Apparently out of 30 players there were only 3 Xenos lists (Tau, Tyranids and could not find the last one) and they placed at the bottom.
I'm not sure people had Sisters on the radar as cheap bodys for Space Marines and I'm curious if Xenos factions can improve with different lists. I imagine a Tau list for 9th must be radically different to accomodate the new objective rules compared to a faction like Marines.
a_typical_hero wrote: I'm not sure people had Sisters on the radar as cheap bodys for Space Marines
I suspect the sisters were there for the repentia rather than the bodies. A lot of single turn glass cannon action while the marines bring the fire support a pure sisters list wouldn't have access to.
Also, on the other hand, there're tons of TTS tournament results if you're looking for high-performing lists.
It's kinda cool to see an actual GT getting off the ground, but for scrying the meta, it's not that relevant.
Custodes and Death Guard tend to dominate and probably need a healthy nerf. Marines continue to be super good and hopefully get toned down in their 9th Ed. codex. AdMech are good at tabling people. Sisters are good at raking up mission points before getting tabled. Etc..
So far that's really just providing evidence that backs up most xeno players feelings that they got shafted by the point changes.
Not truly understanding why custodes are dominating as people say they are I've not found them half a busted as marines in the couple of 9th edition games so far, they still have a hard time vrs T8.
Deathguard being disgustingly resilient, Sisters of Battle as a rush list make sense.
Dysartes wrote: ...am I the only person flabbergasted at the blatant stupidity in running a GT at the moment? Especially in the US?
Let them enjoy their "freedom"
Of all the stupid things that are done regularly in the US right now, playing a game which forces you to stay at least 44" apart is pretty low on the list. We also don't know what additional precautions they might have taken to ensure everyone stays safe - but considering it's the US, my expectations aren't high.
Ice_can wrote: Not truly understanding why custodes are dominating as people say they are I've not found them half a busted as marines in the couple of 9th edition games so far, they still have a hard time vrs T8.
I think its because they don't obviously give any good kill-X secondaries, while being quite likely to max attrition+a kill secondary or two in your opponents list.
Admittedly I keep saying this without much to support it - but its why I think you are going to see a lot of elite-toughness builds do well, at least at the moment.
Almost all armies can win 9th edition missions if they build a specific way but that way is usually boring and expensive.
The reason hoards got hit with points hikes and new rules is because they are a bit OP concerning the missions.
Tyranids, orks, and a few other armies litterally can only do well with massive amounts of bodies that just run and sit on objectives the whole game. With only about 1/3 of their remaining points able to be spend on damage and/or character buffers.
Gaunt spam and boy spam will easily win againgst most armies in 9th due to the way scoring works. But you litterally have to take 120+ bodies and basically have to just advance full tilt to jump on objectives from turn 1 and on.
If you let your opponent block your movement or if they build specifically with the intent of killing 130 models in 3 turns then you will loose however.
Without knowing what the nid list is, it is a bit difficult to say something. It is kraken, and if it was a stealer shock list... well that's the problem right there.
Gaunt spam and boy spam will easily win againgst most armies in 9th due to the way scoring works. But you litterally have to take 120+ bodies and basically have to just advance full tilt to jump on objectives from turn 1 and on.
This is certainly a viable tactics for DA Boyz.
But scoring starts from the 2nd turn onwards.
I don't understand what makes Custodes so good. To me they look like they always had a codex problem, not only points. Has their PA book changed that much how they play ? Or are their lists half soup ?
Also, if this goes on SM players will have to to their own SM tournaments if the other factions want to have any fun, looks like they're still not playing the same game as the others. Genuinely concerned about their first 9th Ed. codex coming October. I hope they'll tone every faction down in the lethality section, I mean the ones that need it of course. So that 9th has everyone on a lower basis for lethality to reduce codex creep a little.
Aaranis wrote: I don't understand what makes Custodes so good. To me they look like they always had a codex problem, not only points. Has their PA book changed that much how they play ? Or are their lists half soup ?
Also, if this goes on SM players will have to to their own SM tournaments if the other factions want to have any fun, looks like they're still not playing the same game as the others. Genuinely concerned about their first 9th Ed. codex coming October. I hope they'll tone every faction down in the lethality section, I mean the ones that need it of course. So that 9th has everyone on a lower basis for lethality to reduce codex creep a little.
Custodes always had excellent strats (Tanglefoot, Stooping Dive, etc..), but were starved for CP. Now (especially with the Moment Shackle FAQ), they are probably the faction with the most CP in the game (aside from perhaps having Guilliman).
Their army is fully ObSec and durable, which suits the 9th Ed. Missions very well. They can basically shut off any types of buffs the opponent brings to kill them (ignore AP -1 and -2, Transhuman, turn-off all re-rolls, Shadowkeepers -1 Strength, good-ol Tanglefoot/Swooping to mess up your charges/melee, double interrupt to mess it up even more, re-deploy to get the most from turn 1, etc..).
