 20:54:54


Post by: BrianDavion


The_Real_Chris wrote:
 VladimirHerzog wrote:
Honestly at this point, if i end up playing against iron hands, i probably will just concede the game to them.


Well I did beat them... Admittedly the guy near wiped me out, but in the process forgot about the objectives so I won on VPs.

But yes if I wanted an anti-tank squadron in my army I would be tempted to make it an IF one.


except you can't ake an IF anti-tank squadron. to get this rule you have to 100% commit to Imperial fists. and apparently a number of their stratagiums are not that great.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Amai wrote:
So maybe its not that broken after all. Seems still way stronger than Ultra marines even they should be the ultimate marines which is stupid.



Ulrtramarines are noted for being tactically flexable.. jacks of all trades and it's shown in this. If you don't know what you want to take, it's ahrd to go wrong with ultramarines. meanwhile every other chapter tends to shoe horn you into a partiuclar style.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 21:39:06


Post by: ClockworkZion


 Xenomancers wrote:
Did GW really just give Imperial fists +1 damage to all heavy weapons while in dev doctrine? LOL. Like...seriously? Is anyone going to play this game anymore?

Against vehicles and buildings only.

And it doesn't stack with their Chapter Tactic's weapon buff in most cases. Heavy Bolters are the ones that get the most out of the combined tactic and doctrine.

Generally it looks like the idea is to let Imperial Fists peel the armour off of units in transports turn one before laying down a lot of bolter shots on turn two. Hardly a game breaker (keep your tanks out of LoS on turn 1 and you already go a long way to negating this buff), and staying in the heavy doctrine means not using the tactical doctrine (which they want to use to buff Aggressors if running Dorn's Moving Castle, or just to make Auto Bolt Rifles good).

Threat saturation (two is one, three is two) goes a long way as well as it means the Fists literally can't kill everything fast enough to take advantage of their other doctrines effectively.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 22:09:30


Post by: ewar


Personally, I think the whole of the 40k forum are unwilling participants in some sort of meta bending piece of performance art. There can be no other explanation.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Basically I am right and you are wrong.


Slow clap for the quality of your argument and depth of insight.

I had a several year break from war gaming forums and really enjoyed my hobby - dipping back in the last few months has been an entirely negative experience and threads like this are just a shining example of the pure evil of the internet. Raging about a book not yet released, with no game time at all and getting literally the first thing being raged about completely wrong. I mean, we are literally drowning in irony.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 23:33:05


Post by: godardc


At first I thought Wow, that's a really weak "super doctrine". What if you face tyranids, or infantry spam ? Then I realized: it's a good doctrine because you don't need AT guns, juts take loads of anti infantry guns and the super doctrine will make them good against vehicles if there are any !
Did we get any new information / confirmation about this super doctrine ?
-Guardsman- wrote:
Some of you are not acting like the people Mr. Rogers knew you could be.


What ?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/11 23:41:20


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Continuity wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Sterling191 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:


Knights are vehicles. LOL. Imperial fist army is just going to be full of HB and AC and they will obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease. Much like an army buffed by gman without spending 400 points on a buff champion.


A fully boosted BS2+ quad HB CMortis does a whopping...5 wounds to a knight. A stationary (because I'm feeling generous) Asscannon razorback does a staggering...4.

Yup, them vees are just melting away.

So it does about the same as 4 lascannons? You seem to be missing the point. You also aren't giving rerolls...because why would a marine player put their entire army in a reroll hits aura...


You can't make an assertion that an IF army that spams HB and AC will "obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease" and then suddenly whip out 4 lascannon when the numbers prove you wrong

Sounds like some playground pretend-fight to me.

If you are going to be snide at least be right. Lascannons average about 1 damage to a vehicle with bs 3+.
Twin las 2x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3)x3.5 = 2.06
a Twin heavy bolter that does 2 damage to a vehicle does
6x(2/3)(1/3)(2/3)x2 = 1.78 (this doesn't even factor in 6's generating 2 hits which actually puts it a little over a LC) that turns it to 2.22 average damage.

Twin HB is 17 and a twin LC is 40....which is the more effective anti tank weapon? You don't have to answer - it's a rhetorical question.

Basically I am right and you are wrong. Imperial fists HB is more effective against tanks than a lascannon...So they don't even have to take lascannons - all they have to do is take anti infantry and they have a TAC list. It's just how I ran Ultramarines before they nerfed Gman...everyone said it was OP then. Now it's knee jerking though. Even though Imperial fists get this for free. FREE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SeanDrake wrote:
Hahahaha I called it in the last Xeno thread his um would be blue fist before they ever got to be blue IH.

With all the knee jerking going on recently there must be a lot of people walking around like John Cleese

While we have not seen all there stuff yet fists don’t seem more than high mid tier just among the marines.
They aren't as good as Ironhands cause defense wins in the end almost always and ironhands have a lot of goof offensive buffs too. Imperial fists auto win vs any opponent with lots of armor though so...there is a real issue with that to if you are like...using vehicles. Unless your ironhands...
Xeno, I'm running YOUR MATH, and getting different answers.

2*(2/3)*(2/3)*(2/3)*3.5=2.07, not 2.06.

Your Heavy Bolter math seems right, though how are you getting the same save from AP-2 and AP-4? What target are you shooting? And 6s generating an extra hit is, statistically, the same as hitting one point better. so that math at least seems accurate too.

But, even without the Ironstone, shooting at a Redemptor, Rhino, or Repulsor, you get...

2 Lascannon shots
4/3 hits
8/9 wounds
8/9 failed saves
28/9 damage, or just over 3.

6 HBolter shots
5 hits
5/3 wounds
10/9 failed saves
20/9 damage, or almost 2 and a quarter.

If you're up against something with Invulns, like, say, an Iron Hands parking lot with the Iron Father... Well, then they probably have the Ironstone too, meaning the Lascannon damage drops by about a quarter off the Ironstone and not quite half in total (from the 5++ and the Ironstone), but the HBolter drops completely in half.

And if we add in Prepared Positions, the HBolter drops from saving on 5s to on 4s, for another reduction of 25%, while the Lascannon still forces invulns, or 6+s if they don't have one.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 01:23:48


Post by: Drudge Dreadnought


Everything was fine when the meta was all about Guilliman, and when it was all about Shadowswords, and when it was all about Pox walkers, and when it was all about Ynnari, and when it was all about tzaangor bombs, and both times it was all about eldar fliers, and when it was all about castellans...but now that it might be all about multiple different space marines chapters, everyone loses their minds.

Having space marines in general become useful is worth having the top meta spot switch to Iron Hands (and maybe Imperial fists) for a bit. I doubt it'll stay there long. Is the meta even worth discussing much until Psychic Awakening is all out? We're in the middle of basically a new edition of army rules. That armies who have gotten updated are more powerful than those who haven't isn't worth all this fuss.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 01:46:05


Post by: AngryAngel80


I know it wasn't much of a prediction, but I did call this. It has begun !!! Seeing the future, it is a burden and a curse.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 01:49:18


Post by: ClockworkZion


AngryAngel80 wrote:
I know it wasn't much of a prediction, but I did call this. It has begun !!! Seeing the future, it is a burden and a curse.

Man, just imagine the panic over whatever we see for Black Templars or Blood Angels in psychic awakening.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 01:51:36


Post by: Waaaghpower


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Continuity wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Sterling191 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:


Knights are vehicles. LOL. Imperial fist army is just going to be full of HB and AC and they will obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease. Much like an army buffed by gman without spending 400 points on a buff champion.


A fully boosted BS2+ quad HB CMortis does a whopping...5 wounds to a knight. A stationary (because I'm feeling generous) Asscannon razorback does a staggering...4.

Yup, them vees are just melting away.

So it does about the same as 4 lascannons? You seem to be missing the point. You also aren't giving rerolls...because why would a marine player put their entire army in a reroll hits aura...


You can't make an assertion that an IF army that spams HB and AC will "obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease" and then suddenly whip out 4 lascannon when the numbers prove you wrong

Sounds like some playground pretend-fight to me.

If you are going to be snide at least be right. Lascannons average about 1 damage to a vehicle with bs 3+.
Twin las 2x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3)x3.5 = 2.06
a Twin heavy bolter that does 2 damage to a vehicle does
6x(2/3)(1/3)(2/3)x2 = 1.78 (this doesn't even factor in 6's generating 2 hits which actually puts it a little over a LC) that turns it to 2.22 average damage.

Twin HB is 17 and a twin LC is 40....which is the more effective anti tank weapon? You don't have to answer - it's a rhetorical question.

Basically I am right and you are wrong. Imperial fists HB is more effective against tanks than a lascannon...So they don't even have to take lascannons - all they have to do is take anti infantry and they have a TAC list. It's just how I ran Ultramarines before they nerfed Gman...everyone said it was OP then. Now it's knee jerking though. Even though Imperial fists get this for free. FREE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SeanDrake wrote:
Hahahaha I called it in the last Xeno thread his um would be blue fist before they ever got to be blue IH.

With all the knee jerking going on recently there must be a lot of people walking around like John Cleese

While we have not seen all there stuff yet fists don’t seem more than high mid tier just among the marines.
They aren't as good as Ironhands cause defense wins in the end almost always and ironhands have a lot of goof offensive buffs too. Imperial fists auto win vs any opponent with lots of armor though so...there is a real issue with that to if you are like...using vehicles. Unless your ironhands...
Xeno, I'm running YOUR MATH, and getting different answers.

2*(2/3)*(2/3)*(2/3)*3.5=2.07, not 2.06.

Your Heavy Bolter math seems right, though how are you getting the same save from AP-2 and AP-4? What target are you shooting? And 6s generating an extra hit is, statistically, the same as hitting one point better. so that math at least seems accurate too.

But, even without the Ironstone, shooting at a Redemptor, Rhino, or Repulsor, you get...

2 Lascannon shots
4/3 hits
8/9 wounds
8/9 failed saves
28/9 damage, or just over 3.

6 HBolter shots
5 hits
5/3 wounds
10/9 failed saves
20/9 damage, or almost 2 and a quarter.

If you're up against something with Invulns, like, say, an Iron Hands parking lot with the Iron Father... Well, then they probably have the Ironstone too, meaning the Lascannon damage drops by about a quarter off the Ironstone and not quite half in total (from the 5++ and the Ironstone), but the HBolter drops completely in half.

And if we add in Prepared Positions, the HBolter drops from saving on 5s to on 4s, for another reduction of 25%, while the Lascannon still forces invulns, or 6+s if they don't have one.

Wouldn't the lascannon be doing 4.5 damage in this comparison also?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 02:05:24


Post by: AngryAngel80


 ClockworkZion wrote:
AngryAngel80 wrote:
I know it wasn't much of a prediction, but I did call this. It has begun !!! Seeing the future, it is a burden and a curse.

Man, just imagine the panic over whatever we see for Black Templars or Blood Angels in psychic awakening.


You know, we don't always agree but I think we can agree on this. If the marine factions get upgraded like this in the PA books, the threads they spawn will be comical if nothing else.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 02:06:05


Post by: JNAProductions


Derp! Xeno made that mistake and I carried it over.

So that's actually exactly 4 damage for a Twin Lascannon against a T5-8, 3+ or worse target.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 02:10:26


Post by: Elbows


This has no real impact on me, but I do like when something this....odd comes up. While I don't do tournaments or even play much if any 40K I do enjoy battle reports when I'm bored, and thus I even tire of "the meta" when the games are so samey.

My first thought was...devastator doctrine Predator autocannon becoming: Strength 7, -2 AP, 4 damage....sweet pickles. I'd love to see how this shakes up the meta if it does at all.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 02:42:09


Post by: ClockworkZion


Invictor Warsuits feel like they have a real home in a Primaris IF army between the buffed autocannons and heavy bolter.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 06:58:10


Post by: Klickor


Isnt prepared position just cover and IF ignores it anyway? In some scenarios the Heavy Bolter will beat a lascannon and others lose. I would take the option that costs less than half as much and fire 3x the shots though since its good against way more targets. Also much better against a 4++ save vehicle like a knight since its damage is spread out more and not worth it for the knight player to use a cp to reroll a failed save and you dont waste that extra ap on an invul.

You could take 3 eliminator squad for sniping characters and 3 TFC for artillery and still have good chance of killing a Tank Commander/armiger/non IH dread. Add some Invictors who will wipe screens with 2d6 ap2 ignores cover flamer hits and that flamer is even better than a lascannon against tanks when the screens are gone. That flamer is also a serious threat to flyers unlike a lascannon.

Not to mention 30 intercessors with 36" str 4 ap3 D2 guns that ignores cover and have exploding 6s. They will shred anything below t8 and even t8 have to be careful since each 6 to wound is an ap3 flat D3 that needs to be saved.

IH vehicles can survive that fire power but other tanks will just melt.

The amount of weapons marines have that are heavy and usable against infantry and characters shouldnt be underestimated and now all of them also works against tanks due to devastator doctrine more than doubling their damage against tanks.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 08:44:37


Post by: Dr. Mills


Hmm.

I'm looking forward to the IF supplement. Mostly I've always enjoyed the IF but the super doctrine will be amazing against some units that you don't want to waste anti tank on but are dangerous enough that you have to.

Examples are land speeders - fast and can carry lots of guns and an ultramarine one with typhoons and bolters is deadly. Add in a 2CP 4++ if moved and it can be dangerous. Two autocannon IF shots and (if he fails the saves) gone.
Various admech units are troublesome, and I can see this as a good counter to them.

Obviously different metas will have different milage, but s a primarily infantry based primaris force, I've struggled to deal with vehicles - hopefully this will help top it in my favour!


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 12:47:56


Post by: Tyel


I think the reactions are way over the top, and am struggling to see how this is going to be remotely the same tier as IHs super-stacking.

Okay, Imperial Fist Assault Cannons and Heavy Bolters are going to be better than lascannons versus targets with reasonable invuls. Is that... a problem? They are not massively better. I guess you can say "aha! HB spam will crush infantry lists!" creating the super all-comers list, but I'm not entirely convinced.

There is however an issue in the quantum of power. I don't think you should be able to make something 100% better - because that's a huge buff. If it was +1 damage on 6s, that would be fine. +1 damage on D6 weapons would be reasonable too.

But then this is clearly version 8.5, so its just roll on everyone else.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 12:56:39


Post by: SeanDrake


 ClockworkZion wrote:
AngryAngel80 wrote:
I know it wasn't much of a prediction, but I did call this. It has begun !!! Seeing the future, it is a burden and a curse.

Man, just imagine the panic over whatever we see for Black Templars or Blood Angels in psychic awakening.


Who knows melee is lacklustre at the minute to say the least, I suppose they could buff crusader squads to make horde space marines viable but who knows.
I think salamanders still might be the dark horse given there’s so little info at the moment.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 13:21:59


Post by: Crimson


Tyel wrote:
I think the reactions are way over the top, and am struggling to see how this is going to be remotely the same tier as IHs super-stacking.

Okay, Imperial Fist Assault Cannons and Heavy Bolters are going to be better than lascannons versus targets with reasonable invuls. Is that... a problem? They are not massively better. I guess you can say "aha! HB spam will crush infantry lists!" creating the super all-comers list, but I'm not entirely convinced.

There is however an issue in the quantum of power. I don't think you should be able to make something 100% better - because that's a huge buff. If it was +1 damage on 6s, that would be fine. +1 damage on D6 weapons would be reasonable too.

But then this is clearly version 8.5, so its just roll on everyone else.

It might not be as obscene as the IH, but it is still pretty crazy and as you note, scales really weirdly. It just feels really wrong that this encourages the IF to abandon heavy, hard hitting big guns and exclusively favour dakka. If I had been designing these rules I would have done something completely opposite and given bonus for hard hitting guns with singe or few shots. This would seem to fit the IF better.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 13:29:55


Post by: Sherrypie


 Crimson wrote:

It might not be as obscene as the IH, but it is still pretty crazy and as you note, scales really weirdly. It just feels really wrong that this encourages the IF to abandon heavy, hard hitting big guns and exclusively favour dakka. If I had been designing these rules I would have done something completely opposite and given bonus for hard hitting guns with singe or few shots. This would seem to fit the IF better.


Single or few shots for the guys who have for years been branded as siege masters and having a culture of all the dakka with bolt weaponry? Just curious, how do you see that fitting them better?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 13:37:16


Post by: Crimson


 Sherrypie wrote:

Single or few shots for the guys who have for years been branded as siege masters and having a culture of all the dakka with bolt weaponry? Just curious, how do you see that fitting them better?


Lascannons, missile launchers etc are bunker busting weapons used in sieges. Trying to bring down a fortress with a heavy bolter is just stupid. The Bolter Drill was originally just Lysander's trait, it has now been applied to whole chapter and it has been flanderised to such a degree that now they apparently just use bolters for everything.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 13:39:33


Post by: ClockworkZion


 Crimson wrote:
Tyel wrote:
I think the reactions are way over the top, and am struggling to see how this is going to be remotely the same tier as IHs super-stacking.

Okay, Imperial Fist Assault Cannons and Heavy Bolters are going to be better than lascannons versus targets with reasonable invuls. Is that... a problem? They are not massively better. I guess you can say "aha! HB spam will crush infantry lists!" creating the super all-comers list, but I'm not entirely convinced.

There is however an issue in the quantum of power. I don't think you should be able to make something 100% better - because that's a huge buff. If it was +1 damage on 6s, that would be fine. +1 damage on D6 weapons would be reasonable too.

But then this is clearly version 8.5, so its just roll on everyone else.

It might not be as obscene as the IH, but it is still pretty crazy and as you note, scales really weirdly. It just feels really wrong that this encourages the IF to abandon heavy, hard hitting big guns and exclusively favour dakka. If I had been designing these rules I would have done something completely opposite and given bonus for hard hitting guns with singe or few shots. This would seem to fit the IF better.

Your average tank is toughness around T8 IIRC, which means that relying on heavy bolters, or even autocannons to punch holes in things is a bit suspect of a plan. Sure those will work on T6 vehicles, but fishing.for 5s and 6s isn't a good plan.

More realistically I feel the compromise will lead us to heavy plasma weapons. Multiple shots, good strength, decent damage. It doesn't stack with bolter drill, but it has a wider range of targets than lascannons do later in the game.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 13:41:31


Post by: Sherrypie


 Crimson wrote:
 Sherrypie wrote:

Single or few shots for the guys who have for years been branded as siege masters and having a culture of all the dakka with bolt weaponry? Just curious, how do you see that fitting them better?


