These are my suggestions:


Calculated Fury:
The unique doctrine should only apply to infantry. Iron Hands already have a powerful chapter tactic that bolsters their vehicles.

Iron Father Feirros:
Increase cost to 220 points. Feirros is the best Astartes named character in terms of utility (In the HQ slot), specifically when combined with Iron Hands tactics and rules. His costs need to reflect this simple fact.

March of the Ancients:
Change to 2CP, and can only be used once per battle. At the moment if you have a Dread with less than 10 wounds in your list you automatically use this strat. At least make me think about it.

Cogitated Martyrdom:
Change to 3CP. It costs 3CP to make some Intercessors target a character. Make it cost 3CP to negate their attacks in return. Alternatively change it to 2CP but limit's it's use to the Tactical Doctrine.

Machine Empathy:
Change to 2CP. Far too powerful when combined with Feirros and the psychic power

Iron Stone:
Change the effect to work only once per battle. Activate at the start of a turn of the controlling player's choosing. This is currently the best relic in the game, it need to be toned down.

Souls of Iron:
Change to once per battle, or change cost to 3CP. In combination with a CP re-roll and regular deny-the-witch this makes Iron Hands shut down psykers too reliably.

Blessing of the Machine God:
Change to WC6

Psysteel Armour:
Change to WC7

From what I've read on the current scene of competitive Iron Hand builds they're fairly varied and many do not even run as pure Iron Hands, but rather successors. It would appear what most of the winning lists build around is not Feirros, but rather the ignoring the penalty of moving and firing heavy weapons and re-rolling 1s.

A lot of the things you are suggesting is attacking things that are not really the core problem, but I see your strategy. Nerf a bit of everything to bring the whole thing down which is fair, but personally I think if a few things are the outstanding offenders then those things should be specifically targeted.

How to go about that I am not yet certain as I've not played enough as or against them yet.

text removed,
Reds8n

Azrael's invul doesn't work on vehicles. That's also only one of his amazing rules.

You don't know much about his abilities it seems, or why they are so strong in the context of the full IH rules

My sweet summer child, I urge you to take a look at some of the recent podcasts that discuss the IH. 40k stat centre and Chapter Tactics. I don't want to write essays on why he's so strong.

 Ishagu wrote:
Azrael's invul doesn't work on vehicles. That's also only one of his amazing rules.

You don't know much about his abilities it seems, or why they are so strong in the context of the full IH rules

My sweet summer child, I urge you to take a look at some of the recent podcasts that discuss the IH. 40k stat centre and Chapter Tactics. I don't want to write essays on why he's so strong.

I've seen his abilities. He's not worth 220 points. You're literally throwing out an arbitrary number. OR are you saying you calculated it?

Except he's the best named HQ character in the Astartes faction.

He heals vehicles, can increase the BS of a unit to 2+ even if damaged, has fantastic shooting and melee, and doubles the survivability of a unit like a Repulsor wounded by anything AP-3

He is worth those points yes. Some people think he's worth MORE. Even if you can't understand why when combined with various strats he's so powerful, doesn't mean he isn't.

Not sure about 220, but 185 for what he offers is the minimum.

He is not only a 5++ bot, he also has some impressive stats and other buffs.

 Ishagu wrote:
Except he's the best named HQ character in the Astartes faction.

He heals vehicles, can increase the BS of a unit to 2+ even if damaged, has fantastic shooting and melee, and doubles the survivability of a unit like a Repulsor wounded by anything AP-3

He is worth those points yes. Some people think he's worth MORE. Even if you can't understand why when combined with various strats he's so powerful, doesn't mean he isn't.

Heals vehicles that are hanged up on and die in a turn because healing is basically useless, doesn't give everyone full rerolls to hit like a regular Chapter Master ala Azrael would, and his shooting is basically just that of a Heavy Bolter. Oh and in melee he hits on a 3+ with no rerolls.

He's not near the best Marine character and your ignorance is outstanding. You just made an arbitrary number you pulled out of thin air.

IH have free re rolls lol, they don't need them.

He can heal 6 wounds a turn for 1CP, a unit can recover 9 in one turn with the Iron Hands.

You really don't know about the rule stacking and combinations it seems, Slayer-Fan. Go read the supplement in detail then come back.
You dismiss something you know nothing about. But that's the Internet, hey ho.

 Ishagu wrote:
IH have free re rolls lol, they don't need them.

He can heal 6 wounds a turn for 1CP, a unit can recover 9 in one turn with the Iron Hands.

You really don't know about the rule stacking and combinations it seems, Slayer-Fan. Go read the supplement in detail then come back.

They have free rerolls of 1 for Heavy Weapons. Nowhere near the same thing.

Is Feirros the only character in an IH army? Do I need him specifically to grant re roll auras I can get for cheap from another character that I will always take?

The problem is that IH don't really have anything in terms of unqiue models or units, but GW (or more probably, a major fanboy on staff) wants them to have a unique subfaction book anyway. As there's nothing models-wise to add, all they can differentiate them by is rules, and GW basically chose to do that by giving them a combination of rules and abilities that most other factions only get access to one of or that can only be applied to single units via Stratagems.

IH vehicles for instance are essentially getting the Cadian, Valhallan, and Tallarn doctrines with the Defensive Gunners stratagem and the Tenacious warlord trait, all active at the same time on all their units, on top of their existing Space Marine abilities and doctrines.

Short of major points increases or removing multiple abilities, I'm not sure there is a way to balance them.

The fact that I can stack the following onto an IH Repulsor looks comical when you write it down:

-Ignore wounds on a 6+
-Profile doesn't degrade
-Overwatch on a 5+ or even 4+
-5+ Invul
-Reduce Damage by 1
-Repaired 6+D3 wounds a turn
-Always hit on a 2+
-Improve Save by 1
-Natural re-roll 1s
-Extra AP for shooting attacks
-Same re roll auras as other chapters


These are the crazy stacking bonuses that make units over powered in an Iron Hands army.

How else did you expect GW to shift a boat load of Primaris?

 Elbows wrote:
How else did you expect GW to shift a boat load of Primaris?

lol, that's the thing. They literally stated that the Astartes faction are still by far the biggest sellers

I was at the Michigan GT this past weekend. I saw a ton of R.Ex. of the 118 people playing, I saw probably 20 total. With 2-3 people using triple. Of the people using them, 4 were pure IH. Others were soup. If anything needs adjusted, it's that particular vehicle. But exactly how? How do you balance a single unit that can be used in a dozen armies without making the non offending armies strictly worse?

You alter the Iron Hands rules, not the unit rules.

A Repuslor in any other army is a little bit over-costed. Great firepower, but easy to destroy.

 Ishagu wrote:
These are my suggestions:


Calculated Fury:
The unique doctrine should only apply to infantry. Iron Hands already have a powerful chapter tactic that bolsters their vehicles.
Agree. Vehicles have enough buffs without this.

Iron Father Feirros:
Increase cost to 220 points. Feirros is the best Astartes named character in terms of utility (In the HQ slot), specifically when combined with Iron Hands tactics and rules. His costs need to reflect this simple fact.
220 is a bit too pricey. 150-170 seems fairer as this is +50% his base cost essentially. Increase him too much and no one would use him.

March of the Ancients:
Change to 2CP, and can only be used once per battle. At the moment if you have a Dread with less than 10 wounds in your list you automatically use this strat. At least make me think about it.
1CP for one dread, 3CP for two dreads. Follows the relic strat cost.

Cogitated Martyrdom:
Change to 3CP. It costs 3CP to make some Intercessors target a character. Make it cost 3CP to negate their attacks in return. Alternatively change it to 2CP but limit's it's use to the Tactical Doctrine.
2CP in the tectical doctrine is fair and much more sensible.

Machine Empathy:
Change to 2CP. Far too powerful when combined with Feirros and the psychic power
This is a combo issue, the strat is fine. I'd like to see the nerf on the Psychic power by either making the power harder to cast or only effect unfixed vehicles

Iron Stone:
Change the effect to work only once per battle. Activate at the start of a turn of the controlling player's choosing. This is currently the best relic in the game, it need to be toned down.
Rather than once a game, make it effect one MODEL only a turn.

Souls of Iron:
Change to once per battle, or change cost to 3CP. In combination with a CP re-roll and regular deny-the-witch this makes Iron Hands shut down psykers too reliably.
3CP is too expensive for essentially an auto DTW on a 4+, but it is an excellent strat. Make it allow you to deny with a non psyker character using normal rules for DTW and its much fairer like the Custodes strat.


Blessing of the Machine God:
Change to WC6
agree

Psysteel Armour:
Change to WC7
keep it the same, as other powers are much better

- IH Chapter tactic: take away Overwatch on 5s and 6s
- IH super-doctrine to: re-roll 1s to hit when stationary (while in Dev Doctrine), full stop.
- Ironstone: max 1 target per turn
- Character Dreadnought stratagem: max 1 per game
- double repair stratagem: on unit not already repaired this turn
- Feirros: up his cost to 150-160 at least

This would be a start. IH would still be very good but less obscene.

One of the hardest things I find about balancing the Iron stone is that it swings from amazingly strong or really useless. If it only works on one model then it's pretty much useless if you have more than one vehicle because the other guy is just gonna shoot the others next to it.

I think if any change is going to be made to it I would make it once a game only similar to the cadian relic, but boost it's range to 12 inches. So you have one turn of big coverage and protection, but after that it's used up.

We've got multiple versions of this thread, one in YMDC and another copy of it cropping up in every Iron Hands discussion thread. People suggesting that IH get nerfed to the ground, and other people suggesting that those people are terrible at balance, and nothing actually getting done.