A lethal army can still whittle them down and/or table them towards the end of the game, especially once CP go low, but the way 9th Ed. works, they'll probably have the points to win and don't care.
6x Custodes
4x Space Marines Soup or Successor
3x Imperial Soup
3x Chaos Soup
2x Grey Knights
2x Blood Angels
2x Nurgle (?)
2x Death Guard
1x Eldar
1x Ultramarines
1x White Scars
1x Chaos Knights
1x Sororitas
1x Tyranids
1x Tau
How are the participants chosen for this kind of events? Do they have to qualify in local tournaments first?
Chaos overall has a good representation, but barely any Xenos showed up.
The 2 Nurgle Lists are Death Guard and Demons in the same detachment, and are functionally identical to the death guard lists. Difference is they have Nurglings which are absurdly strong atm.
Looks like the game is going to be a lot about rushing objectives turn one, and trying to win on secondaries. I just hope it is not going to end with one or two gigantic mosh pits, in most games.
Aaranis wrote: I don't understand what makes Custodes so good. To me they look like they always had a codex problem, not only points. Has their PA book changed that much how they play ? Or are their lists half soup ?
Also, if this goes on SM players will have to to their own SM tournaments if the other factions want to have any fun, looks like they're still not playing the same game as the others. Genuinely concerned about their first 9th Ed. codex coming October. I hope they'll tone every faction down in the lethality section, I mean the ones that need it of course. So that 9th has everyone on a lower basis for lethality to reduce codex creep a little.
The relation between costs and battlefield effect determines whether a unit is good or bad. Custodes have relatively low costs in 9th because they received few nerfs while most factions received many nerfs.
I am super happy to see soup, I was afraid it was as dead as can be. Other than that I don't think there is too much to be excited about with the results or participants.
6x Custodes
4x Space Marines Soup or Successor
3x Imperial Soup
3x Chaos Soup
2x Grey Knights
2x Blood Angels
2x Nurgle (?)
2x Death Guard
1x Eldar
1x Ultramarines
1x White Scars
1x Chaos Knights
1x Sororitas
1x Tyranids
1x Tau
How are the participants chosen for this kind of events? Do they have to qualify in local tournaments first?
Chaos overall has a good representation, but barely any Xenos showed up.
Nobody is taking Xenos because no-one really feels they can win an event at the moment and non of the pundits or playtesters are upbeat about them alot of it is wait till you see the new codex which is sometime in 2021 at the earliest.
This was an 8th edition tournament which got hijacked at the last second into 9th edition.
Most of the partecipants were ready for 8th edition, and in 8th most players didn't bring xenos. After the hijack many switched to another list or faction, but switching to marines and custodes is easy. Switching to xenos is much harder.
Spoletta wrote: This was an 8th edition tournament which got hijacked at the last second into 9th edition.
Most of the partecipants were ready for 8th edition, and in 8th most players didn't bring xenos. After the hijack many switched to another list or faction, but switching to marines and custodes is easy. Switching to xenos is much harder.
If Custodes Troops got the 50% increase Drukhari got and Drukhari got no increase you bet your ass we would be seeing the Drukhari raiding the tournament silly.
Spoletta wrote: This was an 8th edition tournament which got hijacked at the last second into 9th edition.
Most of the partecipants were ready for 8th edition, and in 8th most players didn't bring xenos. After the hijack many switched to another list or faction, but switching to marines and custodes is easy. Switching to xenos is much harder.
If Custodes Troops got the 50% increase Drukhari got and Drukhari got no increase you bet your ass we would be seeing the Drukhari raiding the tournament silly.
Yeah. No way some 8th Edition tournament would've had a quarter of the people bring foot-heavy Custodes lists.
The lists and faction spread screams "9th Ed. winners" and that's what people brought.
Spoletta wrote: This was an 8th edition tournament which got hijacked at the last second into 9th edition.
Most of the partecipants were ready for 8th edition, and in 8th most players didn't bring xenos. After the hijack many switched to another list or faction, but switching to marines and custodes is easy. Switching to xenos is much harder.
If Custodes Troops got the 50% increase Drukhari got and Drukhari got no increase you bet your ass we would be seeing the Drukhari raiding the tournament silly.
But they didn't. They got one of the smallest points increases, along with +1 to their invuls, their own version of transhuman physiology, and a stratagem that negates ap -1 and -2. So an army with obsec on everything, 2+, 4++, T5, 3W troops, even better stats on their elites, and a dreadnought that's tougher than a leviathan but cheaper. Yikes. Did I miss anything? Guess loyalist marines should start sweating.