Lascannons, missile launchers etc are bunker busting weapons used in sieges. Trying to bring down a fortress with a heavy bolter is just stupid. The Bolter Drill was originally just Lysander's trait, it has now been applied to whole chapter and it has been flanderised to such a degree that now they apparently just use bolters for everything.


Fair. In that sense it might have been more thematic to, say, give them the ability to reroll Damage rolls, thus encouraging use of proper heavy weapons like lascannons or missiles while doing nothing for plasma variants while their "ignore cover" trait deals with entrenched infantry.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 14:23:11


Post by: Klickor


 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
Tyel wrote:
I think the reactions are way over the top, and am struggling to see how this is going to be remotely the same tier as IHs super-stacking.

Okay, Imperial Fist Assault Cannons and Heavy Bolters are going to be better than lascannons versus targets with reasonable invuls. Is that... a problem? They are not massively better. I guess you can say "aha! HB spam will crush infantry lists!" creating the super all-comers list, but I'm not entirely convinced.

There is however an issue in the quantum of power. I don't think you should be able to make something 100% better - because that's a huge buff. If it was +1 damage on 6s, that would be fine. +1 damage on D6 weapons would be reasonable too.

But then this is clearly version 8.5, so its just roll on everyone else.

It might not be as obscene as the IH, but it is still pretty crazy and as you note, scales really weirdly. It just feels really wrong that this encourages the IF to abandon heavy, hard hitting big guns and exclusively favour dakka. If I had been designing these rules I would have done something completely opposite and given bonus for hard hitting guns with singe or few shots. This would seem to fit the IF better.

Your average tank is toughness around T8 IIRC, which means that relying on heavy bolters, or even autocannons to punch holes in things is a bit suspect of a plan. Sure those will work on T6 vehicles, but fishing.for 5s and 6s isn't a good plan.

More realistically I feel the compromise will lead us to heavy plasma weapons. Multiple shots, good strength, decent damage. It doesn't stack with bolter drill, but it has a wider range of targets than lascannons do later in the game.


A heavy bolter have a better chance in wounding T8 than a lascannon due to having 3 shots(more like 3,5 due to exploding 6s). In devastator profile ap 2 is usually enough since more usually hits the invul on most targets. Sure its only D2 damage instead of d6 but you are only paying 10 instead of 25pts for the weapon and it is less swingy.

If buying anti tank guns you get more damage/point from heavy bolters than lascannons on T8 targets. Much more.

A IF heavy bolter against a T8 target with a 4++ does the same average damage as a non IF lascannon for 40% of the price and is much better against infantry targets. Against a t8 2+ save without invul the heavy bolter still does more dmg/point than a normal lascannon even if they are closer in effectiveness.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 14:43:37


Post by: ClockworkZion


I didn't say lascannons were the better choice, and pointed towards heavy plasma weapos like the plasma cannon instead.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 17:14:00


Post by: Dr. Mills


 ClockworkZion wrote:
I didn't say lascannons were the better choice, and pointed towards heavy plasma weapos like the plasma cannon instead.


And the heavy plasma incinerator being S8 2D -5AP a shot makes it an excellent weapon against vehicles now, especially overcharged at S9 with 3D...


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/12 17:21:39


Post by: ClockworkZion


 Dr. Mills wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
I didn't say lascannons were the better choice, and pointed towards heavy plasma weapos like the plasma cannon instead.


And the heavy plasma incinerator being S8 2D -5AP a shot makes it an excellent weapon against vehicles now, especially overcharged at S9 with 3D...

Exactly my thoughts too. The vehicle mounted plasma is D3 shots as well (average 2) which puts it at a good place for the army as well.

Primaris IF may like plasma even more than the DA do.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 14:24:14


Post by: The Newman


 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
Everything was fine when the meta was all about Guilliman, and when it was all about Shadowswords, and when it was all about Pox walkers, and when it was all about Ynnari, and when it was all about tzaangor bombs, and both times it was all about eldar fliers, and when it was all about castellans...but now that it might be all about multiple different space marines chapters, everyone loses their minds.

Having space marines in general become useful is worth having the top meta spot switch to Iron Hands (and maybe Imperial fists) for a bit. I doubt it'll stay there long. Is the meta even worth discussing much until Psychic Awakening is all out? We're in the middle of basically a new edition of army rules. That armies who have gotten updated are more powerful than those who haven't isn't worth all this fuss.


This might be the most level-headed thing anyone has had to say about anything in the Marine 2.0 codex and expansions. Being in any way surprised that the latest codex is also the strongest * is like being surprised that water is wet. GW has always had issues with that, it's why 40k has a lethality issue in general.

Honestly while I do feel like Marines have gotten stronger, I also think they have pretty much the same weaknesses they had to begin with. All those new rules and buffs are being layered on top of what was and still is the weakest profile in the game for the points.

* - I'm not saying that I think Codex 2.0 Marines are the top of the heap now. IG still curb-stomps them, but I've come around to the belief that has more to do with the rock-paper-scissors nature of the 40k rules than it does with their relative power levels.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 14:30:12


Post by: JNAProductions


The Newman wrote:
 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
Everything was fine when the meta was all about Guilliman, and when it was all about Shadowswords, and when it was all about Pox walkers, and when it was all about Ynnari, and when it was all about tzaangor bombs, and both times it was all about eldar fliers, and when it was all about castellans...but now that it might be all about multiple different space marines chapters, everyone loses their minds.

Having space marines in general become useful is worth having the top meta spot switch to Iron Hands (and maybe Imperial fists) for a bit. I doubt it'll stay there long. Is the meta even worth discussing much until Psychic Awakening is all out? We're in the middle of basically a new edition of army rules. That armies who have gotten updated are more powerful than those who haven't isn't worth all this fuss.


This might be the most level-headed thing anyone has had to say about anything in the Marine 2.0 codex and expansions. Being in any way surprised that the latest codex is also the strongest * is like being surprised that water is wet. GW has always had issues with that, it's why 40k has a lethality issue in general.

* - I'm not saying that I think Codex 2.0 Marines are the top of the heap now. IG still curb-stomps them, but I've come around to the belief that has more to do with the rock-paper-scissors nature of the 40k rules than it does with their relative power levels.
Eh... GW doesn't do Power Creep, they just kinda randomly do Power Levels.

Sometimes, the new stuff is the bomb dot com. Sometimes, it's pretty meh.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 14:30:18


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


SeanDrake wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
AngryAngel80 wrote:
I know it wasn't much of a prediction, but I did call this. It has begun !!! Seeing the future, it is a burden and a curse.

Man, just imagine the panic over whatever we see for Black Templars or Blood Angels in psychic awakening.


Who knows melee is lacklustre at the minute to say the least, I suppose they could buff crusader squads to make horde space marines viable but who knows.
I think salamanders still might be the dark horse given there’s so little info at the moment.


The pessimist in me says that it's gonna be the worst of the lot and people are going to tell us to suck it up because Iron Hands are strong. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 15:27:01


Post by: Daedalus81


 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.


We're not powerless. GW wont be idle. Communicate with them in a clear manner and we will see change.

We are in a far different dynamic than any edition prior and the abject pessimism from posters is profound.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 15:49:10


Post by: Ordana


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.


We're not powerless. GW wont be idle. Communicate with them in a clear manner and we will see change.

We are in a far different dynamic than any edition prior and the abject pessimism from posters is profound.
I agree but we're going to be looking at 6 months of this because I doubt there will be changes before the Spring Faq. And even then GW doesn't have a good history in changing rules to be less oppressive instead of just changing points which screws up other less OP space marine chapters.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 16:06:21


Post by: Karol


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.


We're not powerless. GW wont be idle. Communicate with them in a clear manner and we will see change.

We are in a far different dynamic than any edition prior and the abject pessimism from posters is profound.


I don't know about the communication thing. But maybe what is left of Grey Knight players, just can't write properly to explain GW why they aren't happy with the army. It seems like GW just changes stuff they want to change, and people think that the changes happen, because of stuff they have been saying for decades.



Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 16:53:00


Post by: ccs


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.


We're not powerless. GW wont be idle. Communicate with them in a clear manner and we will see change.

We are in a far different dynamic than any edition prior and the abject pessimism from posters is profound.


Yeah, sure. You all complained about ______, and maybe it got toned down. But then you got _______. And complained. And received _________ instead. And now you've got this "Marine problem" (don't worry, it'll go away when the SoB arrive)

I see a pattern here, and you're voices aren't a factor.
GWs continuing to do GWs standard thing and your complaints are just background noise.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 17:46:56


Post by: The Newman


 JNAProductions wrote:
Eh... GW doesn't do Power Creep, they just kinda randomly do Power Levels.

Sometimes, the new stuff is the bomb dot com. Sometimes, it's pretty meh.

You're talking about poor intra-faction balance and that's also always been true even for brand-new codexes. The point was that overall GW has always had a problem with the best combos in the most recent codex being a little better than anything in the game prior to that codex. Not always, but consistently enough that the pattern can't be ignored.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 19:34:42


Post by: Drudge Dreadnought


ccs wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.


We're not powerless. GW wont be idle. Communicate with them in a clear manner and we will see change.

We are in a far different dynamic than any edition prior and the abject pessimism from posters is profound.


Yeah, sure. You all complained about ______, and maybe it got toned down. But then you got _______. And complained. And received _________ instead. And now you've got this "Marine problem" (don't worry, it'll go away when the SoB arrive)

I see a pattern here, and you're voices aren't a factor.
GWs continuing to do GWs standard thing and your complaints are just background noise.


I think our voices are a factor. The problem of 8th from the start has been a proper balancing of firepower vs defense. Marines were low on both. The new books give big buffs to both in a variety of different ways, and it looks like others are getting similar stuff too now, what with the Eldar trait overhaul coming in Phoenix Rising. GW is trying to tackle some of the biggest problems of 8th. The thing is that there's a big time lag. These new sorts of books are addressing problems that became apparent about halfway through the 8th edition codex release cycle (and some that were there from the start of course.) But due to GWs nature as a company and how releases work, they couldn't be fully addressed because stuff like full trait overhauls of a faction are beyond the scope of chapter approved or FAQs. We saw them begin to work on solving the marine problem with Bolter Discipline and internal marine balance changes that brought them more in line with themselves, and it slowly worked up to them realizing they needed to do what they did with the new codex, and now appear to be doing for everyone else with Psychic Awakening.

The direction they're going in seems to be about right, and they seem to be trying to solve a fair amount of the top issues. Its just slow, and they don't necessarily get the new rules/stats exactly right. But those sorts of things can be fixed in FAQs and CA.

To put it simply, we've gone from a rules space where marines could not be properly represented and/or balanced to one where they can, but it'll take some time to iron out (and will never be perfect.) But this is a big improvement.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 20:44:38


Post by: Karol


But it is a big improvement only for factions they got right at the start of 8th ed, or marines who get updated often. An orc or necron play may be forced to play in 8.5 with an unupdated codex for anywhere between 6 to more months. And while we can of course hope that the CA and the spring FAQ will tone stuff down, but it always comes with the fear that some codex may come out in Feb, end up being OP, and not get fixed till CA 2020.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 21:04:38


Post by: Not Online!!!


 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Simply cries in R&H.



I actually managed to win against ih with mine.
Otoh i fielded 250 geq

My csm on the otherhand just get outdone by numarines.
And that even though we are supposedly a v2.0 dex allready.

Makes you wonder.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 21:23:24


Post by: Gadzilla666


Not Online!!! wrote:
 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Simply cries in R&H.



I actually managed to win against ih with mine.
Otoh i fielded 250 geq

My csm on the otherhand just get outdone by numarines.
And that even though we are supposedly a v2.0 dex allready.

Makes you wonder.

Csm 2.0 was a bad joke. Hoping pa 2 is the real 2.0. Probably not if the leeks are true.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 21:26:51


Post by: Not Online!!!


Gadzilla666 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Simply cries in R&H.



I actually managed to win against ih with mine.
Otoh i fielded 250 geq

My csm on the otherhand just get outdone by numarines.
And that even though we are supposedly a v2.0 dex allready.

Makes you wonder.

Csm 2.0 was a bad joke. Hoping pa 2 is the real 2.0. Probably not if the leeks are true.


Isn't something new for csm to be updated but still Stuck in another edition.

Altough i still find it disgusting that a bunch of marines is capable to nearly fry my meatgrinder clogger ups.
I was done to militia at the end of the battle, my muties were dead!


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 21:36:26


Post by: Gadzilla666


Not Online!!! wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Simply cries in R&H.



I actually managed to win against ih with mine.
Otoh i fielded 250 geq

My csm on the otherhand just get outdone by numarines.
And that even though we are supposedly a v2.0 dex allready.

Makes you wonder.

Csm 2.0 was a bad joke. Hoping pa 2 is the real 2.0. Probably not if the leeks are true.


Isn't something new for csm to be updated but still Stuck in another edition.

Altough i still find it disgusting that a bunch of marines is capable to nearly fry my meatgrinder clogger ups.
I was done to militia at the end of the battle, my muties were dead!

Yes but you still beat them. With an army without a codex or even strategems. So they aren't invincible. Just not fun to play against.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 21:43:05


Post by: Not Online!!!


Gadzilla666 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Simply cries in R&H.



I actually managed to win against ih with mine.
Otoh i fielded 250 geq

My csm on the otherhand just get outdone by numarines.
And that even though we are supposedly a v2.0 dex allready.

Makes you wonder.

Csm 2.0 was a bad joke. Hoping pa 2 is the real 2.0. Probably not if the leeks are true.


Isn't something new for csm to be updated but still Stuck in another edition.

Altough i still find it disgusting that a bunch of marines is capable to nearly fry my meatgrinder clogger ups.
I was done to militia at the end of the battle, my muties were dead!

Yes but you still beat them. With an army without a codex or even strategems. So they aren't invincible. Just not fun to play against.


Yay, great me, i just brought the ultimate anti skew list and won hurray, i played the same list before with my csm, guess what the result was there.
And if the only way to beat them is vomitting 2 companies worth of militia and mutants and their respective morale buffers and imunizers on the table and rolling hot on critical rolls then yes, most armies stand infront of a problem they themselves can't solve.

Also unbeatable is not the standard for broken imo.
A too high winrate allready is.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/13 22:13:11


Post by: Gadzilla666


Spoiler:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Simply cries in R&H.



I actually managed to win against ih with mine.
Otoh i fielded 250 geq

My csm on the otherhand just get outdone by numarines.
And that even though we are supposedly a v2.0 dex allready.

Makes you wonder.

Csm 2.0 was a bad joke. Hoping pa 2 is the real 2.0. Probably not if the leeks are true.


Isn't something new for csm to be updated but still Stuck in another edition.

Altough i still find it disgusting that a bunch of marines is capable to nearly fry my meatgrinder clogger ups.
I was done to militia at the end of the battle, my muties were dead!

Yes but you still beat them. With an army without a codex or even strategems. So they aren't invincible. Just not fun to play against.


Yay, great me, i just brought the ultimate anti skew list and won hurray, i played the same list before with my csm, guess what the result was there.
And if the only way to beat them is vomitting 2 companies worth of militia and mutants and their respective morale buffers and imunizers on the table and rolling hot on critical rolls then yes, most armies stand infront of a problem they themselves can't solve.

Also unbeatable is not the standard for broken imo.
A too high winrate allready is.

Didn't say they weren't broken. They definitely need nerfs. Lots of nerfs. If they aren't fun to play against and you need to list tailor for them they're broken.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 02:17:14


Post by: NurglesR0T


Who else thinks that in 12 months time when several new codexes are released marines will just be another mild mid tier footnote at the local tourney scene?

Enjoy the power creep now is all I can say, because it never lasts for marines



Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 05:43:00


Post by: BrianDavion


 NurglesR0T wrote:
Who else thinks that in 12 months time when several new codexes are released marines will just be another mild mid tier footnote at the local tourney scene?

Enjoy the power creep now is all I can say, because it never lasts for marines



I'd bet money on it TBH. we're already seeing eldar getting their own create a chapter and new psykic powers. eneugh that I can tell you exactly what'll happen. Space Marines came out with some new abilities, GW thinks these are a good idea and introduces them to everyone else, however as time goes by the space Marine stuff, which had been fairly restrained, is over shadowed as GW abandons restraint for some new factions and produces disgustedly broken ones.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 06:46:48


Post by: Not Online!!!


BrianDavion wrote:
 NurglesR0T wrote:
Who else thinks that in 12 months time when several new codexes are released marines will just be another mild mid tier footnote at the local tourney scene?

Enjoy the power creep now is all I can say, because it never lasts for marines



I'd bet money on it TBH. we're already seeing eldar getting their own create a chapter and new psykic powers. eneugh that I can tell you exactly what'll happen. Space Marines came out with some new abilities, GW thinks these are a good idea and introduces them to everyone else, however as time goes by the space Marine stuff, which had been fairly restrained, is over shadowed as GW abandons restraint for some new factions and produces disgustedly broken ones.


Sm stuff allready got bonkers though, in regards to restraint.

Basically we are back at power-creep town


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 07:17:10


Post by: An Actual Englishman


BrianDavion wrote:
 NurglesR0T wrote:
Who else thinks that in 12 months time when several new codexes are released marines will just be another mild mid tier footnote at the local tourney scene?

Enjoy the power creep now is all I can say, because it never lasts for marines



I'd bet money on it TBH. we're already seeing eldar getting their own create a chapter and new psykic powers. eneugh that I can tell you exactly what'll happen. Space Marines came out with some new abilities, GW thinks these are a good idea and introduces them to everyone else, however as time goes by the space Marine stuff, which had been fairly restrained, is over shadowed as GW abandons restraint for some new factions and produces disgustedly broken ones.

We’re seeing nothing of the sort. Nothing in Phoenix Rising comes even remotely close to the stack of rules and buffs that SM enjoy from their supplements. There is no comparison. They also haven’t been restrained with the Marines at all. They are laughably imbalanced.