My suggestion? Change things in small, gradual amounts. Try to weaken abilities without taking away from the core of what they're supposed to do.

Oh, and change the Ironstone to a healing ability instead of a reduce-damage ability. There's just no way to balance reduced damage in an aura.

It's popping up because we got a lot of major players voicing their concerns on a lot of platforms, and the echo chamber is strong. However, just because it's an echo chamber, also doesn't mean it's wrong. Having these armies posting nearly 80% win rates (was 78% according to Stats Center) at tournaments, and doing so with a very wide variety of lists (which drives home the point of the "this isn't even my final form" scenario, where there's even better versions of Iron Hands waiting to come to light), is insane. For a great comparison, back when there was a lot of complaining about Ynnari during 8th edition, they were only in the mid-60% range for average win rate. The sample size as well is not insignificant at some low 200-something games recorded. If this trend holds true for another 800 games, that will be a very significant sample size, but even now... that's not good.

So, yeah, there's some very VALID reasons that people are saying Iron Hands are OP. The main questions now are; does anything need to be done about it, will GW do anything about it, and what could be done about it?

 Aenar wrote:
- IH Chapter tactic: take away Overwatch on 5s and 6s
- IH super-doctrine to: re-roll 1s to hit when stationary (while in Dev Doctrine), full stop.
- Ironstone: max 1 target per turn
- Character Dreadnought stratagem: max 1 per game
- double repair stratagem: on unit not already repaired this turn
- Feirros: up his cost to 150-160 at least

This would be a start. IH would still be very good but less obscene.

This seems like a very good start. I'd say bump Feirros to the 170 range. 220 does seem a little high.

Vecting a psychic power needs to go up to 2 or better 3 CP IMO.

It's as much a gg as the genuine agents of vect if they turn off a no-overwatch spell or something and the match is just over.

We should ask ourselves, at what point level would people STOP taking Feirros?

I think 250 is too high, 220 is about right - that's double his current cost. At 160-170 he's only 30/40 points more than Jain Zar, and that seems pretty crazy to me seeing as many people are calling her overpriced. He is definitely more useful than Marneus Calgar, who comes in at 200 points.

Aenar suggested changing the Iron Hands Doctrine to re-rolls 1s when stationary - this is a brilliant idea! At the moment their rule makes them too mobile and hard hitting, we have this funny scenario where Iron Hands assault bikes and speeders are better than they are as White Scars. Now they still get a fantastic bonus, but they are no longer the best pilots in the Imperium lol

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Vecting a psychic power needs to go up to 2 or better 3 CP IMO.

It's as much a gg as the genuine agents of vect if they turn off a no-overwatch spell or something and the match is just over.

Keep in mind that, unlike Vecting, it's only a 50/50 shot. (And a bunch of other factions have this same strat.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ishagu wrote:
We should ask ourselves, at what point level would people STOP taking Feirros?

I think 250 is too high, 220 is about right - that's double his current cost. At 160-170 he's only 30/40 points more than Jain Zar, and that seems pretty crazy to me seeing as many people are calling her overpriced. He is definitely more useful than Marneus Calgar, who comes in at 200 points.

Aenar suggested changing the Iron Hands Doctrine to re-rolls 1s when stationary - this is a brilliant idea! At the moment their rule makes them too mobile and hard hitting, we have this funny scenario where Iron Hands assault bikes and speeders are better than they are as White Scars. Now they still get a fantastic bonus, but they are no longer the best pilots in the Imperium lol

I wouldn't be taking Feirros if he was anything more than 130 points. He's not actually that good.

I don't get one thing. Why is it a problem that one faction is more better then other? Is it because top players have their armies in other colours then black?

Karol wrote:
I don't get one thing. Why is it a problem that one faction is more better then other? Is it because top players have their armies in other colours then black?

Because it makes tournaments boring and samey. I don't want to fight the same army five times when I go to a five-round tournament.

Nobody is going to take him at 220 points. You're delusional.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Vecting a psychic power needs to go up to 2 or better 3 CP IMO.

It's as much a gg as the genuine agents of vect if they turn off a no-overwatch spell or something and the match is just over.

Keep in mind that, unlike Vecting, it's only a 50/50 shot. (And a bunch of other factions have this same strat.)

Well, it's a 75% shot with a re-roll, and if it's game-ending, you'll take the roll. Either way, a 50/50 chance at insta-winning against armies like GSC or Ravenguard or so is great value.

Yes, other factions have it, specifically those that are "in the lore" without psykers such as World Eaters and (formerly?) Black Templars.

Maybe too fidgety, but since Aeldari now have some strats with different costs for some sub-factions in Psychic Awakening, it'd ideally want to see it rolled into mono-faction bonuses: e.g. if you play mono-World Eaters or Graia, it's a 1 CP strat, but if you soup, it's a 3 CP strat, since it just becomes just another safety net in addition to your psykers, etc.. and just shuts down some armies way too hard IMO.

Threads are already up in the proposed rules forum.

SM in general: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/781101.page

IH in particular: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/781418.page

White Scars are almost as busted as IH and IF and Salamanders are going to be in the same ballpark as White Scars if not at or above IH level. UM and RG need nerfs and the best Successors need nerfs as well unless GW gets into a really stupidly high gear and produces rules for everyone that makes them comparable.

Feirros would be useless compared to Successors at 220, he's half the reason anyone would run actual IH and you're making him not only fair but actually overcosted considering you're also basically halving the amount he heals. Nothing should ever be increased by 100% in pts cost, it's absolutely absurd how undercosted he is, but it's not fair to hurt people that bought him this bad. He should still be a viable meta unit, increase his cost by 20 pts, that's still relatively huge for his current cost. Or make an emergency one-time nerf of 40 pts, but 110 pts for a model that's less than 150 is not okay. Is he the most undercosted unit ever? Probably, but he's also worth less than 250 pts, at the end of the day him alone doesn't an 80% win-rate faction make and invalidating people's brand new purchase is terribly unfair.

At the end of the day it's more important that people can play with their toys than everything is perfectly balanced, currently, the lack of balance makes me not want to put my toys up against IH, that's a problem, but a 100% increase in Feirros is too blunt a change.

Nobody is going to continue playing IH with your changes and there are powerful alternatives and in the future we'll see even more alternatives that might be even more powerful.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Yes, other factions have it, specifically those that are "in the lore" without psykers such as World Eaters and (formerly?) Black Templars.

That's a fair point. For armies where it's their only real psychic defense, having a strat to shut down a single power seems less of an issue. (Though there's nothing stopping those armies from souping at the moment, and for some factions like Sisters of Battle they actually are a very good Soup choice for CP batteries anyways.)

Well, it's a 75% shot with a re-roll, and if it's game-ending, you'll take the roll. Either way, a 50/50 chance at insta-winning against armies like GSC or Ravenguard or so is great value.

That's less of a fair point. The 75% uses up an extra command point, *and* it uses up your only reroll for the turn, so if you have other psychic defense you're potentially leaving yourself in the lurch if you roll low for a DTW check where you really needed to roll high.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Vecting a psychic power needs to go up to 2 or better 3 CP IMO.

It's as much a gg as the genuine agents of vect if they turn off a no-overwatch spell or something and the match is just over.

Keep in mind that, unlike Vecting, it's only a 50/50 shot. (And a bunch of other factions have this same strat.)

Well, it's a 75% shot with a re-roll, and if it's game-ending, you'll take the roll. Either way, a 50/50 chance at insta-winning against armies like GSC or Ravenguard or so is great value.

Yes, other factions have it, specifically those that are "in the lore" without psykers such as World Eaters and (formerly?) Black Templars.

Maybe too fidgety, but since Aeldari now have some strats with different costs for some sub-factions in Psychic Awakening, it'd ideally want to see it rolled into mono-faction bonuses: e.g. if you play mono-World Eaters or Graia, it's a 1 CP strat, but if you soup, it's a 3 CP strat, since it just becomes just another safety net in addition to your psykers, etc.. and just shuts down some armies way too hard IMO.

That 75% with the reroll is literally another CP to add. Your argument makes no sense.

Not turn waaaghpower, phase. Some posters don’t play that much I suspect...

Waaaghpower wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Yes, other factions have it, specifically those that are "in the lore" without psykers such as World Eaters and (formerly?) Black Templars.

That's a fair point. For armies where it's their only real psychic defense, having a strat to shut down a single power seems less of an issue. (Though there's nothing stopping those armies from souping at the moment, and for some factions like Sisters of Battle they actually are a very good Soup choice for CP batteries anyways.)

Well, it's a 75% shot with a re-roll, and if it's game-ending, you'll take the roll. Either way, a 50/50 chance at insta-winning against armies like GSC or Ravenguard or so is great value.

That's less of a fair point. The 75% uses up an extra command point, *and* it uses up your only reroll for the turn, so if you have other psychic defense you're potentially leaving yourself in the lurch if you roll low for a DTW check where you really needed to roll high.

Well, the strat is used only after your DTW has failed. And that's the issue: You have a DTW on top.

Again, the classic example is GSC vs. Iron Hands. They have to clear your screens. They have to deepstrike and spend 3 CP to get in closer. They probably have to spend another 3 CP to vect your Auspex Scan if you have any infantry as a Marine player. They still have to roll an insane charge with Repulsors being -2 to charge, likely sitting on terrain, etc.., etc.. . Probably spend more CP on that. And after that, they need a no-overwatch spell to even get their T3 bodies through a million of Marine-shots (on 5+ or 4+ for Iron Hands) with all the insane new Marine re-rolls, their spell gets vected on a 4+ for a measly 1 CP. And if they fail any of that, it's gg, game over.