Karol wrote:Looks like the game is going to be a lot about rushing objectives turn one, and trying to win on secondaries. I just hope it is not going to end with one or two gigantic mosh pits, in most games.
Spoletta wrote: This was an 8th edition tournament which got hijacked at the last second into 9th edition.
Most of the partecipants were ready for 8th edition, and in 8th most players didn't bring xenos. After the hijack many switched to another list or faction, but switching to marines and custodes is easy. Switching to xenos is much harder.
If Custodes Troops got the 50% increase Drukhari got and Drukhari got no increase you bet your ass we would be seeing the Drukhari raiding the tournament silly.
But they didn't. They got one of the smallest points increases, along with +1 to their invuls, their own version of transhuman physiology, and a stratagem that negates ap -1 and -2. So an army with obsec on everything, 2+, 4++, T5, 3W troops, even better stats on their elites, and a dreadnought that's tougher than a leviathan but cheaper. Yikes. Did I miss anything? Guess loyalist marines should start sweating.
2+ 4++ is the profile Custodes have had for all of 8th, that +1 to invulns is not new. Also, their strat to ignore Ap 1 and Ap 2 is only for Terminators. That's very good for them, but there's still a lot of Ap 3+ that ignores it. ...and that strat doesn't have anything to do with the faq/ca adjustment into 9th, that was in the War of the Spider.
I'm not defending them getting such a small points adjustment (relatively speaking), the points adjustments are all over the place. Custodes probably got the only set of changes that were appropriate compared to Marines, but that's an indictment of the Marine increases more than anything else.
Spoletta wrote: This was an 8th edition tournament which got hijacked at the last second into 9th edition.
Most of the partecipants were ready for 8th edition, and in 8th most players didn't bring xenos. After the hijack many switched to another list or faction, but switching to marines and custodes is easy. Switching to xenos is much harder.
If Custodes Troops got the 50% increase Drukhari got and Drukhari got no increase you bet your ass we would be seeing the Drukhari raiding the tournament silly.
But they didn't. They got one of the smallest points increases, along with +1 to their invuls, their own version of transhuman physiology, and a stratagem that negates ap -1 and -2. So an army with obsec on everything, 2+, 4++, T5, 3W troops, even better stats on their elites, and a dreadnought that's tougher than a leviathan but cheaper. Yikes. Did I miss anything? Guess loyalist marines should start sweating.
2+ 4++ is the profile Custodes have had for all of 8th, that +1 to invulns is not new. Also, their strat to ignore Ap 1 and Ap 2 is only for Terminators. That's very good for them, but there's still a lot of Ap 3+ that ignores it. ...and that strat doesn't have anything to do with the faq/ca adjustment into 9th, that was in the War of the Spider.
I'm not defending them getting such a small points adjustment (relatively speaking), the points adjustments are all over the place. Custodes probably got the only set of changes that were appropriate compared to Marines, but that's an indictment of the Marine increases more than anything else.
It isn't? Sorry, news to me, not a lot of Custodes players around here (though that may change now). I knew the AP strat was from pa but didn't realize it only works on termis, that's a little less bonkers. Agreed on the points, but looking at the price and stats on the Telemon and then looking at my Hellforged Leviathan stings a bit. You gotta agree though, Custodes are looking pretty good.
Sunny Side Up wrote: Also, on the other hand, there're tons of TTS tournament results if you're looking for high-performing lists.
It's kinda cool to see an actual GT getting off the ground, but for scrying the meta, it's not that relevant.
Custodes and Death Guard tend to dominate and probably need a healthy nerf. Marines continue to be super good and hopefully get toned down in their 9th Ed. codex. AdMech are good at tabling people. Sisters are good at raking up mission points before getting tabled. Etc..
Soup now has a cost (in CP) instead of being a benefit by giving you more CP.
That is fine and how it should be.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
a_typical_hero wrote: Of all the Xenos factions I think only Tau have it really rough with the new scoring system.
Eldar, Orks and Tyranids could have solutions in the form of Wraithguard, mass boys and mass gaunts maybe.
Custodes, Marines and Death Guard is the safe bet though and have a relative low cost / entry barrier.
For Tau I would look more towards the European lists from 8th that had a lot more mobility to get on objectives instead of the US style fire bases that sit in their deployment zone waiting for the game to end.
Dysartes wrote:...am I the only person flabbergasted at the blatant stupidity in running a GT at the moment? Especially in the US?
Nope, not really. I stopped being surprised by general human stupidity a long time ago. Doesn't mean it doesn't make me want to smack them though.
Yeah, but it's a special kind of stupid when we do it here in the US. It's one thing to see someplace like El Salvadore make bad choices, there's always the tacit understanding that if wasn't for bad options they wouldn't have any options at all. The US doing it is "watching a man with every advantage in the world calmly, deliberately, and decisively stick his todger in a pan of hot bleach".