You’re living in cloud cookoo land if you think this same treatment will roll out for anyone but the remaining marine factions and if Phoenix rising is anything to go by it won’t happen during PA.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 07:18:28


Post by: kingheff


If the eldar book is anything to go by these psychic awakening books won't be massive buffs.
The eldar book is actually fun and interesting which does buff some underperforming units but it's nothing on the scale of the marine books.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 07:28:49


Post by: Gadzilla666


kingheff wrote:
If the eldar book is anything to go by these psychic awakening books won't be massive buffs.
The eldar book is actually fun and interesting which does buff some underperforming units but it's nothing on the scale of the marine books.

I'm beginning to wonder just how much the writers of these books actually communicate with each other. Do the rules team have a coordinated plan? Or do they just turn different groups of writers loose on each book, let them work in a vacuum, without communicating with the other teams working on other books, and just see what happens? And then just throw it out there without play testing any of it.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 07:41:40


Post by: tneva82


The Newman wrote:
 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
Everything was fine when the meta was all about Guilliman, and when it was all about Shadowswords, and when it was all about Pox walkers, and when it was all about Ynnari, and when it was all about tzaangor bombs, and both times it was all about eldar fliers, and when it was all about castellans...but now that it might be all about multiple different space marines chapters, everyone loses their minds.

Having space marines in general become useful is worth having the top meta spot switch to Iron Hands (and maybe Imperial fists) for a bit. I doubt it'll stay there long. Is the meta even worth discussing much until Psychic Awakening is all out? We're in the middle of basically a new edition of army rules. That armies who have gotten updated are more powerful than those who haven't isn't worth all this fuss.


This might be the most level-headed thing anyone has had to say about anything in the Marine 2.0 codex and expansions. Being in any way surprised that the latest codex is also the strongest * is like being surprised that water is wet. GW has always had issues with that, it's why 40k has a lethality issue in general.

Honestly while I do feel like Marines have gotten stronger, I also think they have pretty much the same weaknesses they had to begin with. All those new rules and buffs are being layered on top of what was and still is the weakest profile in the game for the points.

* - I'm not saying that I think Codex 2.0 Marines are the top of the heap now. IG still curb-stomps them, but I've come around to the belief that has more to do with the rock-paper-scissors nature of the 40k rules than it does with their relative power levels.


Curb stomps enough that first GT after IH codex came out had 8 IH in top-8.

Yep yep.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote:
 NurglesR0T wrote:
Who else thinks that in 12 months time when several new codexes are released marines will just be another mild mid tier footnote at the local tourney scene?

Enjoy the power creep now is all I can say, because it never lasts for marines



I'd bet money on it TBH. we're already seeing eldar getting their own create a chapter and new psykic powers. eneugh that I can tell you exactly what'll happen. Space Marines came out with some new abilities, GW thinks these are a good idea and introduces them to everyone else, however as time goes by the space Marine stuff, which had been fairly restrained, is over shadowed as GW abandons restraint for some new factions and produces disgustedly broken ones.


Nice way of skipping that the eldar ones aren't nearly as big or extensive as what marines got.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 08:12:21


Post by: Spoletta


To be fair, CWE were already quite good (maybe too good) in external balance, what they lacked was internal balance.
PA gave them a better internal balance without touching the external one mostly.

Marines lacked external balance, so they were given an all around buff. As many times happens though, when you touch external balance, you fumble the internal one.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 09:03:16


Post by: Ice_can


kingheff wrote:
If the eldar book is anything to go by these psychic awakening books won't be massive buffs.
The eldar book is actually fun and interesting which does buff some underperforming units but it's nothing on the scale of the marine books.

I didn't know crimson hunter exarcs were an under performing unit, given they do tend to see play in flyer spam lists.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 09:40:07


Post by: BrianDavion


 An Actual Englishman wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 NurglesR0T wrote:
Who else thinks that in 12 months time when several new codexes are released marines will just be another mild mid tier footnote at the local tourney scene?

Enjoy the power creep now is all I can say, because it never lasts for marines



I'd bet money on it TBH. we're already seeing eldar getting their own create a chapter and new psykic powers. eneugh that I can tell you exactly what'll happen. Space Marines came out with some new abilities, GW thinks these are a good idea and introduces them to everyone else, however as time goes by the space Marine stuff, which had been fairly restrained, is over shadowed as GW abandons restraint for some new factions and produces disgustedly broken ones.

We’re seeing nothing of the sort. Nothing in Phoenix Rising comes even remotely close to the stack of rules and buffs that SM enjoy from their supplements. There is no comparison. They also haven’t been restrained with the Marines at all. They are laughably imbalanced.

You’re living in cloud cookoo land if you think this same treatment will roll out for anyone but the remaining marine factions and if Phoenix rising is anything to go by it won’t happen during PA.


I'm not living in cookoo land, I'm just cynical. the inital codices after marines where pretty on par with Marines power level wise, but that didn't stop GW from ramping up the creep. Just you wait. in a few months the new necron (or whatever) rules will make iron hands look mild.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 09:45:58


Post by: SeanDrake


So far the common theme of battle reports I have seen fall mostly into the category that most games IH won were ITC house rule games, most games IH lost were 40k games.

So basicly if you play the minatures equivalent of fortnight then IH are likely at an advantage if you play the actual game properly then IH are not much of a challange.

So as normal the issue is less the codex and more the house rules that people use. I don't believe anything should be changed just yet and I also don't think GW should be "balancing" there game based on a 3rd parties implementation of it. GW lack the competence to do balance when they wrote the rules never mind someone else.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 09:51:59


Post by: happy_inquisitor


 Xenomancers wrote:
Did GW really just give Imperial fists +1 damage to all heavy weapons while in dev doctrine? LOL. Like...seriously? Is anyone going to play this game anymore?


This is the beginning of 8th Edition Wave 2 - in which they give seriously good rewards for playing pure faction and subfaction armies. Which to be fair a lot of players were asking for. They are not nerfing soup armies, they are rewarding pure armies and the purer they are the bigger the reward.

Now maybe as a Crimson Fists player I am not unbiased but this is limited to working against vehicles and buildings. I see vehicles across the table from me in about half my games and buildings almost never, so it is really powerful about half the time.

While other factions wait for their purity rewards those factions upgraded to Wave 2 are going to have an advantage, this is going to be especially the case for factions that do not soup well. It is a shift in game design that needs to be worked through the whole game over time, we are only in about the 2nd month of this so there is a long way to go. I know there is a lot of salt from Eldar players about their new stuff but honestly when they work through what the new Exarch abilities do they will see a significant uptick in their capability on the table. I expect similar stop-gaps for other factions as they roll out the new Psychic Awakening stuff and then a much slower roll out of codex upgrades.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 09:54:01


Post by: Lemondish


I'm beginning to wonder at what point this hyperbolic blubbering nonsense will fail to impart the proper panic and folks will turn to ALL CAPS to truly freak the feth out.

Relax. Keep calm. Everything is going to be okay.

This is a bonus that applies to but one weapon type, few of which synergize with the Chapter Tactic, and where half the targets it is valid for do not exist in any real or perceived sense. If your list relies on vehicles to win a game, then you've just found your biggest weakness. An army that can do that to you is something you need to prepare for, whether it's yellow marines or not.

Edit: I accidentally a word


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 09:58:47


Post by: happy_inquisitor


kingheff wrote:
If the eldar book is anything to go by these psychic awakening books won't be massive buffs.
The eldar book is actually fun and interesting which does buff some underperforming units but it's nothing on the scale of the marine books.


They also buff adequately performing units and the most over-performing unit in the Eldar codex - the Crimson Hunter Exarch.

It is still just a stopgap update in my opinion but if it had happened outside the context of the new SM codex and supplements it would have been widely declared the most broken thing in 40K - because it would have been a significant and free buff to an already top tier unit.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 10:10:54


Post by: BrianDavion


Lemondish wrote:
I'm beginning to wonder at what point this hyperbolic blubbering nonsense will fail to impart the proper panic and folks will turn to ALL CAPS to truly freak the feth out.

Relax. Keep calm. Everything is going to be okay.

This is a bonus that applies to but one weapon type, few of which synergize with the Chapter Tactic, and where half the targets it is valid for do not exist in any real or perceived sense. If your list relies on vehicles to win a game, then you've just found your biggest weakness. An army that can do that to you is something you need to prepare for, whether it's yellow marines or not.

Edit: I accidentally a word


BUT A WARHAMMER 40K ARMY MIGHT BE OVER POWERED! WHATEVER SHALL WE DO!? THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE!


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 10:15:30


Post by: Spoletta


You are assuming that the crimson hunter exarch isn't going to see a price increase in CA, which i give almost for granted. At least make it a choice between crimson hunter and crimson hunter exarch.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 10:24:09


Post by: happy_inquisitor


Spoletta wrote:
You are assuming that the crimson hunter exarch isn't going to see a price increase in CA, which i give almost for granted. At least make it a choice between crimson hunter and crimson hunter exarch.


I hope it does get a well deserved points increase - but my point stands that there would be a lot of people posting in ALL CAPS about those new options if we were not all raging about nuMarines instead.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 10:30:59


Post by: Sunny Side Up


happy_inquisitor wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
You are assuming that the crimson hunter exarch isn't going to see a price increase in CA, which i give almost for granted. At least make it a choice between crimson hunter and crimson hunter exarch.


I hope it does get a well deserved points increase - but my point stands that there would be a lot of people posting in ALL CAPS about those new options if we were not all raging about nuMarines instead.


Which is the problem, no?

Pre-Nu-Marines, CHE deserved a hefty price increase.

Post-Nu-Marines, they would probably have to drop some 30-50 points and get another free -1 to hit to even be remotely viable in Iron Hands country, but likely wont because of the meta-lag in printing CA.

The benchmark simply has shifted. Tau, GSC, Orks, etc.. used to be competitive 2 weeks ago. Now they are trash.








Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 10:47:34


Post by: Lemondish


Sunny Side Up wrote:
happy_inquisitor wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
You are assuming that the crimson hunter exarch isn't going to see a price increase in CA, which i give almost for granted. At least make it a choice between crimson hunter and crimson hunter exarch.


I hope it does get a well deserved points increase - but my point stands that there would be a lot of people posting in ALL CAPS about those new options if we were not all raging about nuMarines instead.


Which is the problem, no?

Pre-Nu-Marines, CHE deserved a hefty price increase.

Post-Nu-Marines, they would probably have to drop some 30-50 points and get another free -1 to hit to even be remotely viable in Iron Hands country, but likely wont because of the meta-lag in printing CA.

The benchmark simply has shifted. Tau, GSC, Orks, etc.. used to be competitive 2 weeks ago. Now they are trash.


Ah, the notorious Dakkadakka Dichotomy®. If it hasn't won the last tournament, it's "trash". If it has, it's "broken".

Apparently there's no middleground. All solutions must be drastic.

"Reduce the points by 1/3!"
"Make them -3 to hit!"

Ridiculous.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 10:54:07


Post by: tneva82


It's the GW that has drastic no middle ground. Just look at how marines went from bad to way above any others. Marines are essentially playing different game to others. Where others explore earth marines are exploring different galaxies. That's GW for you. Players really should just take control of rules and say screw it to GW.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 10:55:29


Post by: Sunny Side Up


/shrug

People wanna hide in denial?

I don't care. I got my Marines to play with in the coming months.

You wanna run your CHE against them. Good luck and godspeed. Let me know how you do, lol.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 11:37:51


Post by: happy_inquisitor


Sunny Side Up wrote:


Which is the problem, no?

Pre-Nu-Marines, CHE deserved a hefty price increase.

Post-Nu-Marines, they would probably have to drop some 30-50 points and get another free -1 to hit to even be remotely viable in Iron Hands country, but likely wont because of the meta-lag in printing CA.

The benchmark simply has shifted. Tau, GSC, Orks, etc.. used to be competitive 2 weeks ago. Now they are trash.



No.

OK so Iron Hands were 4/10 top lists at a GT last weekend. Orks were 2/10 so are they half-way as broken as IH or are they trash? Various flavours of Aeldari were 3/10 - are they 75% as broken as IH?

Or is this all just a bit hyperbolic?

Yes the nuMarines are super-strong. Yes if they carry on being half of the top tables of tournaments then they will need some tweaks along the way to maintain a good healthy game. No everything else did not suddenly get trash tier, that is just he usual Dakka binary thinking on display.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 11:56:13


Post by: lolman1c


Gadzilla666 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Simply cries in R&H.



I actually managed to win against ih with mine.
Otoh i fielded 250 geq

My csm on the otherhand just get outdone by numarines.
And that even though we are supposedly a v2.0 dex allready.

Makes you wonder.

Csm 2.0 was a bad joke. Hoping pa 2 is the real 2.0. Probably not if the leeks are true.


Don't worry, in a year or so they'll chrage you for another "fix".


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 12:45:56


Post by: kingheff


happy_inquisitor wrote:
kingheff wrote:
If the eldar book is anything to go by these psychic awakening books won't be massive buffs.
The eldar book is actually fun and interesting which does buff some underperforming units but it's nothing on the scale of the marine books.


They also buff adequately performing units and the most over-performing unit in the Eldar codex - the Crimson Hunter Exarch.

It is still just a stopgap update in my opinion but if it had happened outside the context of the new SM codex and supplements it would have been widely declared the most broken thing in 40K - because it would have been a significant and free buff to an already top tier unit.


True, che got a buff but that's the only real meta unit that did and chapter masters make the alaitoc flyer lists less viable in return. But little else will see much play in competitive. As others have pointed out, che will almost certainly receive a points increase in chapter approved.
I don't play competitive games so I'm happy with the buffs aspects received, I use them already so I'm glad they're better even if few will be competitive despite the buffs.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 12:58:09


Post by: Elemental


 Insectum7 wrote:
I saw the author of this thread and instantly knew what it was going to be.


That's about 50+% of Dakka to me at the moment--bittervets beating the same drum they've been beating for years with no signs of fatigue. Right now, if I had access to everyone's accounts, I could perfectly reproduce a lot of these threads, such that nobody would be able to tell it was me posting.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 13:00:52


Post by: Not Online!!!


 NurglesR0T wrote:
Who else thinks that in 12 months time when several new codexes are released marines will just be another mild mid tier footnote at the local tourney scene?

Enjoy the power creep now is all I can say, because it never lasts for marines



In a way we are back at 7th.

Member folks, new Gw is the old gw +marketing team it seems.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 13:28:42


Post by: Daedalus81


SeanDrake wrote:
So far the common theme of battle reports I have seen fall mostly into the category that most games IH won were ITC house rule games, most games IH lost were 40k games.

So basicly if you play the minatures equivalent of fortnight then IH are likely at an advantage if you play the actual game properly then IH are not much of a challange.

So as normal the issue is less the codex and more the house rules that people use. I don't believe anything should be changed just yet and I also don't think GW should be "balancing" there game based on a 3rd parties implementation of it. GW lack the competence to do balance when they wrote the rules never mind someone else.


This is so absurdly incorrect it borders on comedy.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 13:38:35


Post by: Not Online!!!


Isn't ITC los blocknig terrain actually detrimental to IH?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 13:53:22


Post by: Xenomancers


Not Online!!! wrote:
Isn't ITC los blocknig terrain actually detrimental to IH?

Yes...LOS blocking is really bad when you outgun your opponents and also outlast them from shooting.

What they are claiming with this anti ITC nonsense is that the Ironhands player can win just by destroying your army. So basically...like any other game of 40k. Honestly guys...how hard is it to sit a few intercessor squads on objectives with 36" range guns?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
happy_inquisitor wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Did GW really just give Imperial fists +1 damage to all heavy weapons while in dev doctrine? LOL. Like...seriously? Is anyone going to play this game anymore?


This is the beginning of 8th Edition Wave 2 - in which they give seriously good rewards for playing pure faction and subfaction armies. Which to be fair a lot of players were asking for. They are not nerfing soup armies, they are rewarding pure armies and the purer they are the bigger the reward.

Now maybe as a Crimson Fists player I am not unbiased but this is limited to working against vehicles and buildings. I see vehicles across the table from me in about half my games and buildings almost never, so it is really powerful about half the time.

While other factions wait for their purity rewards those factions upgraded to Wave 2 are going to have an advantage, this is going to be especially the case for factions that do not soup well. It is a shift in game design that needs to be worked through the whole game over time, we are only in about the 2nd month of this so there is a long way to go. I know there is a lot of salt from Eldar players about their new stuff but honestly when they work through what the new Exarch abilities do they will see a significant uptick in their capability on the table. I expect similar stop-gaps for other factions as they roll out the new Psychic Awakening stuff and then a much slower roll out of codex upgrades.

They aren't as bad as Ironhands IMO but I haven't seen relics or strats yet. +1 damage against vehicles just means you load up on heavy bolters and high ROF weapons and basically have a TAC list that specializes against everything. It's basically a guilliman buffed list without paying 400 points for guilliman. +1 damage against vehicles is basically the same as reroll wounds with much higher potential damage. Vs infantry you are usually wounding on 3's so reroll 1's from a lt is more than enough. Very little thinking going on with this rules team. I seem to be doing a lot more thinking than these guys.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 15:13:26


Post by: Gir Spirit Bane


Not Online!!! wrote:


My csm on the otherhand just get outdone by numarines.
And that even though we are supposedly a v2.0 dex allready.

Makes you wonder.


I am actually pretty disgusted by the treatment of CSM 2.0, we're left in the dirt with a very poor effort book, then the other main Marine army comes out bells whistles and each bell and whistle was given a stubber or whatever the hell Cawl has a raging hard on for on Primaris vehicles.

I love the look of my CSM, especially with a sleek new unit kit but now they're 13 ppm vs loyalist 12ppm tactical, weaker traits and no super doctrine equiv to speak of. I don't want to need to soup my Chaos Daemons and CSM to compete on even a semi casual level. Most likely what will happen is a new PA book will reprint the traits from Vigilus burns and that's it, I want to be hopeful but I have pretty much given up Chaos Space Marines being a decent pure army.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 15:27:39


Post by: Not Online!!!


Gir Spirit Bane wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:


My csm on the otherhand just get outdone by numarines.
And that even though we are supposedly a v2.0 dex allready.

Makes you wonder.


I am actually pretty disgusted by the treatment of CSM 2.0, we're left in the dirt with a very poor effort book, then the other main Marine army comes out bells whistles and each bell and whistle was given a stubber or whatever the hell Cawl has a raging hard on for on Primaris vehicles.