It's the most extreme example, but again, it's an instant-game-winning strat invalidating entire Codexes. Eldar setting up their entire army to maybe having a shot at taking down a -1 damage Repulsor and losing doom. Etc.. Stuff like that shouldn't come at 1 CP IMO.

addnid wrote:
Not turn waaaghpower, phase. Some posters don’t play that much I suspect...

Ah, yes. I used the wrong term, but continued on referencing only the consequences in the psychic phase, so it must be that I don't play very much and not that I just misspoke.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Yes, other factions have it, specifically those that are "in the lore" without psykers such as World Eaters and (formerly?) Black Templars.

That's a fair point. For armies where it's their only real psychic defense, having a strat to shut down a single power seems less of an issue. (Though there's nothing stopping those armies from souping at the moment, and for some factions like Sisters of Battle they actually are a very good Soup choice for CP batteries anyways.)

Well, it's a 75% shot with a re-roll, and if it's game-ending, you'll take the roll. Either way, a 50/50 chance at insta-winning against armies like GSC or Ravenguard or so is great value.

That's less of a fair point. The 75% uses up an extra command point, *and* it uses up your only reroll for the turn, so if you have other psychic defense you're potentially leaving yourself in the lurch if you roll low for a DTW check where you really needed to roll high.

Well, the strat is used only after your DTW has failed. And that's the issue: You have a DTW on top.

Again, the classic example is GSC vs. Iron Hands. They have to clear your screens. They have to deepstrike and spend 3 CP to get in closer. They probably have to spend another 3 CP to vect your Auspex Scan if you have any infantry as a Marine player. They still have to roll an insane charge with Repulsors being -2 to charge, likely sitting on terrain, etc.., etc.. . Probably spend more CP on that. And after that, they need a no-overwatch spell to even get their T3 bodies through a million of Marine-shots (on 5+ or 4+ for Iron Hands) with all the insane new Marine re-rolls, their spell gets vected on a 4+ for a measly 1 CP. And if they fail any of that, it's gg, game over.

It's the most extreme example, but again, it's an instant-game-winning strat invalidating entire Codexes. Eldar setting up their entire army to maybe having a shot at taking down a -1 damage Repulsor and losing doom. Etc.. Stuff like that shouldn't come at 1 CP IMO.

There's a bigger flaw here:
If your army relies on passing with a single, specific psychic power in order to win, then your army kind of sucks anyways. You should be able to get by without psychic powers, because psychic powers are notoriously unreliable to begin with - they should be a force multiplier that helps, not a necessary part of your army.

Also, a clever GSC doesn't have to clear screens, they just have to use those screens for free mobility. A clever player can use screens as safe havens against shooting - carefully engage so that you don't have many attacks, then use consolidation movement to wrap the target so they can't fall back. Then, on the opponents turn, fall in and get a bunch of attacks and kill them. (Or bring in regular Genestealer allies with Kraken tactics and just fall back willy nilly.)

my thoughts.

first of all.

-Remove the over watch on 5-6 chapter trait. there is no reason why Ironhands should get 3 traits and everyone else gets 2. especially given that a 6 FNP and the tanks do not degrade trait are both pretty good. I think GW was concerned about Ironhands infantry only getting one trait in this, but the does not degrade trait is a sucessor trait so clearly they're not. and if they really are they concerned, make the overwatch on 5-6 an infantry only thing.

-make the re-roll 1s thing only when stationary. I do like this.

-Bump Ferrios up to 200 points. (they can always raise him up further if he's still too good for his points)

- Ironstone: Allow it to work once per turn.

There's a bigger flaw here:
If your army relies on passing with a single, specific psychic power in order to win, then your army kind of sucks anyways. You should be able to get by without psychic powers, because psychic powers are notoriously unreliable to begin with - they should be a force multiplier that helps, not a necessary part of your army.

Csm dex 2.0 didn't quite get the Memo.
What should someone do there?
"oh you wanted to warptime that discordant? Nope" is not a fun situation period. Especially now with the massive discrepancies of propper updates again.

Not Online!!! wrote:

There's a bigger flaw here:
If your army relies on passing with a single, specific psychic power in order to win, then your army kind of sucks anyways. You should be able to get by without psychic powers, because psychic powers are notoriously unreliable to begin with - they should be a force multiplier that helps, not a necessary part of your army.

Csm dex 2.0 didn't quite get the Memo.
What should someone do there?
"oh you wanted to warptime that discordant? Nope" is not a fun situation period. Especially now with the massive discrepancies of propper updates again.

I will say, this is one of the few things I think 7th edition got better than 8th - Having the option to supercharge certain powers at the cost of not being able to cast others was an interesting and useful mechanic that made necessary powers more acceptable.
Everything else about the psychic phase was crap, but that particular mechanic was nice.

BrianDavion wrote:
my thoughts.

first of all.

-Remove the over watch on 5-6 chapter trait. there is no reason why Ironhands should get 3 traits and everyone else gets 2. especially given that a 6 FNP and the tanks do not degrade trait are both pretty good. I think GW was concerned about Ironhands infantry only getting one trait in this, but the does not degrade trait is a sucessor trait so clearly they're not. and if they really are they concerned, make the overwatch on 5-6 an infantry only thing.

-make the re-roll 1s thing only when stationary. I do like this.

-Bump Ferrios up to 200 points. (they can always raise him up further if he's still too good for his points)

- Ironstone: Allow it to work once per turn.

Anyone thinking Ferrios should be the same price or higher than Calgar is not thinking straight whatsoever.

I don't think you're seeing the bigger picture. You're comparing apples to oranges. Calgar and Feirros are not the same type of character.

Feirros is a better HQ than Calgar, not in a vacuum but as part of the Iron Hands army.

Yes, Calgar hit harder and has a re roll aura. Those things are not as useful as whar Feirros provides.

It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

 NurglesR0T wrote:
It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

I was going to criticize you for not actually having anything ironic in your statement, but I guess Dakkadakka being correct is pretty ironic.






(Just in case that was too subtle, dakka was right, they were garbage in need of buffs. They received those buffs and were good. Then received more buffs and were TOO good. At no point in this process was dakka wrong about any of that. For once.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ishagu wrote:
I don't think you're seeing the bigger picture. You're comparing apples to oranges. Calgar and Feirros are not the same type of character.

Feirros is a better HQ than Calgar, not in a vacuum but as part of the Iron Hands army.

Yes, Calgar hit harder and has a re roll aura. Those things are not as useful as whar Feirros provides.

He just does too much at once. The invul aura alone would make him worth 110 ponts for just about any ironhands build. Even my gimmick list with 3 stormtalons and 9 landspeeders uses him to survive going second, despite him being largely useless after that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:
my thoughts.

first of all.

-Remove the over watch on 5-6 chapter trait. there is no reason why Ironhands should get 3 traits and everyone else gets 2. especially given that a 6 FNP and the tanks do not degrade trait are both pretty good. I think GW was concerned about Ironhands infantry only getting one trait in this, but the does not degrade trait is a sucessor trait so clearly they're not. and if they really are they concerned, make the overwatch on 5-6 an infantry only thing.

-make the re-roll 1s thing only when stationary. I do like this.

-Bump Ferrios up to 200 points. (they can always raise him up further if he's still too good for his points)

- Ironstone: Allow it to work once per turn.

I play ironhands. My space marine army has been paired down to exclusively dreadnoughts and troop choices at this point so that's my background when I say this:

1. I agree. I thought that was total overkill when I first read it.
2. I agree and it make sense. You shouldn't be able to blast across the board, shoot without penalty AND get a captains reroll for free.
3. I would say 150 to start. If you nerf the ironstone as well(which you should) Feirros is nerfed by proxy.
4. I would nerf it to only affect 1 unit per phase, selected at the start of the phase. That way it's still really good but can't make triple repulsor executioners invincible.

Opening post has too many debuffs in one hit. Need to be selective about it.

My preference would be to remove overwatch bonus and adjust or even remove doctrine reroll 1s.

People are saying removing rerolls makes it worse than UM doctrine but it needs to be looked at a faction as a whole. Strictly speaking IH allows it to remain in Devastator doctrine the whole time and from T1 so it is still super strong compared to UM. This also keeps the OG flavour that GW had intended.

Iron Stone stopping 1 vehicle is fine too. Sure it wont help that much early game but late game when your onto your last vehcile and you've removed some threats, its going to make that last vehicle pretty durable. In fact I would even allow it nominate 1 vehicle and the stone be attached to said vehicle.

Ferrios is probably the 150-180 point range. Removing the reroll in the doctrine will also mean you need to invest in a captain and theres no reason why IH doesnt fight without captains.

regarding point 2. I think it's worth comparing the Ironhands doctrine trait to the Ultramarines doctrine trait. Ironhands ignore the -1 penalty for firing heavy weapons, and get to re-roll 1s. Ultramarines may treat a unit that has moved as if it didn't. if iron hands get a "eaither or" they are going to be a bit weaker then Ultramarines in the super doctrine. but I think over all the re-roll 1s when stationary is still gonna make up for it.

But IH gets its super doctrine from T1, that alone is a huge buff IMO.

Ishagu wrote:The fact that I can stack the following onto an IH Repulsor looks comical when you write it down:

-Profile doesn't degrade
-Always hit on a 2+

Please explain how an IH vehicle with 1 wound remaining doesnt degrade ? And please explain how an IH vehicle always hits on 2+. What rule allows them to auto hit on 2+ ??

Aenar wrote:- IH Chapter tactic: take away Overwatch on 5s and 6s

How can IH hit on overwatch when they dont hit on 6s ?? You want to remove their overwatch ??

 p5freak wrote:

Ishagu wrote:The fact that I can stack the following onto an IH Repulsor looks comical when you write it down:

-Profile doesn't degrade
-Always hit on a 2+

Please explain how an IH vehicle with 1 wound remaining doesnt degrade ? And please explain how an IH vehicle always hits on 2+. What rule allows them to auto hit on 2+ ??