I love the look of my CSM, especially with a sleek new unit kit but now they're 13 ppm vs loyalist 12ppm tactical, weaker traits and no super doctrine equiv to speak of. I don't want to need to soup my Chaos Daemons and CSM to compete on even a semi casual level. Most likely what will happen is a new PA book will reprint the traits from Vigilus burns and that's it, I want to be hopeful but I have pretty much given up Chaos Space Marines being a decent pure army.


I started using against nu marines my R&H more.
Normally i nowadays field a battalion with 155 models for 740 pts to just suffocate them in bodies.

I did also try out as stated in the CSM tactica chimera warpflux busses, which generate 2d6 mortals against vehicles, but alas that ain't working.( to no ones surprise really)



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yes...LOS blocking is really bad when you outgun your opponents and also outlast them from shooting.

What they are claiming with this anti ITC nonsense is that the Ironhands player can win just by destroying your army. So basically...like any other game of 40k. Honestly guys...how hard is it to sit a few intercessor squads on objectives with 36" range guns?

ITC has issues, especially on the focus of killing, but i suppose that the terrain does mitigate shooting quite a bit.
So that is one point i think that should be regarded.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/14 16:43:17


Post by: happy_inquisitor


kingheff wrote:


True, che got a buff but that's the only real meta unit that did and chapter masters make the alaitoc flyer lists less viable in return. But little else will see much play in competitive. As others have pointed out, che will almost certainly receive a points increase in chapter approved.
I don't play competitive games so I'm happy with the buffs aspects received, I use them already so I'm glad they're better even if few will be competitive despite the buffs.


The new psychic powers really help warlocks and spiritseers (and the Bonesinger, strangely). One or two nice things there for low warp charge.

Some of the borderline aspects got better. My son still really rates swooping hawks for their anti-horde capability and they got better ways that you could tailor them to some useful roles in a list. Similarly I think there are ways to make Dire Avengers a fair bit more effective on the table if that is what you are after. Quite a lot of the default exarch powers are really meh so having a choice of new and better ones always helps, maybe not enough to make many of them really competitive but at least to give them an interesting niche role in a list.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 07:30:30


Post by: Lemondish


 Daedalus81 wrote:
SeanDrake wrote:
So far the common theme of battle reports I have seen fall mostly into the category that most games IH won were ITC house rule games, most games IH lost were 40k games.

So basicly if you play the minatures equivalent of fortnight then IH are likely at an advantage if you play the actual game properly then IH are not much of a challange.

So as normal the issue is less the codex and more the house rules that people use. I don't believe anything should be changed just yet and I also don't think GW should be "balancing" there game based on a 3rd parties implementation of it. GW lack the competence to do balance when they wrote the rules never mind someone else.


This is so absurdly incorrect it borders on comedy.


I wouldn't be so sure. The house rules crowd* tends to get all up in arms over rules written by GW but forgets that their special snowflake missions aren't what GW writes for. It's ludicrous to expect to be catered to that way.

*ITC tournament babies


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 07:47:30


Post by: lolman1c


 Elemental wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
I saw the author of this thread and instantly knew what it was going to be.


That's about 50+% of Dakka to me at the moment--bittervets beating the same drum they've been beating for years with no signs of fatigue. Right now, if I had access to everyone's accounts, I could perfectly reproduce a lot of these threads, such that nobody would be able to tell it was me posting.


You could never understand the finesse that goes into each and every comment presented by these beautiful people on every side of the argument. It's a skillful dance that leads to overall positive effects for everyone. Sure, the ideas and words in your posts would be similar but the true message and signature would be missing. It just wouldn't be the same.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 09:27:22


Post by: Not Online!!!


Lemondish wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
SeanDrake wrote:
So far the common theme of battle reports I have seen fall mostly into the category that most games IH won were ITC house rule games, most games IH lost were 40k games.

So basicly if you play the minatures equivalent of fortnight then IH are likely at an advantage if you play the actual game properly then IH are not much of a challange.

So as normal the issue is less the codex and more the house rules that people use. I don't believe anything should be changed just yet and I also don't think GW should be "balancing" there game based on a 3rd parties implementation of it. GW lack the competence to do balance when they wrote the rules never mind someone else.


This is so absurdly incorrect it borders on comedy.


I wouldn't be so sure. The house rules crowd* tends to get all up in arms over rules written by GW but forgets that their special snowflake missions aren't what GW writes for. It's ludicrous to expect to be catered to that way.

*ITC tournament babies


And people wonder why politics got closed.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 10:45:19


Post by: grouchoben


Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 10:53:51


Post by: Not Online!!!


That looks like it should raise some flags.
Hopefully gw stops twiddling it's thumbs and does take a look.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 11:09:07


Post by: Nitro Zeus


GSC player's name is Joe Maylam, not Jay Maylam. Just a minor point but Australian players already don't get enough credit as is, so I just want to correct that.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 11:53:47


Post by: Lemondish


 grouchoben wrote:
Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 11:58:26


Post by: Sterling191


Lemondish wrote:

I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


All of this. Its a major meta shift no question, in no small part because the Papa-stone castle does a number on previously meta defining armaments (high-ROF, mid-damage), and people trying to brute force that were sat down hard. A single datapoint is informative, but not remotely conclusive. Time will tell. It always does.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 12:55:06


Post by: Lemondish


Sterling191 wrote:
Lemondish wrote:

I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


All of this. Its a major meta shift no question, in no small part because the Papa-stone castle does a number on previously meta defining armaments (high-ROF, mid-damage), and people trying to brute force that were sat down hard. A single datapoint is informative, but not remotely conclusive. Time will tell. It always does.


The funny part about the castle is that it's the gatekeeping list, not the winning list we'll see more of.

The mobility is key. Iron Hands never have to make the classic 8th edition marine vehicle trade off of mobility or accuracy. They get both for the same cost as everyone else. Those vehicles are already too expensive for most marine forces, but add in essentially +1 to hit and a free captain aura effect and they're criminally undercosted. A true tragedy because I wanted the Interceptors to be viable for everyone because they're cool.

Honestly, that movement penalty rule should have been a universal marine vehicle rule so that we could all pay the right price for vehicles.

On top of that, they gain a whole bunch of ways to keep them alive through an alpha strike.

I'm not scared of castles. I'm scared of ultra durable fliers and speedy units being pretty much guaranteed to hit hard in the first turn because you can't kill them, bracket them, or chew through the bullet shields to hit the characters hard enough.



Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 13:35:28


Post by: Tamwulf


Personally, I'm totally down for playing the yellow with a giant fist and sweeping my games.

"You been fisted!"


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 13:41:04


Post by: Sterling191


Lemondish wrote:

The funny part about the castle is that it's the gatekeeping list, not the winning list we'll see more of.


I dont disagree, but its a trap a lot of people chasing the meta are going to fall into.

Lemondish wrote:

I'm not scared of castles. I'm scared of ultra durable fliers and speedy units being pretty much guaranteed to hit hard in the first turn because you can't kill them, bracket them, or chew through the bullet shields to hit the characters hard enough.


They're not particularly durable though, even in the optimal Stealthy successor configuration.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 13:42:48


Post by: Ratius


Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands


Haha how wonderfully tedious


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 14:17:03


Post by: lolman1c


Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 grouchoben wrote:
Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


It's funny. Since stepping away from 40k for a while and trying out a more other TT games I just become more ashamed of some 40k players (obviously not all). Yes, in lots of the other games I played there is a meta but players seem a lot less ready to exploit it than they do with 40k. You have to imagine, in the last few months players have bought and repainted thousands for pounds worth of models even in local scenes (I know this because I've seen a few players here do that) just to win a few games for a month while other Table Top games players (even pro) seem to stick to their play style and don't change it even if there is an advantage (Or it can take a while before people are exploiting something).

I'm reminded of X-wing (only one of the games I've been playing recently) and how a lot of pro-players have been beat recently while trying to exploit the latest meta by older players who have stuck to the lists they like.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 15:26:09


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 lolman1c wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 grouchoben wrote:
Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


It's funny. Since stepping away from 40k for a while and trying out a more other TT games I just become more ashamed of some 40k players (obviously not all). Yes, in lots of the other games I played there is a meta but players seem a lot less ready to exploit it than they do with 40k. You have to imagine, in the last few months players have bought and repainted thousands for pounds worth of models even in local scenes (I know this because I've seen a few players here do that) just to win a few games for a month while other Table Top games players (even pro) seem to stick to their play style and don't change it even if there is an advantage (Or it can take a while before people are exploiting something).

I'm reminded of X-wing (only one of the games I've been playing recently) and how a lot of pro-players have been beat recently while trying to exploit the latest meta by older players who have stuck to the lists they like.

And what's your point? L2P? That's a pretty poor argument.

If something is broken, it is broken. Nobody cares about "oh you can still beat it". Main difference is some of us called it on the Levi not being the issue with Iron Hands as much as the free rerolls on everything important!


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 16:14:47


Post by: The Newman


I know it's not really on topic but am I the only one annoyed that there are four things to preview this week and they've started with the two that nobody cares about?

(Also, shame on me. I'm one of the people who complained about previewing UM before WS and IH before RG because leading with the good stuff isn't good for the hype train and here I am [expletive]ing because GW listened.)


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 16:14:48


Post by: grouchoben


'Hyperbole' is a bit misleading. As is your claim that this is a regular occurrence.

Panda et all are a nice bunch who are well versed in the comp side of the game - I'm just a spectator who likes to dabble tbh! I'm taking my lead from their analyses.

And I don't think it's true to claim that any other faction has completely and utterly dominated every single GT within 3 weeks of release. This is just the beginning, unless some serious changes are made.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 17:50:00


Post by: Gadzilla666


These are just the early lists. Just wait until the optimized lists
come out in a month or so. And if early builds can dominate tournaments like this imagine what they'll be like in casual pick up games. Doesn't sound like my personal definition of fun.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 17:53:53


Post by: Ordana


Either builds get better and dominate more or the meta reacts to counter and they drop off.
But the question is in what way can the meta counter? Armies are already well equipped to kill MEQ, Knights and flyers, so can lists reasonably get more anti marine/tank/flyer?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 19:43:09


Post by: The Newman


 Ordana wrote:
Either builds get better and dominate more or the meta reacts to counter and they drop off.
But the question is in what way can the meta counter? Armies are already well equipped to kill MEQ, Knights and flyers, so can lists reasonably get more anti marine/tank/flyer?


Maybe.

You know what works better than the current on-meta guns if you need to drive damage past a fixed penalty? Big single-shot high-damage guns, optionally with minimum damage numbers on them like Neutron Lasers and Heavy Laser Destroyers. You know, the kind that GW seems to think an anti-tank gun ought to look like?

I'm not beginning to try to claim that IH aren't overpowered and/or a real problem, but give the meta a chance to catch up. People switch to anti-IH layouts and then other things that the anti-IH layouts don't work so well against startt creeping back in.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 19:54:29


Post by: BrianDavion


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 lolman1c wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 grouchoben wrote:
Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


It's funny. Since stepping away from 40k for a while and trying out a more other TT games I just become more ashamed of some 40k players (obviously not all). Yes, in lots of the other games I played there is a meta but players seem a lot less ready to exploit it than they do with 40k. You have to imagine, in the last few months players have bought and repainted thousands for pounds worth of models even in local scenes (I know this because I've seen a few players here do that) just to win a few games for a month while other Table Top games players (even pro) seem to stick to their play style and don't change it even if there is an advantage (Or it can take a while before people are exploiting something).

I'm reminded of X-wing (only one of the games I've been playing recently) and how a lot of pro-players have been beat recently while trying to exploit the latest meta by older players who have stuck to the lists they like.

And what's your point? L2P? That's a pretty poor argument.

If something is broken, it is broken. Nobody cares about "oh you can still beat it". Main difference is some of us called it on the Levi not being the issue with Iron Hands as much as the free rerolls on everything important!


Ithink his point is that 40k players make a bad thing worse by obsessivly trying to break the game.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 20:09:26


Post by: Ordana


The Newman wrote:
 Ordana wrote:
Either builds get better and dominate more or the meta reacts to counter and they drop off.
But the question is in what way can the meta counter? Armies are already well equipped to kill MEQ, Knights and flyers, so can lists reasonably get more anti marine/tank/flyer?


Maybe.

You know what works better than the current on-meta guns if you need to drive damage past a fixed penalty? Big single-shot high-damage guns, optionally with minimum damage numbers on them like Neutron Lasers and Heavy Laser Destroyers. You know, the kind that GW seems to think an anti-tank gun ought to look like?

I'm not beginning to try to claim that IH aren't overpowered and/or a real problem, but give the meta a chance to catch up. People switch to anti-IH layouts and then other things that the anti-IH layouts don't work so well against startt creeping back in.
Single shot d6 damage weapons aren't being used because there were not good targets for them, but because they are simply to unreliable for the often premium cost you pay.

A lascannon does less against a standard tank profile (t7 3+sv) then a twin ironhail autocannon (to pick a 2D weapon from the marine codex) with or without the Ironstone relic. While being cheaper.
Accelerator autocannon, same deal. Half the damage, less then half the price.
And minimum damage like the Neutron laser is rare enough that its not really worth accounting for when looking at the bigger Meta picture.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 20:33:46


Post by: bananathug


Yeah, invluns and a compressed S v T range have killed the viability of entire swaths of weapons. The ironstone just kills the last "effective" multi-target tank guns.

Now you choose whether you want to be able to kill a -1 damage 5++ tank or a -1 to hit 4++ magnus/morty or eldar flyers or drone/3++ riptide.

The iron stone is pulling out the crutch that a lot of players have been using (the reasonably good against everything gun). High ROF, medium AP (-1 to -2) and consistent damage (2-3). It is a lot harder for the dice to fail you if you are rolling 12 shots that do 2 damage each vs 4 that can potentially do d6 (too may fail points and with invluns that gets even worse).

I think IF will be the sauce to combat IH but depending on one faction to reduce the proliferation of one OP faction seems about the worst game design since the old lady who swallowed the fly...


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/15 20:52:21


Post by: Ordana


bananathug wrote:
Yeah, invluns and a compressed S v T range have killed the viability of entire swaths of weapons. The ironstone just kills the last "effective" multi-target tank guns.

Now you choose whether you want to be able to kill a -1 damage 5++ tank or a -1 to hit 4++ magnus/morty or eldar flyers or drone/3++ riptide.

The iron stone is pulling out the crutch that a lot of players have been using (the reasonably good against everything gun). High ROF, medium AP (-1 to -2) and consistent damage (2-3). It is a lot harder for the dice to fail you if you are rolling 12 shots that do 2 damage each vs 4 that can potentially do d6 (too may fail points and with invluns that gets even worse).

I think IF will be the sauce to combat IH but depending on one faction to reduce the proliferation of one OP faction seems about the worst game design since the old lady who swallowed the fly...
How is it pulling out a crutch when they are still more efficient, even with -1 to damage?
The answer to all the things you mention is still the same.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 09:12:48


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


BrianDavion wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 lolman1c wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 grouchoben wrote:
Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


It's funny. Since stepping away from 40k for a while and trying out a more other TT games I just become more ashamed of some 40k players (obviously not all). Yes, in lots of the other games I played there is a meta but players seem a lot less ready to exploit it than they do with 40k. You have to imagine, in the last few months players have bought and repainted thousands for pounds worth of models even in local scenes (I know this because I've seen a few players here do that) just to win a few games for a month while other Table Top games players (even pro) seem to stick to their play style and don't change it even if there is an advantage (Or it can take a while before people are exploiting something).

I'm reminded of X-wing (only one of the games I've been playing recently) and how a lot of pro-players have been beat recently while trying to exploit the latest meta by older players who have stuck to the lists they like.

And what's your point? L2P? That's a pretty poor argument.

If something is broken, it is broken. Nobody cares about "oh you can still beat it". Main difference is some of us called it on the Levi not being the issue with Iron Hands as much as the free rerolls on everything important!


Ithink his point is that 40k players make a bad thing worse by obsessivly trying to break the game.

It isn't hard to even break the game accidentally, so that's not a good argument. 3 Dreads being followed by an Ironstone Techmarine already sounds fluffy as is, right?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 10:55:21


Post by: Spoletta


3 Dreads following an ironstone techmarine are perfectly fine in a casual environment. If the other guy has 2 or 3 lascannons, those dreads are not in a good situation.

D6 damage weapons lose only 25% damage from ironstone, they go from 3,5 to 2,66 damage. Only one dread can halve damage.

It's easier than facing 3 dreadnaught of old RG, the -1 to hit is actually scarier in many cases, except that they don't need an HQ and a relic for it.

Not saying that IH are not going to be a though opponent in casual games, but that specific example doesn't seem really scary.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 11:21:03


Post by: Ice_can


Spoletta wrote:
3 Dreads following an ironstone techmarine are perfectly fine in a casual environment. If the other guy has 2 or 3 lascannons, those dreads are not in a good situation.

D6 damage weapons lose only 25% damage from ironstone, they go from 3,5 to 2,66 damage. Only one dread can halve damage.

It's easier than facing 3 dreadnaught of old RG, the -1 to hit is actually scarier in many cases, except that they don't need an HQ and a relic for it.

Not saying that IH are not going to be a though opponent in casual games, but that specific example doesn't seem really scary.

Except it's not 2.66 per turn
You hit on 3+ so 66% wound on a 3+ so 66% even before saves it's 43% wound rate ok with reroll hits and wound rolls that can become better but add in a 5++ and your down to a .29% chance of a wound per shot .29x 2.66 damage is .77 wounds per turn for 25 points that's pretty poor.

A heavy bolter does .43 wounds per turn against the same targets and is only 10 points. D6 weapons still look bonkers. When 20 points of heavy bolters out damages a 25 points lascannon.

People use multi shot D2 Dd3 weapons because they work Dd6 weapons are unreliable and overcosted.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 11:51:25


Post by: The Newman


Ice_can wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
3 Dreads following an ironstone techmarine are perfectly fine in a casual environment. If the other guy has 2 or 3 lascannons, those dreads are not in a good situation.

D6 damage weapons lose only 25% damage from ironstone, they go from 3,5 to 2,66 damage. Only one dread can halve damage.

It's easier than facing 3 dreadnaught of old RG, the -1 to hit is actually scarier in many cases, except that they don't need an HQ and a relic for it.

Not saying that IH are not going to be a though opponent in casual games, but that specific example doesn't seem really scary.

Except it's not 2.66 per turn
You hit on 3+ so 66% wound on a 3+ so 66% even before saves it's 43% wound rate ok with reroll hits and wound rolls that can become better but add in a 5++ and your down to a .29% chance of a wound per shot .29x 2.66 damage is .77 wounds per turn for 25 points that's pretty poor.

A heavy bolter does .43 wounds per turn against the same targets and is only 10 points. D6 weapons still look bonkers. When 20 points of heavy bolters out damages a 25 points lascannon.

People use multi shot D2 Dd3 weapons because they work Dd6 weapons are unreliable and overcosted.

You know darn well what he meant comparing 3.5 to 2.66, the rest of the math that gets down to .77 wounds average per shot is irrelevant since it applies to the shot either way.

Heavy Bolters being better for the points against an IH target is relevant though, and that just means that instead of a 5-shot D2 weapon you want a 10-shot D1 weapon that the Iron Stone and the 1/2 damage strat have no effect on whatsoever. ...which is annoying since anti-heavy-infantry guns being the best thing for killing tanks was silly and now the best thing for killing IF armor is anti-light-infantry guns.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 11:54:08


Post by: Not Online!!!


"Rcc VotLW havocs, for when you need to drown your local ih deathblobber in lead like the meta chaser he Is!"

Warning, this comment does not include sufficient Rcc to equip a squad.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 12:18:24


Post by: Ice_can


The Newman wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
3 Dreads following an ironstone techmarine are perfectly fine in a casual environment. If the other guy has 2 or 3 lascannons, those dreads are not in a good situation.

D6 damage weapons lose only 25% damage from ironstone, they go from 3,5 to 2,66 damage. Only one dread can halve damage.

It's easier than facing 3 dreadnaught of old RG, the -1 to hit is actually scarier in many cases, except that they don't need an HQ and a relic for it.

Not saying that IH are not going to be a though opponent in casual games, but that specific example doesn't seem really scary.

Except it's not 2.66 per turn
You hit on 3+ so 66% wound on a 3+ so 66% even before saves it's 43% wound rate ok with reroll hits and wound rolls that can become better but add in a 5++ and your down to a .29% chance of a wound per shot .29x 2.66 damage is .77 wounds per turn for 25 points that's pretty poor.

A heavy bolter does .43 wounds per turn against the same targets and is only 10 points. D6 weapons still look bonkers. When 20 points of heavy bolters out damages a 25 points lascannon.

People use multi shot D2 Dd3 weapons because they work Dd6 weapons are unreliable and overcosted.

You know darn well what he meant comparing 3.5 to 2.66, the rest of the math that gets down to .77 wounds average per shot is irrelevant since it applies to the shot either way.

Heavy Bolters being better for the points against an IH target is relevant though, and that just means that instead of a 5-shot D2 weapon you want a 10-shot D1 weapon that the Iron Stone and the 1/2 damage strat have no effect on whatsoever. ...which is annoying since anti-heavy-infantry guns being the best thing for killing tanks was silly and now the best thing for killing IF armor is anti-light-infantry guns.

D6 weapons suck even implying IH arn't broken because they effect the worst way to kill tanks the least is GW level logic at best.

You want people to take lascannons etc at 25 points each how about you make them worthwhile and stop just trying to build an army to countrr the meta you see and understand why units do or don't work in 8th edition.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 12:25:35


Post by: Tyel


I think other table top games optimise just as much as 40k. Its just some of them are designed with that assumption in mind.

Whereas GW are only just starting to get over the idea that the average player acts as if they are in a highlander tournament, has one or at most two of every unit, and so will have "good", "average" and "bad" units in their army, which gives a sort of balanced tier level. A bit like most of the armies you typically see in White Dwarf going back through the decades.

Whereas yes, someone who plays even semi-regularly will tend to go "this is good, this is bad, I'll take 3 of that good unit pls, you can keep those bad units on the shelf."

This isn't really surprising. I mean I am slowly putting together a Word Bearers army - because new chaos kits and I always wanted one. I am really trying to escape the "play to win" mentality and just go for aesthetic choices - partly because I know the rules for most of these units are objectively terrible, so "playing to win" is just irrational. But its still a hard habit to break.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 14:08:34


Post by: Bharring


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 lolman1c wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 grouchoben wrote:
Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


It's funny. Since stepping away from 40k for a while and trying out a more other TT games I just become more ashamed of some 40k players (obviously not all). Yes, in lots of the other games I played there is a meta but players seem a lot less ready to exploit it than they do with 40k. You have to imagine, in the last few months players have bought and repainted thousands for pounds worth of models even in local scenes (I know this because I've seen a few players here do that) just to win a few games for a month while other Table Top games players (even pro) seem to stick to their play style and don't change it even if there is an advantage (Or it can take a while before people are exploiting something).

I'm reminded of X-wing (only one of the games I've been playing recently) and how a lot of pro-players have been beat recently while trying to exploit the latest meta by older players who have stuck to the lists they like.

And what's your point? L2P? That's a pretty poor argument.

If something is broken, it is broken. Nobody cares about "oh you can still beat it". Main difference is some of us called it on the Levi not being the issue with Iron Hands as much as the free rerolls on everything important!


Ithink his point is that 40k players make a bad thing worse by obsessivly trying to break the game.

It isn't hard to even break the game accidentally, so that's not a good argument. 3 Dreads being followed by an Ironstone Techmarine already sounds fluffy as is, right?

How easy something is to do rarely invalidates whether it's worth doing.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 14:57:42


Post by: The Newman


Ice_can wrote:
Spoiler:
The Newman wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
3 Dreads following an ironstone techmarine are perfectly fine in a casual environment. If the other guy has 2 or 3 lascannons, those dreads are not in a good situation.

D6 damage weapons lose only 25% damage from ironstone, they go from 3,5 to 2,66 damage. Only one dread can halve damage.

It's easier than facing 3 dreadnaught of old RG, the -1 to hit is actually scarier in many cases, except that they don't need an HQ and a relic for it.

Not saying that IH are not going to be a though opponent in casual games, but that specific example doesn't seem really scary.

Except it's not 2.66 per turn
You hit on 3+ so 66% wound on a 3+ so 66% even before saves it's 43% wound rate ok with reroll hits and wound rolls that can become better but add in a 5++ and your down to a .29% chance of a wound per shot .29x 2.66 damage is .77 wounds per turn for 25 points that's pretty poor.

A heavy bolter does .43 wounds per turn against the same targets and is only 10 points. D6 weapons still look bonkers. When 20 points of heavy bolters out damages a 25 points lascannon.

People use multi shot D2 Dd3 weapons because they work Dd6 weapons are unreliable and overcosted.

You know darn well what he meant comparing 3.5 to 2.66, the rest of the math that gets down to .77 wounds average per shot is irrelevant since it applies to the shot either way.

Heavy Bolters being better for the points against an IH target is relevant though, and that just means that instead of a 5-shot D2 weapon you want a 10-shot D1 weapon that the Iron Stone and the 1/2 damage strat have no effect on whatsoever. ...which is annoying since anti-heavy-infantry guns being the best thing for killing tanks was silly and now the best thing for killing IF armor is anti-light-infantry guns.

D6 weapons suck. Even implying IH aren't broken because they have the smallest impact on the worst weapons for killing tanks is GW level logic at best.

You want people to take lascannons etc at 25 points each, how about you make them worthwhile and stop just trying to build an army to counter the meta you see. You don't seem to understand why units do or don't work in 8th edition.


1) Sorry, grammar is a pet peeve of mine. I edited your post for clarity so I could better think through responding to it, if I got something wrong please say so.

2) I specifically called out that even though I do think the meta has room to adjust to IH, I don't think that means IH aren't a problem. They clearly are. I just think it's going to take a little time to see exactly how big of a problem.

3) I'm not really sure who you're talking to in the second paragraph. The first part seems to be aimed at GW (it's not like I can do anything about the problems with the Lascannon profile), the second part seems to be aimed at me. For what it's worth I'm not reacting to my local meta this time*, I'm the only person to have fielded an IH army locally so far. I'm commenting on what types of weapons I'm worried about seeing on the other side of the table.

* - It's not an unfair assumption considering my posting history and I don't blame you for making it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Preview is up!

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/10/16/space-marines-preview-the-imperial-fistsgw-homepage-post-1/


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Eye of Hypnoth is just a general IF relic now instead of Vigilus only.

They really are getting +1 damage for Heavy weapons in Devastator Doctrine, but it's only vs VEHICLES and BUILDINGS so no bets on whether that gets FAQed.

The Geokenisis power they previewed has the potential to spike to stupid levels.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 15:10:26


Post by: Castiel


TBF if you are going to the bother of painting that much yellow you deserve to be compensated for the loss of sanity with some good rules!


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 15:38:02


Post by: The Newman


Also: Crimson Fists are mentioned as being in the book, Black Templars are not.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 15:39:51


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 lolman1c wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 grouchoben wrote:
Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


It's funny. Since stepping away from 40k for a while and trying out a more other TT games I just become more ashamed of some 40k players (obviously not all). Yes, in lots of the other games I played there is a meta but players seem a lot less ready to exploit it than they do with 40k. You have to imagine, in the last few months players have bought and repainted thousands for pounds worth of models even in local scenes (I know this because I've seen a few players here do that) just to win a few games for a month while other Table Top games players (even pro) seem to stick to their play style and don't change it even if there is an advantage (Or it can take a while before people are exploiting something).

I'm reminded of X-wing (only one of the games I've been playing recently) and how a lot of pro-players have been beat recently while trying to exploit the latest meta by older players who have stuck to the lists they like.

And what's your point? L2P? That's a pretty poor argument.

If something is broken, it is broken. Nobody cares about "oh you can still beat it". Main difference is some of us called it on the Levi not being the issue with Iron Hands as much as the free rerolls on everything important!


Ithink his point is that 40k players make a bad thing worse by obsessivly trying to break the game.

It isn't hard to even break the game accidentally, so that's not a good argument. 3 Dreads being followed by an Ironstone Techmarine already sounds fluffy as is, right?

How easy something is to do rarely invalidates whether it's worth doing.

Oh please. A NEW player could easily have done that.

Blame GW, not the player.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 15:50:13


Post by: Nym


Quick question to Space Marine players : do the Super Doctrines replace the regular benefit (-1 AP) or not ?

I've just realised that IF Intercessors with Stalker Bolt Rifles could be S4 AP-3 D3, and I think I'm about to throw up...

This edition is getting out of whack too fast for me.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 15:58:43


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Nym wrote:
Quick question to Space Marine players : do the Super Doctrines replace the regular benefit (-1 AP) or not ?

I've just realised that IF Intercessors with Stalker Bolt Rifles could be S4 AP-3 D3, and I think I'm about to throw up...

This edition is getting out of whack too fast for me.

It doesn't replace, no. However Stalkers won't be doing a lot to vehicles.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 16:09:17


Post by: Bharring


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 lolman1c wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 grouchoben wrote:
Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


It's funny. Since stepping away from 40k for a while and trying out a more other TT games I just become more ashamed of some 40k players (obviously not all). Yes, in lots of the other games I played there is a meta but players seem a lot less ready to exploit it than they do with 40k. You have to imagine, in the last few months players have bought and repainted thousands for pounds worth of models even in local scenes (I know this because I've seen a few players here do that) just to win a few games for a month while other Table Top games players (even pro) seem to stick to their play style and don't change it even if there is an advantage (Or it can take a while before people are exploiting something).

I'm reminded of X-wing (only one of the games I've been playing recently) and how a lot of pro-players have been beat recently while trying to exploit the latest meta by older players who have stuck to the lists they like.

And what's your point? L2P? That's a pretty poor argument.

If something is broken, it is broken. Nobody cares about "oh you can still beat it". Main difference is some of us called it on the Levi not being the issue with Iron Hands as much as the free rerolls on everything important!


Ithink his point is that 40k players make a bad thing worse by obsessivly trying to break the game.

It isn't hard to even break the game accidentally, so that's not a good argument. 3 Dreads being followed by an Ironstone Techmarine already sounds fluffy as is, right?

How easy something is to do rarely invalidates whether it's worth doing.

Oh please. A NEW player could easily have done that.

Blame GW, not the player.

I'm not sure I follow. You're saying that how easy it is decides whether you should do it, specifically because of how easy it is?

Most circular arguments have at least one term in the loop before the cycle...

I won't excuse people from doing things they shouldn't just because it isn't too hard to do things they shouldn't.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 16:16:05


Post by: The Newman


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Nym wrote:
Quick question to Space Marine players : do the Super Doctrines replace the regular benefit (-1 AP) or not ?

I've just realised that IF Intercessors with Stalker Bolt Rifles could be S4 AP-3 D3, and I think I'm about to throw up...

This edition is getting out of whack too fast for me.

It doesn't replace, no. However Stalkers won't be doing a lot to vehicles.


I don't know about that, they wound anything lighter than T8 on a 5+ and there aren't really that many T8s outside of Guard and IK. And Ap3 D3 is pretty good once you do have a successful wound roll. ...and we're talking about IF here where a 6 to-hit generates an auto-hit with a bolt weapon and there are a lot of rerolls available and they could be getting the +1 to-wound from a Chaplain.

I wouldn't want to build a list around that but the option to catch someone off-guard is there.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 16:44:49


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 lolman1c wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 grouchoben wrote:
Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


It's funny. Since stepping away from 40k for a while and trying out a more other TT games I just become more ashamed of some 40k players (obviously not all). Yes, in lots of the other games I played there is a meta but players seem a lot less ready to exploit it than they do with 40k. You have to imagine, in the last few months players have bought and repainted thousands for pounds worth of models even in local scenes (I know this because I've seen a few players here do that) just to win a few games for a month while other Table Top games players (even pro) seem to stick to their play style and don't change it even if there is an advantage (Or it can take a while before people are exploiting something).

I'm reminded of X-wing (only one of the games I've been playing recently) and how a lot of pro-players have been beat recently while trying to exploit the latest meta by older players who have stuck to the lists they like.

And what's your point? L2P? That's a pretty poor argument.

If something is broken, it is broken. Nobody cares about "oh you can still beat it". Main difference is some of us called it on the Levi not being the issue with Iron Hands as much as the free rerolls on everything important!


Ithink his point is that 40k players make a bad thing worse by obsessivly trying to break the game.

It isn't hard to even break the game accidentally, so that's not a good argument. 3 Dreads being followed by an Ironstone Techmarine already sounds fluffy as is, right?

How easy something is to do rarely invalidates whether it's worth doing.

Oh please. A NEW player could easily have done that.

Blame GW, not the player.

I'm not sure I follow. You're saying that how easy it is decides whether you should do it, specifically because of how easy it is?

Most circular arguments have at least one term in the loop before the cycle...

I won't excuse people from doing things they shouldn't just because it isn't too hard to do things they shouldn't.

My post was incredibly easy to follow. You're just overthinking it.
You say just because something is easily done doesn't mean it should be done. I'm saying a new player could easily have done that same setup with little research because it looks cool and Iron Hands = Dreads. Same way a new player buying a bunch of Guard Infantry having no idea they're broken, just that they're the primary troop choice.

Trying to blame the player for GW's shoddy balancing is the very definition of Battered Wife Syndrome. How can you NOT see that?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 16:46:56


Post by: Ordana


The Newman wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Nym wrote:
Quick question to Space Marine players : do the Super Doctrines replace the regular benefit (-1 AP) or not ?

I've just realised that IF Intercessors with Stalker Bolt Rifles could be S4 AP-3 D3, and I think I'm about to throw up...

This edition is getting out of whack too fast for me.

It doesn't replace, no. However Stalkers won't be doing a lot to vehicles.


I don't know about that, they wound anything lighter than T8 on a 5+ and there aren't really that many T8s outside of Guard and IK. And Ap3 D3 is pretty good once you do have a successful wound roll. ...and we're talking about IF here where a 6 to-hit generates an auto-hit with a bolt weapon and there are a lot of rerolls available and they could be getting the +1 to-wound from a Chaplain.

I wouldn't want to build a list around that but the option to catch someone off-guard is there.
indeed. We already saw armies of Intercessors have good results with the new codex and the UM/WS supplement before IH's came and took over. Depending on relics/stratagems you could do the same with IF and have better anti-tank for free.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 18:16:45


Post by: Bharring


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Spoiler:
Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 lolman1c wrote:
[spoiler]
Lemondish wrote:
 grouchoben wrote:
Well it's funny, because those commenters in this thread saying 'relax, it's not as bad as you think' are ones I usually agre with. But they're dead wrong on this one.

Here's Panda from his excellent weekly rundown thread over at r/comp40k:

9 GT sized or greater events; 36 top 4 placings.
Of those, 24 were Space Marines or had a detachment.
Of those, 18 were Iron Hands.
Of the 9 events, Iron Hands won 7 of them; the eighth was White Scars with an IH successor detachment.
That’s 50% of all top 4 being Iron Hands; Space Marines 67%.

There hasn't been anything like this in 40k 8th edition yet. Those saying 'this is fine' don't really seem to be in contact with what's happening with the game, and are rather repeating a well-established (and often, in the past, corect) mantra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the top 4 breakdowns. ...

Into the Hellstorm 4
Mike Porter – Iron Hands
Andrew Wilcock – Chaos
Simon Miller – Space Wolves/AdMech
Simon Priddis – IH Successor

Michigan GT
Thomas Ogden – Iron Hands
Aaron Aleong – Guard/White Scars
Elliot Levy – Orks
Brad Chester – IH/RG

Battle for Salvation
Nicholas Rose – Iron Hands
Mark Hertel – Iron Hands
Andrew Gonyo – RG Successor
Sean Nayden – Eldar

Crucible
John Lennon – WS/IH Successor
Ruben Fernandez – White Scars
Cody Saults – Chaos
Daniel Smith – Iron Hands

Midtcon
Thomas Dorner – Iron Hands
Rasmus Olesen – Orks
Kristian Krabsen – Iron Hands
Andreas Drachmann – Orks

Fantasia 36
Sami Keinanen – Iron Hands
Mark Haatio – Ultramarines
Robert Gustafsson – Iron Hands
Tim Nordin – Guard/Iron Hands

Iron Monkey
Doug Sainsbury – Iron Hands
Andrew Bartosh – Raven Guard
James Brown – Knights/BA
Pascal Roggen – AdMech/Assassins/Knights

Seeds of Destruction
Jay Maylam – GSC
Jay Seebarun – Iron Hands
Feliks Bartkiewicz – Iron Hands
Liam Royle – DE/Harlies

Harbor Heresy
Zachary Nelson – Iron Hands
Ryan Lynn – Iron Hands
Harrison Jewell – Raven Guard
Colin Sherman – Tau


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And this is within a few weeks of the rules dropping. Things are going to get a lot worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Well done to Jay Maylam for breaking what would have otherwise been a clean sweep with his GSC!)