Aenar wrote:- IH Chapter tactic: take away Overwatch on 5s and 6s

How can IH hit on overwatch when they dont hit on 6s ?? You want to remove their overwatch ??

He's referring to Ferrios buff Signum Array.

The other stuff i think you can use your brain to figure out what he meant.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Also, a clever GSC doesn't have to clear screens, they just have to use those screens for free mobility. A clever player can use screens as safe havens against shooting - carefully engage so that you don't have many attacks, then use consolidation movement to wrap the target so they can't fall back. Then, on the opponents turn, fall in and get a bunch of attacks and kill them. (Or bring in regular Genestealer allies with Kraken tactics and just fall back willy nilly.)

Sure. A clever player can. And a clever Iron Hands player can again do some clever positioning around that. Etc...

That's not the point. The armies need to be balanced, including between two first-time 40K players playing their first game ever, one playing Iron Hands and one GSC.

If the requirement for one army is "just play smarter" to overcome a basic discrepancy in math and ease of stratagem-use, it just means the armies aren't balanced and should be re-balanced.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Also, a clever GSC doesn't have to clear screens, they just have to use those screens for free mobility. A clever player can use screens as safe havens against shooting - carefully engage so that you don't have many attacks, then use consolidation movement to wrap the target so they can't fall back. Then, on the opponents turn, fall in and get a bunch of attacks and kill them. (Or bring in regular Genestealer allies with Kraken tactics and just fall back willy nilly.)

Sure. A clever player can. And a clever Iron Hands player can again do some clever positioning around that. Etc...

That's not the point. The armies need to be balanced, including between two first-time 40K players playing their first game ever, one playing Iron Hands and one GSC.

If the requirement for one army is "just play smarter" to overcome a basic discrepancy in math and ease of stratagem-use, it just means the armies aren't balanced and should be re-balanced.

You can't make every list and faction equally hard to master or have the same skill ceiling, an IH player is going to start seeing a decline in how much better he gets after ten games, a GSC player maybe 50 games. The game needs to be somewhat balanced at as many levels of the game as possible, putting a higher priority on higher levels of play. I don't think it's unreasonable to have factions that are hard to learn and play well, that might very well be a selling point, even to someone that isn't a veteran but just likes complicated mechanics and a challenging learning curve. Even if IH were balanced for competitive play they'd still be unbalanced for casual play and if you balanced GSC for casual play they'd be unbeatable in competitive. Teach the reps about how difficult each army is to learn and master so they can educate potential buyers and you should be fine, just another piece in the puzzle of finding the right army for a buyer. When IH are better for top tier competitive play than GSC we have a problem, not when IH are better for a first game, you just can't balance the game entirely around a first game experience. Instead you might want to engineer a balanced first game experience with a boxed set like DG vs UM. If the game becomes less and less balanced as you learn and play against more advanced players then the game wouldn't be very fun.

Sunny Side Up wrote:


That's not the point. The armies need to be balanced, including between two first-time 40K players playing their first game ever, one playing Iron Hands and one GSC.

If the requirement for one army is "just play smarter" to overcome a basic discrepancy in math and ease of stratagem-use, it just means the armies aren't balanced and should be re-balanced.

This has to be one of the silliest comments. Two first time 40k players taking genuine random armies would have no major issue with IH rules. There are many ways to build IH and not make it unbearable, its just human nature for people to google and look up comp lists and make it the norm.

Warhammer will never be a balanced game when it comes to competition. Its not GW's intent when writing rules. They are making a tonne of money from this marine release.

 Smirrors wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:


That's not the point. The armies need to be balanced, including between two first-time 40K players playing their first game ever, one playing Iron Hands and one GSC.

If the requirement for one army is "just play smarter" to overcome a basic discrepancy in math and ease of stratagem-use, it just means the armies aren't balanced and should be re-balanced.

This has to be one of the silliest comments. Two first time 40k players taking genuine random armies would have no major issue with IH rules. There are many ways to build IH and not make it unbearable, its just human nature for people to google and look up comp lists and make it the norm.

Warhammer will never be a balanced game when it comes to competition. Its not GW's intent when writing rules. They are making a tonne of money from this marine release.

Just like they made a tonne of money in 7th edition by power creeping every codex and turning more and more players away? Having an accessible and fair ruleset sells models, it's not that a balanced SM release wouldn't sell more in the long run, it'd just be too much effort or some stupid exec gave the development too little time to write this. If you know you have limited time you should probably err on the side of caution, but if an exec said #1 make them competitive and #2 don't spend 6 weeks testing it to make sure it doesn't break competitive balance entirely then I can see how this mess was made.

I do not play IH, but i feel at this point they need unique points on everything in the army. Pointed specifically to what they have access to as an army.

If GW wants to stack rules like this, they have to know they cannot just have points the same across the board.

Apple fox wrote:
I do not play IH, but i feel at this point they need unique points on everything in the army. Pointed specifically to what they have access to as an army.

If GW wants to stack rules like this, they have to know they cannot just have points the same across the board.

Well, obviously not going to happen, but from a game-design perspective, obviously that would've been ideal (especially as they did print separate supplements where a page with point could've been included).

If Ultramarine Aggressors are better than non-Ultramarine Aggressors, they should be more expensive in the UM book to be balanced vs. non-Ultramarine Aggressors.
If White Scars Assault Centurions are better than non-White Scars Assault Centurions, they should be more expensive in the Whtie Scars book to be balanced vs. non-White Scars Assault Centurions
If Ravenguard Snipers are better than non-Ravenguard Snipers, they should be more expensive in the Ravenguard book to be balanced vs. non-Ravenguard Snipers.
Etc...,
Etc...,

If i was designer i would go first on this things:
1. Full reroll aura on subpar characters is to strong.
The ability to give captains full rerolls should be 3 CP and for phase. All characters having this ability should be priced around 200 pts. It just make your army to efficient in any format and the captain can increase the aura to 9 inches with the relic.
2. The deployment on the entire board by units like scouts should be removed. This ability is to strong in any format, because it deny your opponent movement, could stop them from scoring and give you extra points. It give you positioning advantage for free. You should be allowd to redeploy maximum 9 inches from your zone or only in your zone. Remember aeldar rangers could have deepstike only in their zone and that was removed. The other option is all units with this treat to get points increase.
3. Leithenants should give rerolls only in the fight phase. That will make G-Man not replacable by 160-180 pts characters.

 p5freak wrote:
[

Aenar wrote:- IH Chapter tactic: take away Overwatch on 5s and 6s

How can IH hit on overwatch when they dont hit on 6s ?? You want to remove their overwatch ??

If I find myself running a close combat oriented army against them, then yes, yes I do.

 p5freak wrote:

Aenar wrote:- IH Chapter tactic: take away Overwatch on 5s and 6s

How can IH hit on overwatch when they dont hit on 6s ?? You want to remove their overwatch ??

I don't know if you're being serious or not Anyway, I'd take away the Overwatch on 5s and let them do it on 6s like everyone else (5s using their Optimal Repulsion Doctrines stratagem).

A lot of the IH abilities are great for alpha strike protection. The Ironstone bearer being a weak link is mitigated by Cogitated Martyrdom.

I don't want to lose that. But I also don't want it to apply for the whole game. Having the Ironstone apply only once a game would render it exactly as powerful as the rest of the relics available to IH, in my estimation.

The second issue is the doctrine bonus. They outright remove the one 8th edition trade-off marine vehicles have had to contend with: accuracy vs mobility vs cost. You sometimes only get to pick two, and even then it isn't always the best trade. I honestly felt like that moving and firing without penalty on marine vehicles should have been baseline, and the platforms priced accordingly, rather than it being an IH only benefit. That ship has sailed, but this bonus needs to be adjusted a bit.

But how do you alter this? Limit their time in Devastator doctrine by forcing a change? Then every IH player just builds a list knowing that 1 CP goes to rolling back the doctrine. Do we apply it only to Infantry? That could work.

I think changing it would be the best option. Either so it applies only to infantry, or changing the rule entirely so stationary units re-roll 1s with heavy weapons.

At this stage, and if the IF and Salamanders turn out to be very strong too, we could take the nuclear option and ban all the SM supplements.

More seriously, the real problem with IH is the almost endless list of interlocking buffs and bonuses they get. That makes altering things a bit tricky because you have so many different levers to pull. I like limiting the re-roll 1s to hit to stationary stuff only and increasing Ferrios to around 160-180 would be a good start too. The re-rolls in particular is annopying, because it does what GW often does and has unintended side effects, like making IH Land Speeders better than White Scars ones.

Why change them there obviously working as intended?

I mean Guard have been broken since launch, knights pretty much as well all though after many months they did get adjusted, elder have spent huge chunks of this edition topping tournaments, Tau had the moment in the sun as did Death Guard and GSC.

Marines have they're first top tier release since there fliers got nerfed shortly after launch and almost the entire player base lose there gak within 24hs with it taking just 7days to reach peak hysteria after a handful of tournaments with multiple IH must burn threads.

I mean I all ready know the answer but how many tournaments in the last few months were not won by either imp soup or Elder the answer is very few.

There should be celebration that soup is dead and elder air wing is on life support. Yes it's sad that marines will no longer be free wins at tournaments and that people might have to play for objectives rather than just trying to table the opposition by turn 2.

In the long run leaving marines as they are will be healthy for the game especially if future codexs provide non soup bonuses for the other races.

Models should never, ever be banned. That is against the hobby, the theme and punished players and collectors.