I remember sweeps like this happening with the Ynnari or the 7 Flyrants, or even when that short lived unending poxwalker army was about. Castellans, too.

Saying this is unprecedented may not be accurate. The speed at which players took advantage is really the only notable point. It remains to be seen how this army will be countered.

I think it is a problem, but I think (as usual) the hyperbole is ridiculous.


It's funny. Since stepping away from 40k for a while and trying out a more other TT games I just become more ashamed of some 40k players (obviously not all). Yes, in lots of the other games I played there is a meta but players seem a lot less ready to exploit it than they do with 40k. You have to imagine, in the last few months players have bought and repainted thousands for pounds worth of models even in local scenes (I know this because I've seen a few players here do that) just to win a few games for a month while other Table Top games players (even pro) seem to stick to their play style and don't change it even if there is an advantage (Or it can take a while before people are exploiting something).

I'm reminded of X-wing (only one of the games I've been playing recently) and how a lot of pro-players have been beat recently while trying to exploit the latest meta by older players who have stuck to the lists they like.

And what's your point? L2P? That's a pretty poor argument.

If something is broken, it is broken. Nobody cares about "oh you can still beat it". Main difference is some of us called it on the Levi not being the issue with Iron Hands as much as the free rerolls on everything important!


Ithink his point is that 40k players make a bad thing worse by obsessivly trying to break the game.

It isn't hard to even break the game accidentally, so that's not a good argument. 3 Dreads being followed by an Ironstone Techmarine already sounds fluffy as is, right?

How easy something is to do rarely invalidates whether it's worth doing.

Oh please. A NEW player could easily have done that.

Blame GW, not the player.

I'm not sure I follow. You're saying that how easy it is decides whether you should do it, specifically because of how easy it is?

Most circular arguments have at least one term in the loop before the cycle...

I won't excuse people from doing things they shouldn't just because it isn't too hard to do things they shouldn't.

My post was incredibly easy to follow. You're just overthinking it. You say just because something is easily done doesn't mean it should be done. I'm saying a new player could easily have done that same setup with little research because it looks cool and Iron Hands = Dreads. Same way a new player buying a bunch of Guard Infantry having no idea they're broken, just that they're the primary troop choice.

It's certainly possible that a new player happens to build a tournament list that's identical to a netlist, then builds a new list every few months that just happens to be the new meta hotness. But the odds are... not in their favor. Tracking that closely to meta netlists repeatedly is *very* hard to do "accidentally". Sure, we can say a random new player might have a 1/1000 chance of doing it with their first army, but even if we assume they do new armies every couple months, we're talking one in a *billion* that they do it three times in a row.

It's fairly probable that if you have two random players build lists independent of balance, one will likely be stronger than the other. But that's not nearly the same as army hopping between netlists. And the balance gap will almost-always be substantially smaller than "Netlist vs average-new-player-list".

Trying to blame the player for GW's shoddy balancing is the very definition of Battered Wife Syndrome. How can you NOT see that?

*Please* try to be less vitrolic with your language. Battered Wife Syndrome is a serious condition. If I blame you for stealing Bob's wallet, that's not battered wife syndrome just because Bob left his wallet unattended. "It's easy to steal it" doesn't mean you weren't wrong to steal it. And accusing people who call you out for steeling it to be pro-domestic-abuse is despicable.

Being able to steal/be a jerk/hurt someone isn't OK just because bob/GW/society/gov't didn't stop you.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 20:26:16


Post by: Karol


It's fairly probable that if you have two random players build lists independent of balance, one will likely be stronger than the other. But that's not nearly the same as army hopping between netlists. And the balance gap will almost-always be substantially smaller than "Netlist vs average-new-player-list".


If two people start necron and DA, and two other start IH or old Inari. The IH players is going to have a vastly better army. And am talking here about non tournament lists.


Being able to steal/be a jerk/hurt someone isn't OK just because bob/GW/society/gov't didn't stop you.

That is intersting view of the world, because we have a saying here that you have to steal your first big money here. And another one that says that law is law, but justice has to be on our side.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 20:53:09


Post by: Bharring


Karol wrote:
It's fairly probable that if you have two random players build lists independent of balance, one will likely be stronger than the other. But that's not nearly the same as army hopping between netlists. And the balance gap will almost-always be substantially smaller than "Netlist vs average-new-player-list".


If two people start necron and DA, and two other start IH or old Inari. The IH players is going to have a vastly better army. And am talking here about non tournament lists.

You'll occasionally see new players who see "trash" armies as OP, or OP armies as "trash" because the exact opposite is true. An "old Ynnari" army built indifferent to balance wasn't notably stronger than another faction's list built indifferent to balance (in large part due to the huge amount of options Ynnari had). "Fight Twice" and buffstacking meant a lot less when you have an MSU list. Or didn't have Spears. Or Farseers. Or whatever. The stronger book tends to be a little stronger, but variance in choices usually eclipse the strength/weakness in the books (when lists aren't built for balance reasons).



Being able to steal/be a jerk/hurt someone isn't OK just because bob/GW/society/gov't didn't stop you.

That is intersting view of the world, because we have a saying here that you have to steal your first big money here.

Not sure what that one is supposed to mean. Is it saying you *should* steal if you can get away with it?

And another one that says that law is law, but justice has to be on our side.

Is this saying that you're justified in whatever you're doing, or is it saying that you must only do what is justified?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 21:42:13


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Bharring wrote:
Karol wrote:
It's fairly probable that if you have two random players build lists independent of balance, one will likely be stronger than the other. But that's not nearly the same as army hopping between netlists. And the balance gap will almost-always be substantially smaller than "Netlist vs average-new-player-list".


If two people start necron and DA, and two other start IH or old Inari. The IH players is going to have a vastly better army. And am talking here about non tournament lists.

You'll occasionally see new players who see "trash" armies as OP, or OP armies as "trash" because the exact opposite is true. An "old Ynnari" army built indifferent to balance wasn't notably stronger than another faction's list built indifferent to balance (in large part due to the huge amount of options Ynnari had). "Fight Twice" and buffstacking meant a lot less when you have an MSU list. Or didn't have Spears. Or Farseers. Or whatever. The stronger book tends to be a little stronger, but variance in choices usually eclipse the strength/weakness in the books (when lists aren't built for balance reasons).



Being able to steal/be a jerk/hurt someone isn't OK just because bob/GW/society/gov't didn't stop you.

That is intersting view of the world, because we have a saying here that you have to steal your first big money here.

Not sure what that one is supposed to mean. Is it saying you *should* steal if you can get away with it?

And another one that says that law is law, but justice has to be on our side.

Is this saying that you're justified in whatever you're doing, or is it saying that you must only do what is justified?

What we are saying is we are playing by the rules laid out for us. If the rules are so poorly written that they can be exploited or not allow a fair game between two basic TAC armies, who is really at fault? The player that isn't toning down an already TAC list, or GW for not making them fair in the first place?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 22:40:28


Post by: Bharring


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Karol wrote:
It's fairly probable that if you have two random players build lists independent of balance, one will likely be stronger than the other. But that's not nearly the same as army hopping between netlists. And the balance gap will almost-always be substantially smaller than "Netlist vs average-new-player-list".


If two people start necron and DA, and two other start IH or old Inari. The IH players is going to have a vastly better army. And am talking here about non tournament lists.

You'll occasionally see new players who see "trash" armies as OP, or OP armies as "trash" because the exact opposite is true. An "old Ynnari" army built indifferent to balance wasn't notably stronger than another faction's list built indifferent to balance (in large part due to the huge amount of options Ynnari had). "Fight Twice" and buffstacking meant a lot less when you have an MSU list. Or didn't have Spears. Or Farseers. Or whatever. The stronger book tends to be a little stronger, but variance in choices usually eclipse the strength/weakness in the books (when lists aren't built for balance reasons).



Being able to steal/be a jerk/hurt someone isn't OK just because bob/GW/society/gov't didn't stop you.

That is intersting view of the world, because we have a saying here that you have to steal your first big money here.

Not sure what that one is supposed to mean. Is it saying you *should* steal if you can get away with it?

And another one that says that law is law, but justice has to be on our side.

Is this saying that you're justified in whatever you're doing, or is it saying that you must only do what is justified?

What we are saying is we are playing by the rules laid out for us. If the rules are so poorly written that they can be exploited or not allow a fair game between two basic TAC armies, who is really at fault? The player that isn't toning down an already TAC list, or GW for not making them fair in the first place?

Can't it be both?

Who's at fault for Bob's wallet? Bob for leaving it unattended, or you for taking it? Both.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 22:51:45


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Karol wrote:
It's fairly probable that if you have two random players build lists independent of balance, one will likely be stronger than the other. But that's not nearly the same as army hopping between netlists. And the balance gap will almost-always be substantially smaller than "Netlist vs average-new-player-list".


If two people start necron and DA, and two other start IH or old Inari. The IH players is going to have a vastly better army. And am talking here about non tournament lists.

You'll occasionally see new players who see "trash" armies as OP, or OP armies as "trash" because the exact opposite is true. An "old Ynnari" army built indifferent to balance wasn't notably stronger than another faction's list built indifferent to balance (in large part due to the huge amount of options Ynnari had). "Fight Twice" and buffstacking meant a lot less when you have an MSU list. Or didn't have Spears. Or Farseers. Or whatever. The stronger book tends to be a little stronger, but variance in choices usually eclipse the strength/weakness in the books (when lists aren't built for balance reasons).



Being able to steal/be a jerk/hurt someone isn't OK just because bob/GW/society/gov't didn't stop you.

That is intersting view of the world, because we have a saying here that you have to steal your first big money here.

Not sure what that one is supposed to mean. Is it saying you *should* steal if you can get away with it?

And another one that says that law is law, but justice has to be on our side.

Is this saying that you're justified in whatever you're doing, or is it saying that you must only do what is justified?

What we are saying is we are playing by the rules laid out for us. If the rules are so poorly written that they can be exploited or not allow a fair game between two basic TAC armies, who is really at fault? The player that isn't toning down an already TAC list, or GW for not making them fair in the first place?

Can't it be both?

Who's at fault for Bob's wallet? Bob for leaving it unattended, or you for taking it? Both.

That's really going out of the way to defending the person that left their wallet unattended. It's already known as naive to just trust leaving such valuables unattended, ergo most of the fault lies on the person leaving it there.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 23:00:41


Post by: Insectum7


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's really going out of the way to defending the person that left their wallet unattended. It's already known as naive to just trust leaving such valuables unattended, ergo most of the fault lies on the person leaving it there.


Or, you know, the person who finds the wallet can also turn it in to the lost-and-found, or use the contact information to mail it to the owner.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/16 23:07:35


Post by: Crimson


^ Yep!

Not that this is a terribly good analogy.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 00:28:46


Post by: Lemondish


Time to build a list of players not to have a game with lest some models go missing when I'm not looking


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 01:09:04


Post by: Eonfuzz


Has this thread actually devolved into victim blaming people for having their goods stolen?

Its not MY FAULT they left their wallet on the table! SOMEONE else could've STOLEN it, so I TOOK it because I NEED the MONEY.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 01:30:16


Post by: Crimson


 Eonfuzz wrote:
Has this thread actually devolved into victim blaming people for having their goods stolen?

Its not MY FAULT they left their wallet on the table! SOMEONE else could've STOLEN it, so I TOOK it because I NEED the MONEY.

Yes. It makes me really question the ethics of some posters.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 01:46:18


Post by: Gadzilla666


I'd really like to see the "he just left it there unguarded so it's his fault"
defense used in court.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 01:57:48


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's really going out of the way to defending the person that left their wallet unattended. It's already known as naive to just trust leaving such valuables unattended, ergo most of the fault lies on the person leaving it there.


Or, you know, the person who finds the wallet can also turn it in to the lost-and-found, or use the contact information to mail it to the owner.

That's us telling GW to fix their rules. Good catch!


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 02:02:46


Post by: Suzuteo


I just opened the last page, and I can only assume that I arrived in the midst of a tortured analogy gone too far?

Imperial Fists sound like yet another problem. I say GW nerf the Doctrines themselves. Maybe limit each to once per game or to force them to cycle through them?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 02:39:09


Post by: Gadzilla666


I don't see gw doing that. I'd say it's more a case of waiting for everyone else's op rules then watching the power creep and bloat build.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 03:17:24


Post by: bullyboy


Allow marines to activate one doctrine per turn, once per game, in any order (so whit Scars don't have to wait until Turn 3). So you will have 3 turns of doctrines, but can use them in any order you wish.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 03:54:47


Post by: BrianDavion


 Crimson wrote:
 Eonfuzz wrote:
Has this thread actually devolved into victim blaming people for having their goods stolen?

Its not MY FAULT they left their wallet on the table! SOMEONE else could've STOLEN it, so I TOOK it because I NEED the MONEY.

Yes. It makes me really question the ethics of some posters.


You're questioning it? christ Crimson I've long since detirmined that some of the folks here must eaither posess zero ethics. or simply find it amusing to pretend they don't on the internet where they can't suffer any concequences for it.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 05:15:45


Post by: Marin


I don`t see any more reason to panic after IH release, ofcourse +1 flat damage to most armies best units is super good, but for that point it`s clear SM need tuning down regardless of the chapter.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 05:26:39


Post by: Sunny Side Up


Marin wrote:
I don`t see any more reason to panic after IH release, ofcourse +1 flat damage to most armies best units is super good, but for that point it`s clear SM need tuning down regardless of the chapter.


Yes and no.

It's not as overall good as Iron Hands IMO, but it does invalidate a lot of army concepts. Tank Commanders, Venom Spam, Disco Lords, Knights probably, Mech Tau (with Riptides already basically gone), etc..

It's just another sucker punch.

Also, I think a lot of Marine stuff is OP or on the verge of OP, and might slip through, simply because IH are the most egregious offender. So Iron Stone and Feirros might get a nerf-bat, but all the crazy UM/Ravenguard/WhiteScars/IF/etc.. stuff slips through and we'll end up with a 90%-of-players-play-Marines-Meta anyhow.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 05:31:23


Post by: Marin


Sunny Side Up wrote:
Marin wrote:
I don`t see any more reason to panic after IH release, ofcourse +1 flat damage to most armies best units is super good, but for that point it`s clear SM need tuning down regardless of the chapter.


Yes and no.

It's not as overall good as Iron Hands IMO, but it does invalidate a lot of army concepts. Tank Commanders, Venom Spam, Disco Lords, Knights probably, Mech Tau (with Riptides already basically gone), etc..

It's just another sucker punch.

Also, I think a lot of Marine stuff is OP or on the verge of OP, and might slip through, simply because IH are the most egregious offender. So Iron Stone and Feirros might get a nerf-bat, but all the crazy UM/Ravenguard/WhiteScars/IF/etc.. stuff slips through and we'll end up with a 90%-of-players-play-Marines-Meta anyhow.


True, that is the reason there should be wide SM nerfs and not only IH.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 06:21:38


Post by: ClockworkZion


Lwt the meta settle before we start demanding massive nerds.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 06:43:05


Post by: Sunny Side Up


 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lwt the meta settle before we start demanding massive nerds.


Quite the opposite. Act quickly for once. We've had to slog through months and months of obviously (not nearly as) OP stuff like the Castellan, etc..

It shouldn't take months to fix these things and people, as with the Castellan, "adapting" by putting all their mid-range vehicles in some storage box is exactly what you want to avoid.

Act as quickly as humanly possible so stuff doesn't get invalidated and all lists remain playable without "adapting". If people need to adapt, you failed at balancing the game.

They fethed it up with things like the Castellan before. The idea is to learn from mistakes, not to repeat them ad infinitum.




Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 06:46:37


Post by: addnid


 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lwt the meta settle before we start demanding massive nerds.


Hah hah massive "nerds". Thanks for the laugh man, so early here at work and i am all alone, that was nice


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 07:09:52


Post by: ClockworkZion


Sunny Side Up wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lwt the meta settle before we start demanding massive nerds.


Quite the opposite. Act quickly for once. We've had to slog through months and months of obviously (not nearly as) OP stuff like the Castellan, etc..

It shouldn't take months to fix these things and people, as with the Castellan, "adapting" by putting all their mid-range vehicles in some storage box is exactly what you want to avoid.

Act as quickly as humanly possible so stuff doesn't get invalidated and all lists remain playable without "adapting". If people need to adapt, you failed at balancing the game.

They fethed it up with things like the Castellan before. The idea is to learn from mistakes, not to repeat them ad infinitum.

Knee jerk reactions to the loudest voices only ruin the game. Letting it shake out a bit and see what's causing problems is the best place to start.

And they did nerf the Castellan. Multiple times. The fact they're fine tuning the nerfs is a good thing, not a bad one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
addnid wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lwt the meta settle before we start demanding massive nerds.


Hah hah massive "nerds". Thanks for the laugh man, so early here at work and i am all alone, that was nice

Apparently autocorrect is bad at spelling and hates the word "nerf".


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 07:11:40


Post by: BrianDavion


Sunny Side Up wrote:
Marin wrote:
I don`t see any more reason to panic after IH release, ofcourse +1 flat damage to most armies best units is super good, but for that point it`s clear SM need tuning down regardless of the chapter.


Yes and no.

It's not as overall good as Iron Hands IMO, but it does invalidate a lot of army concepts. Tank Commanders, Venom Spam, Disco Lords, Knights probably, Mech Tau (with Riptides already basically gone), etc..

It's just another sucker punch.

Also, I think a lot of Marine stuff is OP or on the verge of OP, and might slip through, simply because IH are the most egregious offender. So Iron Stone and Feirros might get a nerf-bat, but all the crazy UM/Ravenguard/WhiteScars/IF/etc.. stuff slips through and we'll end up with a 90%-of-players-play-Marines-Meta anyhow.


the problem with Imperial fists is a structral issue with the game, naeml;y that mutliple attack weapons useally seen as anti-heavy infantry tradtionallyu, are often better then heavy anti-tank guns


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 07:35:27


Post by: vict0988


 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lwt the meta settle before we start demanding massive nerds.