The supplements can be adjusted individually, rule by rule.

SeanDrake wrote:
Why change them there obviously working as intended?

I mean Guard have been broken since launch, knights pretty much as well all though after many months they did get adjusted, elder have spent huge chunks of this edition topping tournaments, Tau had the moment in the sun as did Death Guard and GSC.

Marines have they're first top tier release since there fliers got nerfed shortly after launch and almost the entire player base lose there gak within 24hs with it taking just 7days to reach peak hysteria after a handful of tournaments with multiple IH must burn threads.

I mean I all ready know the answer but how many tournaments in the last few months were not won by either imp soup or Elder the answer is very few.

There should be celebration that soup is dead and elder air wing is on life support. Yes it's sad that marines will no longer be free wins at tournaments and that people might have to play for objectives rather than just trying to table the opposition by turn 2.

In the long run leaving marines as they are will be healthy for the game especially if future codexs provide non soup bonuses for the other races.

Is it healthy that one marines supplement is clearly easier to play and superior to its peers?

Whilst I echo the merits of the game being more objective focused and a new meta, the point is that Iron hands as they are now can win by shooting people off the board whilst taking minimal losses. They just need tweaking back into line with the other supplements in terms of marines.

The other issue is that as phoenix rising shows, other armies are not getting the same level of power spikes, which will leave marines a clear head and shoulders better than a lot of armies.

Dudeface wrote:
Is it healthy that one marines supplement is clearly easier to play and superior to its peers?

Is it, really?

Funny thing is, for three years now when something is broken, unfun junk in Codex: SM, you can see funny trend. It's always A + Leviathan, B + Leviathan, C + Leviathan, D + Leviathan, etc, etc. Occasionally Leviathan being replaced by Deredeo or Contemptor Mortis. I look at Chaos/Space ""Marines"" armies on tournaments that consist of 4+ recast Leviathans (or 6+ Mortis/Deredeos, in both cases to the exclusion of everything else save for token buffing character), and think to myself 'gee, what could be the problem here, surely it's the base rules, not OP, pay to win junk with way too good stats for it's price'

Last time I checked, IH regular dreadnoughts are not a problem. You can kill these easily, and IH can't repair dead vehicles. Neither are Ironclads/Redemptors, really, they don't have defensive or offensive output to do so even with IH bonus. For some funny reason, though, combining unit with gazillion wounds (and damage dice rolls) with stratagems and rules meant for 80 pts dread doesn't really work. But, maybe, just maybe, it's not really the fault of the base rules, but the units not meant to work with them. Funny idea that, eh?

I don't say IH shouldn't be nerfed, far from it, but the approach OP (and a few others) propose, basically making IH bonus worthless for stuff it was actually meant to buff because only the smallest possible buffs will not make Leviathans OP is terrible one. Rules should be balanced to the most common denominator, not to outlier that wrecks any possible attempt at doing so. Give Leviathans Redemptor stats, delete 2+ stats across the board from all FW dreads (replacing them with Venerable upgrade), there, half of the problem solved, now you can fine-tune IH to the level of other SM much more easily.

 Ishagu wrote:
Models should never, ever be banned. That is against the hobby, the theme and punished players and collectors.

The supplements can be adjusted individually, rule by rule.

it is time imo, that differing traits cost differing points.,

That is an interesting idea. What if you could play stock codex, just basic rules. Then maybe by traits if you wanted to a design your own chapter. Or you could go all ham and get a specilised doctrin on top of traits, but all of those would cost points.

So Lets say a marine X army for 2000pts would have fewer rules then a IH army, but the IH army would have only 1800pts to spend on models. And am pulling the numbers out of my arse, am not claiming that the IH rules should cost 200pts or that costing 200pts would somehow fix the IH problem.

 Irbis wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Is it healthy that one marines supplement is clearly easier to play and superior to its peers?

Is it, really?

Funny thing is, for three years now when something is broken, unfun junk in Codex: SM, you can see funny trend. It's always A + Leviathan, B + Leviathan, C + Leviathan, D + Leviathan, etc, etc. Occasionally Leviathan being replaced by Deredeo or Contemptor Mortis. I look at Chaos/Space ""Marines"" armies on tournaments that consist of 4+ recast Leviathans (or 6+ Mortis/Deredeos, in both cases to the exclusion of everything else save for token buffing character), and think to myself 'gee, what could be the problem here, surely it's the base rules, not OP, pay to win junk with way too good stats for it's price'

Last time I checked, IH regular dreadnoughts are not a problem. You can kill these easily, and IH can't repair dead vehicles. Neither are Ironclads/Redemptors, really, they don't have defensive or offensive output to do so even with IH bonus. For some funny reason, though, combining unit with gazillion wounds (and damage dice rolls) with stratagems and rules meant for 80 pts dread doesn't really work. But, maybe, just maybe, it's not really the fault of the base rules, but the units not meant to work with them. Funny idea that, eh?

I don't say IH shouldn't be nerfed, far from it, but the approach OP (and a few others) propose, basically making IH bonus worthless for stuff it was actually meant to buff because only the smallest possible buffs will not make Leviathans OP is terrible one. Rules should be balanced to the most common denominator, not to outlier that wrecks any possible attempt at doing so. Give Leviathans Redemptor stats, delete 2+ stats across the board from all FW dreads (replacing them with Venerable upgrade), there, half of the problem solved, now you can fine-tune IH to the level of other SM much more easily.

No you just made sure anyone not playing IronHands never places a dreadnaught on the table outside of a narative game ever.

The fact that codex dreadnaughts need to have 6+++, half damage strategum and a -1 damage aura all stacking up to be considered remotely viable rules wise says the base unit design is the problem.

Codex dreadnaughts suck as badly as Failbadon does at black crusade 13.1 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.13

The FAQ's are up - Iron Hands & Raven Guard.

beast_gts wrote:
The FAQ's are up - Iron Hands & Raven Guard.

No nerf aside the March of the Ancients stratagem (IH dreadnought becoming character, now max 1 per game).
RIP the game until the next balance update.

 Irbis wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Is it healthy that one marines supplement is clearly easier to play and superior to its peers?

Is it, really?

Funny thing is, for three years now when something is broken, unfun junk in Codex: SM, you can see funny trend. It's always A + Leviathan, B + Leviathan, C + Leviathan, D + Leviathan, etc, etc. Occasionally Leviathan being replaced by Deredeo or Contemptor Mortis. I look at Chaos/Space ""Marines"" armies on tournaments that consist of 4+ recast Leviathans (or 6+ Mortis/Deredeos, in both cases to the exclusion of everything else save for token buffing character), and think to myself 'gee, what could be the problem here, surely it's the base rules, not OP, pay to win junk with way too good stats for it's price'

Last time I checked, IH regular dreadnoughts are not a problem. You can kill these easily, and IH can't repair dead vehicles. Neither are Ironclads/Redemptors, really, they don't have defensive or offensive output to do so even with IH bonus. For some funny reason, though, combining unit with gazillion wounds (and damage dice rolls) with stratagems and rules meant for 80 pts dread doesn't really work. But, maybe, just maybe, it's not really the fault of the base rules, but the units not meant to work with them. Funny idea that, eh?

I don't say IH shouldn't be nerfed, far from it, but the approach OP (and a few others) propose, basically making IH bonus worthless for stuff it was actually meant to buff because only the smallest possible buffs will not make Leviathans OP is terrible one. Rules should be balanced to the most common denominator, not to outlier that wrecks any possible attempt at doing so. Give Leviathans Redemptor stats, delete 2+ stats across the board from all FW dreads (replacing them with Venerable upgrade), there, half of the problem solved, now you can fine-tune IH to the level of other SM much more easily.

Given the Iron hands lists doing well have more repulsor executioners and flyers in than leviathans, all of which are GW main plastics, I think we can discredit this entire concept that FW is a problem.

For those calling for 200+ point Feirros in addition to removing reroll 1s in the doctrine:

You're crazy. The only reason Feirros is great is BECAUSE you don't need another captain (and even that is HIGHLY debatable because there's still plenty of non heavy weapons and the chapter master strat to think about). Feirros isnt as strong as people think.

That said, a very small points bump (let's say 130 ish) wouldn't be uncalled for.

 NurglesR0T wrote:
It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

The Iron Hands being broken in half is pretty clear evidence that Dakka had no clue about how bad marines actually were or how to fix them. *~Marines aren't durable enough they need free invulns free FNP~* *~Marines don't do enough damage we should increase the AP of every bolt weapon~* *~Marines should take reduced damage to capture how durable they are in the fluff. Multidamage plasma makes them a joke~* GW does all of that and BAM marines are a problem again just like they were at the start of 8th unless suddenly everyone forgot about Rulesbloat Aquilaman's Razorback+tactical marine lists.

Marines need point increases across the board, I'm not sure why marines deserve a gentle hand when every other army gets kneecapped. If certain chapter tactics are terribad with the higher point costs then those specific tactics should be compensated with different buffs.

They have implemented one of the suggestions. 8 more to go!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DominayTrix wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:
It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

The Iron Hands being broken in half is pretty clear evidence that Dakka had no clue about how bad marines actually were or how to fix them. *~Marines aren't durable enough they need free invulns free FNP~* *~Marines don't do enough damage we should increase the AP of every bolt weapon~* *~Marines should take reduced damage to capture how durable they are in the fluff. Multidamage plasma makes them a joke~* GW does all of that and BAM marines are a problem again just like they were at the start of 8th unless suddenly everyone forgot about Rulesbloat Aquilaman's Razorback+tactical marine lists.

Marines need point increases across the board, I'm not sure why marines deserve a gentle hand when every other army gets kneecapped. If certain chapter tactics are terribad with the higher point costs then those specific tactics should be compensated with different buffs.