A lack of nerds has always been a problem at GW, a good nerd would be able to estimate how many pts each unit should be worth, another nerd would be able to roughly balance relics and other free rules, another two or three nerds would be able to find unclear rules writing, six to twelve nerds (GW could re-use the same nerds) would be able to playtest every option in every release three times before release and make sure very little slips past. I say GW needs more nerds!


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 07:36:28


Post by: ClockworkZion


Oddly, I think Heavy Plasma Incinterators with an overcharge might be the best squad level weapon for tank busting. S9, -5AP, Dmg3 versus tanks means they bust tanks better than lascannons do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 vict0988 wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lwt the meta settle before we start demanding massive nerds.

A lack of nerds has always been a problem at GW, a good nerd would be able to estimate how many pts each unit should be worth, another nerd would be able to roughly balance relics and other free rules, another two or three nerds would be able to find flaws in the writing, six to twelve nerds would be able to playtest every option in every release three times before release and make sure very little slips past. I say GW needs more nerds!

They can't afford that many pocket protectors.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 07:41:16


Post by: Dai


Yeah, when I see those podcast interviews in the youtube I definitely think "those are some cool guys".


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 07:55:50


Post by: AngryAngel80


Just because they aren't cool doesn't mean they are nerds, they could just be dorks. I up vote this we need more massive nerds in GW games development now.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 08:12:42


Post by: Sunny Side Up


 ClockworkZion wrote:

Knee jerk reactions to the loudest voices only ruin the game. Letting it shake out a bit and see what's causing problems is the best place to start.

And they did nerf the Castellan. Multiple times. The fact they're fine tuning the nerfs is a good thing, not a bad one.

.


Defaming sensible re-balancing as "nerf" or "knee jerk" does not make a coherent argument.

We have the data. Even without the data, we have basic math. There's no doubt that this needs adjustment.

And even if it were "knee jerk reactions". Actually, "knee jerk reactions" haven't thus far ruined the game. What ruined 7th was rampant OP stuff draining the diversity from the game, thus historically speaking, 1000s overreacting "knee jerk reactions" would still be preferable to another overtly slow re-balancing as with the Castellan. If this were a knee jerk reaction, which it is not.

Hell, if you actually look at other games, say Magic the Gathering or so, that do have a healthy and growing competitive community of the type 40K only dreams off, they are far, far more offensively with this and certainly "don't let the meta shake out". If they have a card that is causing issues and being taken by too many people, because it's obviously good, they just ban it for competitions in five seconds flat. Mistakes do happen after all. Rather kill off that one "sorry, messed up there" thing (even at the risk at perhaps banning a few too many things that might not have needed a nerf/ban) than hurt the game overall.





Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 08:37:02


Post by: vict0988


Sunny Side Up wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:

Knee jerk reactions to the loudest voices only ruin the game. Letting it shake out a bit and see what's causing problems is the best place to start.

And they did nerf the Castellan. Multiple times. The fact they're fine tuning the nerfs is a good thing, not a bad one.

.


Defaming sensible re-balancing as "nerf" or "knee jerk" does not make a coherent argument.

We have the data. Even without the data, we have basic math. There's no doubt that this needs adjustment.

And even if it were "knee jerk reactions". Actually, "knee jerk reactions" haven't thus far ruined the game. What ruined 7th was rampant OP stuff draining the diversity from the game, thus historically speaking, 1000s overreacting "knee jerk reactions" would still be preferable to another overtly slow re-balancing as with the Castellan. If this were a knee jerk reaction, which it is not.

Hell, if you actually look at other games, say Magic the Gathering or so, that do have a healthy and growing competitive community of the type 40K only dreams off, they are far, far more offensively with this and certainly "don't let the meta shake out". If they have a card that is causing issues and being taken by too many people, because it's obviously good, they just ban it for competitions in five seconds flat. Mistakes do happen after all. Rather kill off that one "sorry, messed up there" thing (even at the risk at perhaps banning a few too many things that might not have needed a nerf/ban) than hurt the game overall.

I'm not a competitive MTG player but what are Siege Rhinos? Slow and steady is the way forward, what led 7th astray was the lack of any kind of balancing, not a set of gradual balancing updates that didn't correct the game enough. Nerf Invisibility one warp charge per 6 months and over the course of 7th it would have actually been fair.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 08:45:39


Post by: Marin


 ClockworkZion wrote:
Oddly, I think Heavy Plasma Incinterators with an overcharge might be the best squad level weapon for tank busting. S9, -5AP, Dmg3 versus tanks means they bust tanks better than lascannons do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 vict0988 wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lwt the meta settle before we start demanding massive nerds.

A lack of nerds has always been a problem at GW, a good nerd would be able to estimate how many pts each unit should be worth, another nerd would be able to roughly balance relics and other free rules, another two or three nerds would be able to find flaws in the writing, six to twelve nerds would be able to playtest every option in every release three times before release and make sure very little slips past. I say GW needs more nerds!

They can't afford that many pocket protectors.


I lost fire prism with -2 to hit from 5 hellblasters, 2 died cuz of the overcharge and shooed in death.
Non invul vehicles are losing their place of the game, since SM just destroy them to easy.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 11:17:15


Post by: Not Online!!!


And I am not unhappy about your exemple because -2 to hit should not exist in the first place.

But i get your point however truth is that was the case since codex 8 th.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 11:26:07


Post by: Ice_can


Marin wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Marin wrote:
I don`t see any more reason to panic after IH release, ofcourse +1 flat damage to most armies best units is super good, but for that point it`s clear SM need tuning down regardless of the chapter.


Yes and no.

It's not as overall good as Iron Hands IMO, but it does invalidate a lot of army concepts. Tank Commanders, Venom Spam, Disco Lords, Knights probably, Mech Tau (with Riptides already basically gone), etc..

It's just another sucker punch.

Also, I think a lot of Marine stuff is OP or on the verge of OP, and might slip through, simply because IH are the most egregious offender. So Iron Stone and Feirros might get a nerf-bat, but all the crazy UM/Ravenguard/WhiteScars/IF/etc.. stuff slips through and we'll end up with a 90%-of-players-play-Marines-Meta anyhow.


True, that is the reason there should be wide SM nerfs and not only IH.

Except Iron hands are the chapter/supliment over achieving in win ratio, other non IH marines aren't realy that unbalanced when you dig into the win ratios

Nerding the whole codex will just see it turn into cod3x ironhands supliment being the only viable way to play the faction.

GW sucks at balance even more than most. The internal supliment to supliment balance isn't even close why you think every marine list needs to be punished for IronHands Supliment I don't know.

Marines were always going to cause a ripple effect on the meta as when was the last time someone actually did well woth marines outside of really wierd finge lists like tripple repulsor codex 1.0 bobby G abuse lists?

The meta simple isn't used to fighting Armour saves.

Also if you think pre marine codex was a good meta you've obviously never seen the misery that eldar flying circuses inflict.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 11:29:46


Post by: Karol


And they did nerf the Castellan. Multiple times. The fact they're fine tuning the nerfs is a good thing, not a bad one.

okey, but GW "nerfs" are bad. I mean look at Inari, they nerf, and nothing happened they were still top, nerfed again and again, and yet again, and they were still at the top. So the nerfs may as well have not happened, if they were winning more then others. The castellans come and hard counter Inari, and a few months later GW makes a new Inari codex, which is just kills the army as a playable faction.
Also how many years does GW need to fix an army. The GK were considered too good in which edition 4th or 5th, right? So they have been fixing them for 3-4 editions. one could expect that after so many years, they would know how to do it. Specially as in the mean time, they were able to produce good armies, to every other faction.
Slow nerfs, are only good when they either don't effect you, because your army is good. Because with slow changes you get to play the same good army longer. Or if the changes are done to other armies, because again you get to play with your good stuff no problem. Slow changes when you play an army that is bad, are horrible to expiriance.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 11:30:00


Post by: Not Online!!!


Marin is an eldar player.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 11:46:56


Post by: Orodhen


Sunny Side Up wrote:
Hell, if you actually look at other games, say Magic the Gathering or so, that do have a healthy and growing competitive community of the type 40K only dreams off, they are far, far more offensively with this and certainly "don't let the meta shake out". If they have a card that is causing issues and being taken by too many people, because it's obviously good, they just ban it for competitions in five seconds flat. Mistakes do happen after all. Rather kill off that one "sorry, messed up there" thing (even at the risk at perhaps banning a few too many things that might not have needed a nerf/ban) than hurt the game overall.


There's a big difference between banning a card and banning a model someone spent hours of their time assembling and painting.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 11:53:05


Post by: vict0988


 Orodhen wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Hell, if you actually look at other games, say Magic the Gathering or so, that do have a healthy and growing competitive community of the type 40K only dreams off, they are far, far more offensively with this and certainly "don't let the meta shake out". If they have a card that is causing issues and being taken by too many people, because it's obviously good, they just ban it for competitions in five seconds flat. Mistakes do happen after all. Rather kill off that one "sorry, messed up there" thing (even at the risk at perhaps banning a few too many things that might not have needed a nerf/ban) than hurt the game overall.


There's a big difference between banning a card and banning a model someone spent hours of their time assembling and painting.

Not if its a 200 dollar card and banning it halves the value.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 11:58:09


Post by: Karol


 vict0988 wrote:

Not if its a 200 dollar card and banning it halves the value.


yeah, a friend of my bought a playset of field of the dead, and it looks that with masters tournament decks, having the cards in 42% of all decks, and the 2 month sooner emergancy card errata hastened, he just spent a lot of money for cards that are going to lose a lot of worth very soon.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/17 12:20:12


Post by: topaxygouroun i


MiG has card rotation. Can't apply this to Warhammer. Imagine you have to shelf all the models you buy every single year, and can only use them in special formats if your local area supports them.

Banning models is not a good idea. Making them useless due to powercreep is also not a good idea tho. I really do not enjoy bringing out my Rubric marines for 18 pts a piece when the intercessor can shoot 36" , ap-3, 3 damage for 17 pts and have an extra wound on top of that. And CA will come, but the thing is, we can't really drop Rubrics down to 13 ppm to justify them because that's how much the basic marine costs. We also can't make the intercessor 20+ pts because they won't get played any more.

So what do we do? There are armies out there that really can't play the game any more. Tyranids for instance. Can't even do the genestealer trick any more, not when the IH overwatches on 4+ rerollable, and they don't have any other tricks to begin with. What are tyranids gonna do? Wait for another year just to receive mediocre stuff again? Because I seriously doubt that armies like Tyranids or Thousand Sons will receive super doctrines and overlapping blanket rules.

Seriously, that 36", ap-3, 3 damage basic troop tho....


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 13:23:50


Post by: Bharring


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's really going out of the way to defending the person that left their wallet unattended. It's already known as naive to just trust leaving such valuables unattended, ergo most of the fault lies on the person leaving it there.


Or, you know, the person who finds the wallet can also turn it in to the lost-and-found, or use the contact information to mail it to the owner.

That's us telling GW to fix their rules. Good catch!

Saying "GW, fix your crap" is more akin to telling Bob not to forget his wallet. It's an attempt at a preemptive action that, at best, has a marginal improvement on the frequency of the connundrum. Returning the wallet to Bob (or someone who can get it to Bob) is more akin to just not being a douche.

Also, how is saying "Bob is at fault for being inatttentive, AND you're at fault for stealing the wallet" "going out of the way to defending the person"? It's actively accusing the person (of inattentiveness).

It's like you think that, if there's another party at fault in any way, you're blameless. That's not how morality works. If you steal, you stole. Whether you're pickpocketing an oblivious tourist or breaking into Fort Knox.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Suzuteo wrote:
I just opened the last page, and I can only assume that I arrived in the midst of a tortured analogy gone too far?

It was a redirect of being accused of battered-wife-syndrome (explicitly). I tried to redirect it to a less inflamatory "Stole a wallet insufficiently protected" because spousal abuse and psychological torture should be entirely offlimits here.

The conversation continued because some posters apparently believe stealing is entirely justified - and in fact the right thing to do - if you can get away with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
topaxygouroun i wrote:
MiG has card rotation. Can't apply this to Warhammer. Imagine you have to shelf all the models you buy every single year, and can only use them in special formats if your local area supports them.

It kind-of *is* "Card Rotation". They are "rotating out" old models, while not "rotating out" old models that were "repritnted" (still in production, even if it's a different kit).


Banning models is not a good idea.

Emphatically agree.
Making them useless due to powercreep is also not a good idea tho.

I could accept "legacy" units/rules that don't fit into the modern rulesset or balance schema getting rules that point them out of meta consideration. As a lesser evil. It gives them a tool to allow really special or crazy rules to exist, while not allowing them to negatively impact the meta.

Doing it as SOP, though, is a terrible idea. It should only be used when needed for extreme cases.
I really do not enjoy bringing out my Rubric marines for 18 pts a piece when the intercessor can shoot 36" , ap-3, 3 damage for 17 pts and have an extra wound on top of that. And CA will come, but the thing is, we can't really drop Rubrics down to 13 ppm to justify them because that's how much the basic marine costs. We also can't make the intercessor 20+ pts because they won't get played any more.

I just assumed that was GW flubbing balance once again.


So what do we do? There are armies out there that really can't play the game any more. Tyranids for instance. Can't even do the genestealer trick any more, not when the IH overwatches on 4+ rerollable, and they don't have any other tricks to begin with. What are tyranids gonna do? Wait for another year just to receive mediocre stuff again? Because I seriously doubt that armies like Tyranids or Thousand Sons will receive super doctrines and overlapping blanket rules.

Seriously, that 36", ap-3, 3 damage basic troop tho....

Lament that the glory days of 8th have come to an end. I'd argue 8th was the best period of balance this game has seen since at least 6th. But the new SM codex strongly suggests they've changed direction at GW.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 13:42:54


Post by: Daedalus81


Sunny Side Up wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:

Knee jerk reactions to the loudest voices only ruin the game. Letting it shake out a bit and see what's causing problems is the best place to start.

And they did nerf the Castellan. Multiple times. The fact they're fine tuning the nerfs is a good thing, not a bad one.

.


Defaming sensible re-balancing as "nerf" or "knee jerk" does not make a coherent argument.

We have the data. Even without the data, we have basic math. There's no doubt that this needs adjustment.

And even if it were "knee jerk reactions". Actually, "knee jerk reactions" haven't thus far ruined the game. What ruined 7th was rampant OP stuff draining the diversity from the game, thus historically speaking, 1000s overreacting "knee jerk reactions" would still be preferable to another overtly slow re-balancing as with the Castellan. If this were a knee jerk reaction, which it is not.

Hell, if you actually look at other games, say Magic the Gathering or so, that do have a healthy and growing competitive community of the type 40K only dreams off, they are far, far more offensively with this and certainly "don't let the meta shake out". If they have a card that is causing issues and being taken by too many people, because it's obviously good, they just ban it for competitions in five seconds flat. Mistakes do happen after all. Rather kill off that one "sorry, messed up there" thing (even at the risk at perhaps banning a few too many things that might not have needed a nerf/ban) than hurt the game overall.



We have data from before a considerable number of nerfs. It is quite prudent to let those sink in and determine if more fine tuning is required.

I know we all feel like the other buffs are still a lot, but this is marines we're talking about. And non-soup marines at that. We still have yet to see the extent of Eldar changes. It's time to chill a bit and get more data -- this isn't the same thing with Magic where you can ban a unit and call it good.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 13:55:34


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


Remember when the Kellermorph was going to ruin the game because it would effortlessly kill all the characters in the game?

Needs. More. Data. Stop knee-jerking. That one was "obvious to anyone with a brain" too.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 13:59:11


Post by: Karol



Lament that the glory days of 8th have come to an end. I'd argue 8th was the best period of balance this game has seen since at least 6th. But the new SM codex strongly suggests they've changed direction at GW.

I think that only people that could army hope or had good initial rules can think og 8th ed as good. I don't play necrons, but I can't imagine a necron players saying in a few months, yes 8th was a good and fun edition to play in.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 14:01:19


Post by: Bharring


Karol wrote:

Lament that the glory days of 8th have come to an end. I'd argue 8th was the best period of balance this game has seen since at least 6th. But the new SM codex strongly suggests they've changed direction at GW.

I think that only people that could army hope or had good initial rules can think og 8th ed as good. I don't play necrons, but I can't imagine a necron players saying in a few months, yes 8th was a good and fun edition to play in.

But those Necron players were far better off than IG or DE or numerous other factions in previous editions. I'm not saying the best period of 8th was a shining example of balance - I'm saying was better than what came before and likely what comes afterwards.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 14:05:11


Post by: p5freak


Necrons were never top tier so far in 8th. They did have some top 10 placings after their point drops, but thats it. Right now with SM growing strong they will be mid to low tier, again.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 14:08:04


Post by: Karol


Okey, maybe this is me being a player who played only one edition. But, what does a necron player care about 7th or 6th ed, if he played only in 8th?

that is why I don't understand the whole punish army X for being too good 7 editions ago. Or the whole every army has its time to be good, only for some armies good means every editions and others have a 10 or longer wait time between being good. telling someone who is 15, that maybe in 10 years his army is going to be good, and meanwhile he should learn to like to paint or write fanfiction is just stupid.

Better then in the past only matters to people that had bad armies in the past, and their armies got better in 8th. Kudos to them.

Also what about people that played in 7th or 6th edition, the armies they had back then were bad, and they stayed bad?
The argument that stuff got better for others won't hold much worth for them either. It is like telling a kid in a warzone that wars 300 years ago were worse, and that they should feel happy, because a continent away the avarge life expectancy of other kids rose by 20%.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 14:12:10


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


That's what playing Black Templars has been like, with a side-order of "shut up because Marines are good" when what made them good (Gladius) would've required buying a whole new Marine army.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 14:14:25


Post by: Karol


People had to buy a real roman sword to get rules in prior editions? Madness.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 14:33:01


Post by: Bharring


Karol wrote:
Okey, maybe this is me being a player who played only one edition. But, what does a necron player care about 7th or 6th ed, if he played only in 8th?

If you've only ever played one rulesset, that rulesset is by definition the worst rulesset you've ever seen.