This isn't true. Marines are expensive and elite, and won#t be taking allies in most cases.

Iron Hands get around the elite problem by being super durable, but other chapters are as easy to destroy as they were in the old codex.

 Ishagu wrote:
They have implemented one of the suggestions. 8 more to go!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DominayTrix wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:
It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

The Iron Hands being broken in half is pretty clear evidence that Dakka had no clue about how bad marines actually were or how to fix them. *~Marines aren't durable enough they need free invulns free FNP~* *~Marines don't do enough damage we should increase the AP of every bolt weapon~* *~Marines should take reduced damage to capture how durable they are in the fluff. Multidamage plasma makes them a joke~* GW does all of that and BAM marines are a problem again just like they were at the start of 8th unless suddenly everyone forgot about Rulesbloat Aquilaman's Razorback+tactical marine lists.

Marines need point increases across the board, I'm not sure why marines deserve a gentle hand when every other army gets kneecapped. If certain chapter tactics are terribad with the higher point costs then those specific tactics should be compensated with different buffs.

This isn't true. Marines are expensive and elite, and won#t be taking allies in most cases.

Iron Hands get around the elite problem by being super durable, but other chapters are as easy to destroy as they were in the old codex.

What do allies have to do with anything I mentioned? I'm talking about at the very beginning of 8th before the Guard codex was even out and Gulliman + Razorbacks + Tactical marines was actually a strong viable well rounded list. I can't find any specific links at the moment, but I remember Lawrence Baker winning a large GT or something with a pure Ultramarines list. Didn't the other marine chapters also get durability buffs as well as offensive buffs? The Iron Hands may be the biggest boogieman, but all of the supplements seemed to do very well last weekend especially when compared to non-space marines. Many of the overpowered strategems like the double firing Thunderfire cannon one are non-specific. Tell me again why ONLY Iron Hands need a nerf and this problem can't be boiled down to "The new SM Codex made marines competitively strong and adding any supplement is enough to give them an edge over non-marine armies. Iron Hands are simply the strongest option of those supplements so the attention is on them."

The Iron Hands FAQ has been updated.

Looks like a lot of things suggested have been changed. Good job GW .

IH are still the best, however. And that's perfectly fine.

beast_gts wrote:
The Iron Hands FAQ has been updated.

So does this mean all the blue Iron Hands armies turn their bionics back in at the armory and shout Gulliman's name again?

As a quick recap

- Feirros now only gives 5++ to INFANTRY
- Iron Stone only works on one vehicle per battle round and you declare at the start of the battle round
- March of Ancients can only be used once
- 4+ DTW strat now costs 2 CP
- 4+ Overwatch strat now costs 2CP
- Machine Empathy strat can not repair a vehicle already repaired that turn
- Reforge psychic power can not repair a vehicle already repaired that turn

They are still flavorful and have some decent combos but they've mostly removed the worst offenders out of the book. Hopefully everyone will settle down now.

SeanDrake wrote:
Why change them there obviously working as intended?

I mean Guard have been broken since launch, knights pretty much as well all though after many months they did get adjusted, elder have spent huge chunks of this edition topping tournaments, Tau had the moment in the sun as did Death Guard and GSC.

Marines have they're first top tier release since there fliers got nerfed shortly after launch and almost the entire player base lose there gak within 24hs with it taking just 7days to reach peak hysteria after a handful of tournaments with multiple IH must burn threads.

I mean I all ready know the answer but how many tournaments in the last few months were not won by either imp soup or Elder the answer is very few.

There should be celebration that soup is dead and elder air wing is on life support. Yes it's sad that marines will no longer be free wins at tournaments and that people might have to play for objectives rather than just trying to table the opposition by turn 2.

In the long run leaving marines as they are will be healthy for the game especially if future codexs provide non soup bonuses for the other races.

When IH vehicles get, by default, the IG Defensive Gunners stratagem, Tenacious warlord trait, as well as the Tallarn/Cadian/Valhallan doctrine bonuses, all at the eame time as their basic subfaction abilities, on top of all the marine special rules and abilities, we've gone way beyond those other examples.

There's no way to argue that's good for the game, particularly if that's resting on the assumption that other factions will get treated the same way when there is no such indication.

Nobody is going to celebrate the death of other meta issues just because they get beat even harder by the new hotness. That doesn't solve anything, it gets us another 7E debacle.

 DominayTrix wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:
It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

The Iron Hands being broken in half is pretty clear evidence that Dakka had no clue about how bad marines actually were or how to fix them. *~Marines aren't durable enough they need free invulns free FNP~* *~Marines don't do enough damage we should increase the AP of every bolt weapon~* *~Marines should take reduced damage to capture how durable they are in the fluff. Multidamage plasma makes them a joke~* GW does all of that and BAM marines are a problem again just like they were at the start of 8th unless suddenly everyone forgot about Rulesbloat Aquilaman's Razorback+tactical marine lists.

Marines need point increases across the board, I'm not sure why marines deserve a gentle hand when every other army gets kneecapped. If certain chapter tactics are terribad with the higher point costs then those specific tactics should be compensated with different buffs.

You are going too far I think. Marines got more killy no doubt. We should probably just dump the super doctrines...and in the case of ultramarines - just fold that into their chapter tactics because their chapter tactics blows or just make the super doctrines stratagem effects. IDK. Marines have never really had a chance to be powerful ever - this Ironhands and Crimson fist crap though....

My friend made a great suggestion that dev doctrine should not give AP bonus but just allow you to move and shoot without penalty (for all marines across the board)...so there is a real trade off between staying in devastator and switching to tactical. Then Ironhands reroll 1's in devestator would still be a nice bonus but not OP and it might encourage them to take a weapon that isn't heavy...you know cause...iron hands have basically the same aresenal as other marine chapters. Just ideas. We want good internal balance first and then we can figure out what external balance should be. With a ton of new releases coming out...its possible that marines are actually underpowered in their current state and we just don't know it yet...I actually would not be the least bit surprised if that were the case because that seems to be what happens a lot with marines. They come out first and look pretty good...they other armies get even better stuff.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NurglesR0T wrote:

beast_gts wrote:
The Iron Hands FAQ has been updated.

So does this mean all the blue Iron Hands armies turn their bionics back in at the armory and shout Gulliman's name again?

As a quick recap

- Feirros now only gives 5++ to INFANTRY
- Iron Stone only works on one vehicle per battle round and you declare at the start of the battle round
- March of Ancients can only be used once
- 4+ DTW strat now costs 2 CP
- 4+ Overwatch strat now costs 2CP
- Machine Empathy strat can not repair a vehicle already repaired that turn
- Reforge psychic power can not repair a vehicle already repaired that turn

They are still flavorful and have some decent combos but they've mostly removed the worst offenders out of the book. Hopefully everyone will settle down now.

To be fair they did not touch the biggest issue. The Ironhands super doctrine. It is too good compared to the very similar ultramarines one. Turn 1 on and reroll 1's for free in addition and stacks with dev doctrine while buffing heavy weapons...It's not difficult to see it is the root of the problem. Crimson fists however do apear to be more powerful now and will need nerfs. They are also overpowered by their super doctrine.

I think the nerf was perfect. Enough so that games can be made competitive. I prefer gradual rather than overkill and this has certainly done it.

Whilst IH flyers will still be a thing, they arent going to have alpha strike protection from t1 and neither will they get Iron stone following them around.

They can still be killed quite comfortably by many lists.

Yeah, we can count this one as a bullseye for GW.

DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

It's a 4+ DTW (from any unit) that's made AFTER a normal DTW attempt. It's probably the best psy denial ability in the game. 2 CP is fine.
Now it's a last attempt denial for when you absolutely need it, instead of another auto-use strat.

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

It can be used after a DtW attempt, it's also one of 50 instead of one of 20 Stratagems. Both BT and WE are not supposed to have psykers, this is meant to make up for the perceived weak matchup, IH got it just to add insult to injury in terms of all the things they can do. No you cannot just go out and grab all the Stratagems of every other faction, make improvements on some of them and get them at the same cost, that's insanity.

 vict0988 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

It can be used after a DtW attempt, it's also one of 50 instead of one of 20 Stratagems. Both BT and WE are not supposed to have psykers, this is meant to make up for the perceived weak matchup, IH got it just to add insult to injury in terms of all the things they can do. No you cannot just go out and grab all the Stratagems of every other faction, make improvements on some of them and get them at the same cost, that's insanity.

World Eaters and Black Templars can just as easily add in an extra detachment and get that access to Psykers. So your argument doesn't work.

For 3CP you have a 75% chance to shut down Magnus lol
I think it's a game changing Strat, and could even be costed higher.

 Ishagu wrote:
For 3CP you have a 75% chance to shut down Magnus lol
I think it's a game changing Strat, and could even be costed higher.

And World Eaters have easier access to farming CP as a mono army with Cultist troops, so should it cost more for them?

I don't think GW uses a stratagems efficiency as its CP cost, or how much CP an army can generate. I think they either pick the costs at random, or have some chart with re-rolls 1 CP, utility 2 CP, something for one thing that can work for more things 1-3CP etc.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

Don't forget Sisters of Battle!
Though, honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing GW take a more soup-considered approach and have stratagems that vary in cost based on faction. If you've got a "pure" army of Black Templar, World Eaters, SoB, etc, then it costs 1cp. If you've got a soup army, it costs 2.

Then again, I just generally hate stratagems and special rules where you consume a limited and valuable resource on a wildly random chance. I'd rather pay 3CP for an automatic (or a 2+, so it's in line with Vect) than 1-2CP for a 4+.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

World Eaters and Black Templars can just as easily add in an extra detachment and get that access to Psykers. So your argument doesn't work.