Remember that balance is relative. Perfect balance is impossible. So how "good" or "bad" the balance is can only reasonable be measured against other rulessets. So, if you only know one, it's virtually impossible to judge it fairly.


that is why I don't understand the whole punish army X for being too good 7 editions ago.

Very few people support that concept.


Or the whole every army has its time to be good,

It's less about "It's fair because every army gets to be OP from time to time", and more about "It's not unfair specifically to $faction, it's just unfair over all, and they happen to be the one hosed right now".
only for some armies good means every editions and others have a 10 or longer wait time between being good.

No army that I can think of has been not-good for all of the past 10 years. No army has been "good" for all of the past 10 years.
telling someone who is 15, that maybe in 10 years his army is going to be good, and meanwhile he should learn to like to paint or write fanfiction is just stupid.

I think you're missing a major point here. Nobody is saying you should learn to like the non-balance aspects of this hobby because the army you picked was bad. What gets said is don't fixate on your army being bad, because balance is so unreliable. And thus, if great balance is required for you to enjoy 40k, you're not going to enjoy it. What gets said is that the modelling and fluff can make this hobby worthwhile to a lot of people, whereas the balance and rules generally can't. What gets said is that, if you don't enjoy the balance/crunch as is, and don't enjoy anything else about the hobby, why engage in the hobby? You might have fun in 10 years or so when the crunch might be in your favor, but that's a huge risk. And that's a boatload of your time and energy, invested in things you don't care about.

What gets said is do things you enjoy. Don't just continue doing something you hate with hopes it magically morphs into something you think you might like.

Better then in the past only matters to people that had bad armies in the past, and their armies got better in 8th. Kudos to them.

You miss the point. You're fixating on one faction disadvantaged during what I'm calling the best modern era of the game. My point was that, while it may be suboptimal for those players, it was *more* suboptimal for *more* players previously.

Also what about people that played in 7th or 6th edition, the armies they had back then were bad, and they stayed bad?

Again, this comes down to what the standard is. If the standard is "Perfect balance", nothing will ever live up. Even Chess is skewed. My standard for considering recent-8th the "best modern era of the game" isn't perfection, or any other abstract unknowable state. The standard I'm using is "other modern eras of the game". Against that standard, it measures up. So the point that it has it's flaws is refuted by showing the same flaws were more pronounced in the other modern eras of the game. That's not to say it couldn't be better, only that it never was better.

The argument that stuff got better for others won't hold much worth for them either.

Are you familiar with the quote "Democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time"? The argument isn't that things are perfect. The argument isn't that things couldn't be better. The argument is that it is better than what came before. And better than if we applied random-ish halfbaked fixes (no matter how loudly proponents will scream about their fix being the silver bullet). The argument isn't intended to tell Necron players "Screw you, accept that this is perfect". It's intended to tell them "Well, it could be worse. And always has been". It's an attempt to say "Better Necron players be 50% screwed than DE, IG, Nid, Tau, etc players be 95% screwed".

It is like telling a kid in a warzone that wars 300 years ago were worse, and that they should feel happy, because a continent away the avarge life expectancy of other kids rose by 20%.
That rejection is like saying we should abandon all civilization because we haven't managed to prevent all violence. It's rejecting improvements because there are still flaws. It's refusing to acknowledge any good in the absence of perfection. It doesn't help that kid in the warzone. It just puts more kids in worse warzones.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 15:38:25


Post by: Karol



If you've only ever played one rulesset, that rulesset is by definition the worst rulesset you've ever seen.

Remember that balance is relative. Perfect balance is impossible. So how "good" or "bad" the balance is can only reasonable be measured against other rulessets. So, if you only know one, it's virtually impossible to judge it fairly.

I haven't played anything other then 8th ed, but from what people told me, GK in 7th and 6th were horrible too. So if did play back then, the game would not get any better for me. All I would have would be more years of unfun. And it ain't a question of perfect balance. I don't even know what that is. All I know that there was less then 6 months between eldar coming out and GK, and both books were writen, by what feels like either two different studios or for two different games.

But it doesn't have to be just my army. 8.5 csm standing next to 8.5 sm are hard to compare too. It is like one thing has one rule, when the other has 5-6, or more and synergies.

No army that I can think of has been not-good for all of the past 10 years. No army has been "good" for all of the past 10 years.

Well I don't know how long 6th or 7th were. But am assuming they were at least 2 years long. this means minimum of 6 bad years for GK. And it doesn't look as if they were to get better. They are even gone from the lore right now. In fact they are gone from the lore since their codex came out, and they were the 3ed codex to come out in 8th ed.

What gets said is that, if you don't enjoy the balance/crunch as is, and don't enjoy anything else about the hobby, why engage in the hobby? You might have fun in 10 years or so when the crunch might be in your favor, but that's a huge risk. And that's a boatload of your time and energy, invested in things you don't care about.

Because nothing in the rules says that you need to paint or write lore to play the game. Plus, what If I wait for years, with my money stuck in GK, paint and do all the other stuff that makes me spend more money on them, and then GW just pulls a WFB bretonians on them, and puts all of them in to legacy or just removes them from the game? this would means, I wasted a ton of time and money, and extra money and time doing things I don't really like, waiting for something that wouldn't happen.

You miss the point. You're fixating on one faction disadvantaged during what I'm calling the best modern era of the game. My point was that, while it may be suboptimal for those players, it was *more* suboptimal for *more* players previously.


So wait playing w40k doesn't mean you pick one faction and play that, you should pick multiple factions, just in case one of them is or ends up bad? That is kind of a fethed up to be honest, because the armies cost a lot of money. Plus it sounds a bit like a salesman trick to buy more stuff.


Again, this comes down to what the standard is. If the standard is "Perfect balance", nothing will ever live up. Even Chess is skewed. My standard for considering recent-8th the "best modern era of the game" isn't perfection, or any other abstract unknowable state. The standard I'm using is "other modern eras of the game". Against that standard, it measures up. So the point that it has it's flaws is refuted by showing the same flaws were more pronounced in the other modern eras of the game. That's not to say it couldn't be better, only that it never was better.

I don't know what perfect balance is. What I do know now, is that the guy who sold me my army, couldn't sell it to anyone in 6th or 7th ed. This means GK were bad for at least 3 editions, out of which one I have played in. Plus from what people are saying about the prior editions, a lot of the best armies are the same armies that were best in prior editions. Eldar were never a bad army, tau were often strong, marines were often a strong list too etc. What kind of an improved is it, when bad factions stay bad, some factions get worse, and the good factions stay good? How is the good part checked then and based on what?

Are you familiar with the quote "Democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time"?
Not really people here consider democracy as just bad. And that it was better in the past.

The argument is that it is better than what came before.

But it isn't better. If I bougth GK in 6th or 7th ed, then they would have been bad back then, and bad now. While if someone play eldar in 6th or 7th, his army would be good then and it is good now. So it is like the saying we have that goes somehow like this "each year the world gets better for rich people".

. It's rejecting improvements because there are still flaws. It's refusing to acknowledge any good in the absence of perfection. It doesn't help that kid in the warzone. It just puts more kids in worse warzones

What improvments? my faction was bad in the past, and only got worse with time. I mean, I don't even have to go through different editions to check this. When GK could do turn 1 deep strikes with most of their army, they were better then they are now. Before GK transports got a price hike, because of a model that wasn't part of their codex, they got worse. Specially when their whole codex was build around the transported being priced the original way, and the army doing first turn stuff. Each new rules set for other armies, each new options and way to play, is downgrade to GK. Specially when other armies suddenly get turn 1 deep strike, turn 1 assault etc.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 16:28:30


Post by: Bharring


Karol wrote:

If you've only ever played one rulesset, that rulesset is by definition the worst rulesset you've ever seen.

Remember that balance is relative. Perfect balance is impossible. So how "good" or "bad" the balance is can only reasonable be measured against other rulessets. So, if you only know one, it's virtually impossible to judge it fairly.

I haven't played anything other then 8th ed, but from what people told me, GK in 7th and 6th were horrible too. So if did play back then, the game would not get any better for me. All I would have would be more years of unfun. And it ain't a question of perfect balance. I don't even know what that is. All I know that there was less then 6 months between eldar coming out and GK, and both books were writen, by what feels like either two different studios or for two different games.

But it doesn't have to be just my army. 8.5 csm standing next to 8.5 sm are hard to compare too. It is like one thing has one rule, when the other has 5-6, or more and synergies.

That's nothing new. 40k has never been known for great balance. The Ork 'dex in 7th came out not too long before the Eldar one. Ask Ork players how that went for them.


No army that I can think of has been not-good for all of the past 10 years. No army has been "good" for all of the past 10 years.

Well I don't know how long 6th or 7th were. But am assuming they were at least 2 years long. this means minimum of 6 bad years for GK. And it doesn't look as if they were to get better. They are even gone from the lore right now. In fact they are gone from the lore since their codex came out, and they were the 3ed codex to come out in 8th ed.

Ironically, about 6 years ago, I don't remember if it was late 5th or early 6th, GK *were* the top dog. They have certainly not gone 10 years being garbage.



What gets said is that, if you don't enjoy the balance/crunch as is, and don't enjoy anything else about the hobby, why engage in the hobby? You might have fun in 10 years or so when the crunch might be in your favor, but that's a huge risk. And that's a boatload of your time and energy, invested in things you don't care about.

Because nothing in the rules says that you need to paint or write lore to play the game. Plus, what If I wait for years, with my money stuck in GK, paint and do all the other stuff that makes me spend more money on them, and then GW just pulls a WFB bretonians on them, and puts all of them in to legacy or just removes them from the game? this would means, I wasted a ton of time and money, and extra money and time doing things I don't really like, waiting for something that wouldn't happen.

Nothing in the rules say you must play this game. Football (either kind) requires a lot of hobbyist attention that i don't enjoy (watching games, training, practicing, being outside, etc). So I don't play Football. It'd be silly for people to redesign Football to fit what I like.

If I spent lots of time and money on gear and training for Football, that was just me making bad choices.

Don't waste time and money on a hobby you don't like, waiting for it to become something it's not.


You miss the point. You're fixating on one faction disadvantaged during what I'm calling the best modern era of the game. My point was that, while it may be suboptimal for those players, it was *more* suboptimal for *more* players previously.


So wait playing w40k doesn't mean you pick one faction and play that, you should pick multiple factions, just in case one of them is or ends up bad? That is kind of a fethed up to be honest, because the armies cost a lot of money. Plus it sounds a bit like a salesman trick to buy more stuff.

No. Completely backwards. Being into 40k doesn't mean pick multiple factions so one will be good. It means being into what 40k is, not what it's not. It means being into 40k regardless of whether your army is OP or trash. It means your enjoyment not being predicated on your army's "Performance" competitively. More armies might increase the odds of being competitive, but picking a competitive hobby is a much better way to enjoy a competitive hobby. 40k, historically, has never had great balance. There's no reason to think ever it will. That doesn't make it a bad hobby. It just makes it a bad choice for people looking for a competitive hobby.


Again, this comes down to what the standard is. If the standard is "Perfect balance", nothing will ever live up. Even Chess is skewed. My standard for considering recent-8th the "best modern era of the game" isn't perfection, or any other abstract unknowable state. The standard I'm using is "other modern eras of the game". Against that standard, it measures up. So the point that it has it's flaws is refuted by showing the same flaws were more pronounced in the other modern eras of the game. That's not to say it couldn't be better, only that it never was better.

I don't know what perfect balance is. What I do know now, is that the guy who sold me my army, couldn't sell it to anyone in 6th or 7th ed. This means GK were bad for at least 3 editions, out of which one I have played in.

You should hear Ork or DE balance history. Sure, they're better right now, but they've gone through much worse than you are.

Plus from what people are saying about the prior editions, a lot of the best armies are the same armies that were best in prior editions.

CWE and SM, sure. IG were top tier in 8th - not so in 7th. DE were top tier in 8th - not so in 7th. CSM. Chaos. Not a lot of the top armies in 7th were top in 8th. That's just selection bias

Eldar were never a bad army

Most of 6th, CWE were bad. They had some low points before that too. They *have* been bad. Being the most consistently top tier army, they haven't been bad often. But don't assume they've never been bad.

tau were often strong,

Not really. They had a brilliant month in 6th, and were still better than many, but after a month the 6e CWE book came out and overshadowed them a ton. And before the T'au 6E book they were in a bad place.

marines were often a strong list too etc.

Often, sure. But they have also been trash

What kind of an improved is it, when bad factions stay bad,

IG didn't stay bad. They got better.
DE didn't stay bad THey got better.

some factions get worse,

Probably the two biggest "got worse" factions were CWE and SM. The two top armies. So isn't that a good thing?

and the good factions stay good?

Because most good factions didn't stay good. And those that did got a *lot* worse. The gap between the baseline and the top CWE or SM lists dropped tremendously between 7E and 8E.

How is the good part checked then and based on what?

By noting how much less OP the top-tier stuff was, and how much less trash the bottom-tier stuff was. Also by how much closer to baseline the majority of the options were.

Are you familiar with the quote "Democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time"?
Not really people here consider democracy as just bad. And that it was better in the past.

People everywhere consider a lot of stupid things. That doesn't make them right.

The argument is that it is better than what came before.

But it isn't better. If I bougth GK in 6th or 7th ed, then they would have been bad back then, and bad now. While if someone play eldar in 6th or 7th, his army would be good then and it is good now.

Well, for starters, if they're still playing Serpent Spam from 6th, that army is probably going to lose to even an optimized GK list. Same with the 6E Seer Star list. Or WK Support list. Or Beast Star. Or 7E WK/ScatterBIke lists. CWE might still be good, but not the same units/army.

And even the army - it's not nearly as OP as it was in 6th or 7th. Armies that had no chance against CWE then are on even playing fields in 8th now. That's what makes it better. You're not auto-lose if you take IG, DE, CSM, Chaos, T'au, Nids, or more against CWE today. That's a massive improvement.

So it is like the saying we have that goes somehow like this "each year the world gets better for rich people".

Except that, in this case, each year the "rich people" are someone else. And the world has been getting for everyone else at a faster rate than the rich people. The reason I say it's the most balanced is because, to abuse your analogy - The "rich" might be getting "richer", but the "poor" are getting "richer" at a much faster rate, closing the gap. And there are randomish swaps between who's "rich" and who's "poor". The fact that there exist a subset of "poor" people who are still poor doesn't mean things aren't better off, as a whole.

It's rejecting improvements because there are still flaws. It's refusing to acknowledge any good in the absence of perfection. It doesn't help that kid in the warzone. It just puts more kids in worse warzones

What improvments?

See above. Or just look at the relative varaition in the top-10s for most tournaments now vs most tournaments in 6th/7th.

my faction was bad in the past, and only got worse with time.
Do you really think this is the worst GK has ever been? That's laughably wrong - even the CA where everyone got points cuts, GK weren't made good, but were the most improved.

I mean, I don't even have to go through different editions to check this. When GK could do turn 1 deep strikes with most of their army, they were better then they are now. Before GK transports got a price hike, because of a model that wasn't part of their codex, they got worse. Specially when their whole codex was build around the transported being priced the original way, and the army doing first turn stuff. Each new rules set for other armies, each new options and way to play, is downgrade to GK. Specially when other armies suddenly get turn 1 deep strike, turn 1 assault etc.

Yes, balance creep is a problem. Every army suffers for it. I wish it weren't here. But if these are your biggest concerns, you don't realize how bad other factions have had it. LotD were a faction that auto-lost every single game at the end of their first battle round. Orks have had a hilariously bad track record on their rules. Balance Creep has impacted almost every era of the game, and almost every book released.

I'm not saying there are no problems. I'm saying the problems are less than in previous eras. Pointing out that there is a problem doesn't refute that.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 16:48:49


Post by: ClockworkZion


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:

Knee jerk reactions to the loudest voices only ruin the game. Letting it shake out a bit and see what's causing problems is the best place to start.

And they did nerf the Castellan. Multiple times. The fact they're fine tuning the nerfs is a good thing, not a bad one.

.


Defaming sensible re-balancing as "nerf" or "knee jerk" does not make a coherent argument.

We have the data. Even without the data, we have basic math. There's no doubt that this needs adjustment.

And even if it were "knee jerk reactions". Actually, "knee jerk reactions" haven't thus far ruined the game. What ruined 7th was rampant OP stuff draining the diversity from the game, thus historically speaking, 1000s overreacting "knee jerk reactions" would still be preferable to another overtly slow re-balancing as with the Castellan. If this were a knee jerk reaction, which it is not.

Hell, if you actually look at other games, say Magic the Gathering or so, that do have a healthy and growing competitive community of the type 40K only dreams off, they are far, far more offensively with this and certainly "don't let the meta shake out". If they have a card that is causing issues and being taken by too many people, because it's obviously good, they just ban it for competitions in five seconds flat. Mistakes do happen after all. Rather kill off that one "sorry, messed up there" thing (even at the risk at perhaps banning a few too many things that might not have needed a nerf/ban) than hurt the game overall.



We have data from before a considerable number of nerfs. It is quite prudent to let those sink in and determine if more fine tuning is required.

I know we all feel like the other buffs are still a lot, but this is marines we're talking about. And non-soup marines at that. We still have yet to see the extent of Eldar changes. It's time to chill a bit and get more data -- this isn't the same thing with Magic where you can ban a unit and call it good.

Exactly. It's quite possible, probable even, that the voices that shout the loudest aren't shouting the smartest.

I'm not claiming people are dumb (despite working in retail), but often the initial kneejerk reactions don't really identify the real issues with an army and what's breaking it. I mean how many people were freaking out about a Dreadnought for at least a week before IH Flyer spam was shown to be even more broken? Data collection is a process and should involve more than just the initial data point you find first.


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 21:41:22


Post by: DanielFM


Came here expecting IF discussion, found two pages of unrelated balance whining.
I guess we can blame the lack of rumours. There was a huge leak of Salamanders goodies, but almost nothing about IF. Is their supplement so lame?


Imperial fists... @ 2019/10/18 22:56:30


Post by: ClockworkZion


DanielFM wrote:
Came here expecting IF discussion, found two pages of unrelated balance whining.
I guess we can blame the lack of rumours. There was a huge leak of Salamanders goodies, but almost nothing about IF. Is their supplement so lame?

It's more that GW only showed us the stuff Valrak spoiled. GMG should have their video on the army out tomorrow for us to drool over.