One of my three arguments you mean? A psyker won't help since these Stratagems have to be used before DtW. My main argument for why it should be 2CP was never "it's because WE and BT need it, I mentioned it was because of a perceived weakness to psykers, it could also be intended to give them a leg up against psykers. Iron Hands can't have 15 Stratagems all above the level of the one Stratagem that other sub-factions get, it's not fair. Human psychology, IH getting 15 great Stratagems makes it less enjoyable to play WE that only get 1 great Stratagem. A lack of fairness makes an experience less enjoyable, monkies will literally go from eating a cucumber to throwing it in your face if they see their neighbour is eating delicious grapes while they have to contend with cucumber. An unfun game does not encourage spending unless by spending you mean switch over to playing IH.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

Don't forget Sisters of Battle!
Though, honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing GW take a more soup-considered approach and have stratagems that vary in cost based on faction. If you've got a "pure" army of Black Templar, World Eaters, SoB, etc, then it costs 1cp. If you've got a soup army, it costs 2.

Then again, I just generally hate stratagems and special rules where you consume a limited and valuable resource on a wildly random chance. I'd rather pay 3CP for an automatic (or a 2+, so it's in line with Vect) than 1-2CP for a 4+.

How are you going to further balance that? What if Black Templars or Sisters were with AdMech Graia? They still don't get access to Psykers.

It's either a 1CP strat or it's not. It's got nothing to do with allies, and on a 4+ it's completely unreasonable to say it's worth 2CP.

It's been worth 1 CP for all of 8th edition. It's only suddenly become a problem because it's Iron Hands who have it.

 vict0988 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

World Eaters and Black Templars can just as easily add in an extra detachment and get that access to Psykers. So your argument doesn't work.

One of my three arguments you mean? A psyker won't help since these Stratagems have to be used before DtW. My main argument for why it should be 2CP was never "it's because WE and BT need it, I mentioned it was because of a perceived weakness to psykers, it could also be intended to give them a leg up against psykers. Iron Hands can't have 15 Stratagems all above the level of the one Stratagem that other sub-factions get, it's not fair. Human psychology, IH getting 15 great Stratagems makes it less enjoyable to play WE that only get 1 great Stratagem. A lack of fairness makes an experience less enjoyable, monkies will literally go from eating a cucumber to throwing it in your face if they see their neighbour is eating delicious grapes while they have to contend with cucumber. An unfun game does not encourage spending unless by spending you mean switch over to playing IH.

Then what happens when World Eaters get their eventual update? Are we gonna relegate putting it back to 1CP or make it 2CP for World Eaters because they suddenly have a bunch of Strats too?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
It's been worth 1 CP for all of 8th edition. It's only suddenly become a problem because it's Iron Hands who have it.

Bingo. People are nerfing the wrong things when it's the blasted Super Doctrines being an issue for all the Marines, period.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

World Eaters and Black Templars can just as easily add in an extra detachment and get that access to Psykers. So your argument doesn't work.

One of my three arguments you mean? A psyker won't help since these Stratagems have to be used before DtW. My main argument for why it should be 2CP was never "it's because WE and BT need it, I mentioned it was because of a perceived weakness to psykers, it could also be intended to give them a leg up against psykers. Iron Hands can't have 15 Stratagems all above the level of the one Stratagem that other sub-factions get, it's not fair. Human psychology, IH getting 15 great Stratagems makes it less enjoyable to play WE that only get 1 great Stratagem. A lack of fairness makes an experience less enjoyable, monkies will literally go from eating a cucumber to throwing it in your face if they see their neighbour is eating delicious grapes while they have to contend with cucumber. An unfun game does not encourage spending unless by spending you mean switch over to playing IH.

Then what happens when World Eaters get their eventual update? Are we gonna relegate putting it back to 1CP or make it 2CP for World Eaters because they suddenly have a bunch of Strats too?

Sure, if they get more Stratagems than most other armies those Stratagems ought to be less effective in terms of CP cost. You can either have a few powerful Stratagems but be left in the cold when the right circumstances don't come up to use them or you can have a wealth of Stratagems for every situation, but they should never be amazing in that case, just a lot of neat little Stratagems to help out in a lot of situations and slightly increase performance in those areas. Are you perhabs thinking that this is silly due to allies giving access to more Stratagems? Because I believe allies should be nerfed or mono-sub-faction armies should be buffed, so I don't have any mental dissonance as far as my opinions on how the game should be balanced is concerned.

I'll admit though that the Stratagem was pretty far down on my list of concerns about IH and perhaps the nerf was a mistake, but in general I think more Stratagems should come at a cost, like with Specialist Detachments (which I love).

IH having that stratagem is just icing on the cake on an already strong army. They are already strong in the movement phase with 0 move penalties. Shooting phase is kinda obvious how they are good. And they are still sturdy and have a 5++ overwatch against melee. Them having an anti psyker stratagem on top of that is really really good. You dont even have to have a psyker in your list in case you face someone with a game changing psycic power. You just wip out that power and negate it at a key moment. You lost nothing by having it in your tool box.

Its not like they made IH weak in certain areas to then give them the strat to compensate. Even without it they are good. You just wont use it on a random smite or weak buff/debuff anymore but against a key warp time or deny overwatch power it can win you the game and your opponent is forced to try to play around it all game too.

Its a strat that is strong enough for people to choose rusty 17 over loyal 32 sometimes just to get access to it. IH gets it for being IH, didnt even have to sacrifice anything to get it.

I would love to have it at 2 cp in any list I made just in case I would need it. Would be happy to even in insanely CP hungry BA for those rare moments its useful once every 20 games as one of my 50(joke on me since BA isnt a supplement so I only have half of that) available stratagems. I can only remember 8 strats outside of the core strats that are better in my codex.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
It's been worth 1 CP for all of 8th edition. It's only suddenly become a problem because it's Iron Hands who have it.

According to Dakka Dakka space Marines can't have nice things.

BrianDavion wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
It's been worth 1 CP for all of 8th edition. It's only suddenly become a problem because it's Iron Hands who have it.

According to Dakka Dakka space Marines can't have nice things.

Can't have all the nice things*

 Ordana wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
It's been worth 1 CP for all of 8th edition. It's only suddenly become a problem because it's Iron Hands who have it.

According to Dakka Dakka space Marines can't have nice things.

Can't have all the nice things*

But Space Marines have had this stratagem since the old 8th edition codex came out! In fact, it was the first place it was ever printed!

Not really clear why Iron Hands need a "lol no psychic for you" stratagem at all anyway. If its worth 1 CP out of any army context, why shouldn't it be a standard stratagem available for everyone?

Really though, these nerfs are reasonable, but I think IH will still be dominant. Calculated Fury is stupid. I realise there are certain units which don't benefit as much (i.e. they have the rule already) - but giving a 50% performance boost (which makes things far more reliable) is not good for the game.

Its far too large a discrepancy - before you factor in the 6+++, the 5+ overwatch and vehicles only degrading if they have 1-2 wounds left. Or it would be - except I realise there are arguments that Stealthy (since you can, terrain/objectives permitting, just move backwards to maintain the 12" as necessary) plus Master Artisans for even more reliability is even better.

Having encountered this its just dumb. You hit on 3s rerolling 1s, and have a reroll for that stray 2 that comes up. Then you are probably wounding on 3s, rerolling a failed wound. Then you have silly amounts of AP, so hope I have a decent invul. Oh looks like you killed everything, what a shame. My vehicles meanwhile have reasonable toughness and a 2+ save, so have fun with anything lighter than a lascannon.

I'm fine with people complaining about Iron Hands having the stratagem all of a sudden, that makes sense, but it's been fine at 1 CP for over two years and hasn't ruined the game, why is it suddenly worth 2?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

Well World Eaters can't just pick all these powerful strats and modifiers out of a grab bag to hard counter multiple playstyles. With sane rules-writing IH would've had either the 4+ OW or the 4+ deny. But not both. Since they have both, they should pay a premium for the versatility.

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

Well World Eaters can't just pick all these powerful strats and modifiers out of a grab bag to hard counter multiple playstyles. With sane rules-writing IH would've had either the 4+ OW or the 4+ deny. But not both. Since they have both, they should pay a premium for the versatility.

So what happens when World Eaters get their inevitable rework?

Your argument is bad.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

Well World Eaters can't just pick all these powerful strats and modifiers out of a grab bag to hard counter multiple playstyles. With sane rules-writing IH would've had either the 4+ OW or the 4+ deny. But not both. Since they have both, they should pay a premium for the versatility.

So what happens when World Eaters get their inevitable rework?

Your argument is bad.

I don't know, what happens?

They get the IH treatment with universal strats and powerful modifiers? That sure sounds fun and a real argument for keeping the IH stuff so cheap.

I'm sure you'll be very proud of being right as the game slides into a dumpster.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I'm fine with people complaining about Iron Hands having the stratagem all of a sudden, that makes sense, but it's been fine at 1 CP for over two years and hasn't ruined the game, why is it suddenly worth 2?

Because IH got loads of buffs they didn't have before?

Tyel wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I'm fine with people complaining about Iron Hands having the stratagem all of a sudden, that makes sense, but it's been fine at 1 CP for over two years and hasn't ruined the game, why is it suddenly worth 2?

Because IH got loads of buffs they didn't have before?

and where already nerfed.

I dont think GW wanted to nerf their super doctrine so punish them in other ways. I think its acceptable balance mechanic. Now you are highly unlikely to use it but its their if you had a brigade for example.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
It's been worth 1 CP for all of 8th edition. It's only suddenly become a problem because it's Iron Hands who have it.

Because, again, it is NOT the same thing. One allows a regular deny before using the stratagem. The other does not. Creating a false equivalence doesn't make you right.

It is a more effective stratagem, in a faction which is not fluffed as hating on psykers.

2CP is fine.

Yup it would have been fine if they didnt get that stratagem to begin with

Tyel wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I'm fine with people complaining about Iron Hands having the stratagem all of a sudden, that makes sense, but it's been fine at 1 CP for over two years and hasn't ruined the game, why is it suddenly worth 2?

Because IH got loads of buffs they didn't have before?

So? It's still only worth 1CP. It's easily the dumbest complaint that's been made about the supplement and unfortunately ome GW listened to. That and the Character dreads, which were NOT a problem.

Context matters. We have some stratagems with different costs for different units. Rotating Ion Shields for example. Should GW make it 1cp for the Castellan again? Its ok at 1cp for some units so why not all?

Or why dont we give every army access to the 1cp cost version of deny a power. Wouldnt change at all how good factions that rely on psychic powers would be or would it? If the best and most playable faction can deny psychic powers at will then it will affect the viability of psykers for all armies.

That some armies without psykers get some psychic defense in return for not having psykers gives flavour to the faction and trades one thing for another. Which is fine. Having everything though is something completely different.

Thunderhammers costs 16 for units and 40 for characters. Obviously they should be 16 for everyone since thunderhammers on veterans isnt a problem and havent been for all of 8th. Same with Storm shields. They should be 2pts for characters as well. I almost forgot Jump Packs.

Having to pay 70pts or so for TH+SS+JP for a captain while it costs 20pts for a Veteran is outrageous!!! How can they cost different when veterans isnt broken. That smash captains can kill a model 5x as expensive turn 1 shouldnt factor in at all. They should be able to kill a 700pts knight while costing less than 100pts!

But you can't buy a veteran with SS+JP+TH, you can buy him and another 4 dudes. Meaning they cost 100pts, this gives them ablative wounds to soak up damage. Maybe not as good as tthe 6+W some characters have, but still good enough.
If character stratagems vs unit ones were balanced vs each other, then the veteran may even be better. Only thing hero have over units, is that they are harder to target, but even that seems to be going away.

Karol wrote:
But you can't buy a veteran with SS+JP+TH, you can buy him and another 4 dudes. Meaning they cost 100pts, this gives them ablative wounds to soak up damage. Maybe not as good as tthe 6+W some characters have, but still good enough.
If character stratagems vs unit ones were balanced vs each other, then the veteran may even be better. Only thing hero have over units, is that they are harder to target, but even that seems to be going away.

Vanguard veterans cant do the same thing as a smash captain due to interactions with other special rules like traits, relics and stratagems. So TH+SS+JP combo cost is different. Makes total sense. Which is my point. Same item but vastly different cost due to context its used. TH cost is 2.5x, SS cost 5x and JP cost 10x. And I havent seen anyone say they should be the same cost. So why should stratagems have to?

Deny a power on 4+ in Iron Hands is not the same as if done in a Black Templar list.

A 4+ overwatch stratagem is really strong in Iron Hands but wouldnt be used in most games as BA even if it were 0,5 cp.

Descent of angels, 3d6 charge, is what makes the BA smash captain so reliable and good over the new marine captains. Its balanced in a pure BA list at 2 cp but would it be the same if Ravenguard or Whitescars had access to it? They can also deny overwatch and their captains hit even harder than the BA one but they cant get in melee as easily. Giving them BAs defining stratagem in combination with everything else they have would be insanely good. No one would want that even if that strat for 2 cp is totaly fine in BA.

Klickor wrote:

Karol wrote:
But you can't buy a veteran with SS+JP+TH, you can buy him and another 4 dudes. Meaning they cost 100pts, this gives them ablative wounds to soak up damage. Maybe not as good as tthe 6+W some characters have, but still good enough.
If character stratagems vs unit ones were balanced vs each other, then the veteran may even be better. Only thing hero have over units, is that they are harder to target, but even that seems to be going away.

Vanguard veterans cant do the same thing as a smash captain due to interactions with other special rules like traits, relics and stratagems. So TH+SS+JP combo cost is different. Makes total sense. Which is my point. Same item but vastly different cost due to context its used. TH cost is 2.5x, SS cost 5x and JP cost 10x. And I havent seen anyone say they should be the same cost. So why should stratagems have to?

Deny a power on 4+ in Iron Hands is not the same as if done in a Black Templar list.

A 4+ overwatch stratagem is really strong in Iron Hands but wouldnt be used in most games as BA even if it were 0,5 cp.

Descent of angels, 3d6 charge, is what makes the BA smash captain so reliable and good over the new marine captains. Its balanced in a pure BA list at 2 cp but would it be the same if Ravenguard or Whitescars had access to it? They can also deny overwatch and their captains hit even harder than the BA one but they cant get in melee as easily. Giving them BAs defining stratagem in combination with everything else they have would be insanely good. No one would want that even if that strat for 2 cp is totaly fine in BA.

Vanguard Vets can't hide the same way for a single model to jump around and those Strats you make mention of, the only one they get to really use is the 3D6 charge one. Otherwise, there's no way you can get them to match Slamguinus for surviving and offense.

Also you're right that Black Templars isn't the same as Iron Hands for the Strat. If you fail your deny you still get to use a 5+++. Clearly that's too broken!

I know. Which is why they have different costs.

Wow! BT gets a 5+++ instead of a 6+++ against mortal wounds!

The strength of the stratagem isnt to spend 2cp to have a 75% chance to negate a smite. Spending 2cp to deny 2 mortal wounds is a bad trade. It costing 3 isnt making it much worse.. Its strength is in the ability to stop more powerful psychic powers in a pinch like doom/jinx on your Leviathan dread. Thats a game changer and worth more than 3 cp in some circumstances.

Klickor wrote:
I know. Which is why they have different costs.

Wow! BT gets a 5+++ instead of a 6+++ against mortal wounds!

The strength of the stratagem isnt to spend 2cp to have a 75% chance to negate a smite. Spending 2cp to deny 2 mortal wounds is a bad trade. It costing 3 isnt making it much worse.. Its strength is in the ability to stop more powerful psychic powers in a pinch like doom/jinx on your Leviathan dread. Thats a game changer and worth more than 3 cp in some circumstances.

So your argument is that, since it stops something from dying sometimes, it should cost more?

That's one of the worst arguments I've heard. Also a 5+++ is significantly significantly better than a 6+++ to stop Mortal wounds. Ergo, why shouldn't that be considered into the cost of Black Templars? They get a 50/75% chance to straight up deny and then they ignore the wounds on a 5+?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Klickor wrote:
I know. Which is why they have different costs.

Wow! BT gets a 5+++ instead of a 6+++ against mortal wounds!

The strength of the stratagem isnt to spend 2cp to have a 75% chance to negate a smite. Spending 2cp to deny 2 mortal wounds is a bad trade. It costing 3 isnt making it much worse.. Its strength is in the ability to stop more powerful psychic powers in a pinch like doom/jinx on your Leviathan dread. Thats a game changer and worth more than 3 cp in some circumstances.

So your argument is that, since it stops something from dying sometimes, it should cost more?

That's one of the worst arguments I've heard. Also a 5+++ is significantly significantly better than a 6+++ to stop Mortal wounds. Ergo, why shouldn't that be considered into the cost of Black Templars? They get a 50/75% chance to straight up deny and then they ignore the wounds on a 5+?

Should every faction get every rule/weapon/ability for the cheapest price? "I only use my tacticals for screens and cp so they should cost 4pts like guard"

We already have different pricing on different items depending on who wears it. Is that wrong? Not every faction get every ability.is that also wrong? Is it more fair that a very well rounded army pays a premium for an ability over what a less well rounded army does? I think its fair.

Why the hell are you talking about mortal wounds from psychic powers as its some large threat and BT is OP due to having a 5++ against it. Against a list that spam smites countering one of them doesnt do much anyway and spending 2cp or 3cp doesnt even matter.

Stopping a Librarian Dreadnought flying in and killing your tank with ease or some other power that is way way stronger than a normal smite is what makes that stratagem good even with the new cost. At the old cost it still wasnt good for stopping mortal wounds so why even get caught up on that.

IH pays nothing to have that strat in their toolbox of 50 stratagems while the other factions with that strat kinda have it as one of their defining strengths. I would argue that IH shouldnt even have it to begin with and if they want psychic defense they can just take a Librarian or warlord trait/relic.

The more options you have you should have to pay some for it. IH have more than others already and having them be too cheap makes it easy to counter every strategy with CP instead of building a good list. Factions without psykers cant get easy defense so have to rely on a stratagem they can use once a turn for 1 cp. If IH player really wants psychic defense he can buy a few librarians as well which is an option others cant. If the price of the strat is to expensive to counter a weak power then he can just hope his Deny The Witch works like everyone else. But to let him skip paying 100pts for a psyker due to him already having a good stratagem in a pinch lets him buy 100pts of more tanks. That is one of the reason the strat is so good for IH. You can buy more tanks and still have a psychic defense.

Why is there so much argument? Iron Hands are still really, really powerful.

They will perform well at the next big tournament, no doubt. SoCal open starts soon, but it's also unfortunate that Salamanders and IF won't be able to use the supplements.

 Ishagu wrote:
Why is there so much argument? Iron Hands are still really, really powerful.

They will perform well at the next big tournament, no doubt. SoCal open starts soon, but it's also unfortunate that Salamanders and IF won't be able to use the supplements.

yeah you won't really be able to judge on the marines until you see a toruny where all the chapter supplements are avaliable.