Could be a protracted melee which is not what I'm looking for with my armies.
yeah, playing something that turns in to a random dice rolling simulator with no movment involved on turn 2 isn't very fun.
I've had a game look like it was going to get locked up like that, but the mechanics of Pile In and Morale made trying to make the most of that 3" move fairly engaging.
Soup now has a cost (in CP) instead of being a benefit by giving you more CP.
That is fine and how it should be.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
a_typical_hero wrote: Of all the Xenos factions I think only Tau have it really rough with the new scoring system.
Eldar, Orks and Tyranids could have solutions in the form of Wraithguard, mass boys and mass gaunts maybe.
Custodes, Marines and Death Guard is the safe bet though and have a relative low cost / entry barrier.
For Tau I would look more towards the European lists from 8th that had a lot more mobility to get on objectives instead of the US style fire bases that sit in their deployment zone waiting for the game to end.
This issue is those lists also pretty much died with marines as they just don't have the staying power to not just get tabled.
The old 4th edition devilfish and firewarrior spam might just work as Tau sept but it's got the killing power of wet noodles.
Thanks for that, that's just pure filth seems almost primed to pray on Marine lists though, while being also strong vrs Custodes and a number of other fly keyword based armies.
Thanks for that, that's just pure filth seems almost primed to pray on Marine lists though, while being also strong vrs Custodes and a number of other fly keyword based armies.
For real, the entire marine detachment is built just to kill Primaris. Teeth of Terra, Stalker Intercessors, Grav-cannons. They all mulch primaris pretty hard, although I'm curious he put the strength WLT on his captain instead of imperium's sword.
Aaranis wrote: Also, if this goes on SM players will have to to their own SM tournaments if the other factions want to have any fun, looks like they're still not playing the same game as the others. Genuinely concerned about their first 9th Ed. codex coming October. I hope they'll tone every faction down in the lethality section, I mean the ones that need it of course. So that 9th has everyone on a lower basis for lethality to reduce codex creep a little.
I like how people still whine about SM when out of 31 lists, this tournament saw grand total of TWO marine list. TWO. That's 6.5%, oh no, look at the spam!
There are also 4 half SM soups (I wonder why, when SM are sooo much better than anyone else?), 3 Imperial soups that maybe had SM, and a Blood Angels list. So, at WORST, less than 1/3 of the armies contained SM, and only half of that contained enough SM to have them as main component. Even a Fox News scaretainment show would find it hard to spin these numbers into "force them to have SM tournaments only". Seriously?
Except it gets even worse. Let's look at the winning list. The Sister/Marine one. Except ""Marines"" on it consists mostly of broken Forge World gak spam. This list features almost no actual SM from their own Codex. Gee, that sure sounds like the SM book is OP and everyone will spam it to exclusion of everything else!
Incidentally, same is true for most of Custode lists - broken FW junk for days, with few lists featuring all plastic army (but a lot of all-resin FW ones) - I really hope GW finally publishes Index FW smashing that pay to win nonsense if only because then maybe we'll have less whining about people wanting to play these armies with underpowered plastic models, not cherrypicked resin crap the books get bad rap for even though they don't actually contain these to begin with...
Karol wrote: Looks like the game is going to be a lot about rushing objectives turn one, and trying to win on secondaries. I just hope it is not going to end with one or two gigantic mosh pits, in most games.
Look at the GK list - 5x5 terminators and 3 GMDKs. No paladins. Though he was over in points and he apparently got a yellow card and busted one unit down to strikes.
In any case he has enough terminator units to stick two each onto objectives and then a fifth unit for the home objective. One might be so inclined to take Assassinate against this army and that would definitely cause a loss, because that will cause you to put more energy into GMDKs instead of the terminators, which is a fatal mistake. At the same time the GK player can take 'While We Stand', which is 2 GMDKs and Draigo trying to draw you into preventing that secondary, but its something you should ignore and instead focus on terminators.
Melee is essential and getting into a rumble in the middle of the board is bound to happen.
Irbis wrote:I like how people still whine about SM when out of 31 lists, this tournament saw grand total of TWO marine list. TWO. That's 6.5%, oh no, look at the spam!
There are also 4 half SM soups (I wonder why, when SM are sooo much better than anyone else?), 3 Imperial soups that maybe had SM, and a Blood Angels list. So, at WORST, less than 1/3 of the armies contained SM, and only half of that contained enough SM to have them as main component. Even a Fox News scaretainment show would find it hard to spin these numbers into "force them to have SM tournaments only". Seriously?
Except it gets even worse. Let's look at the winning list. The Sister/Marine one. Except ""Marines"" on it consists mostly of broken Forge World gak spam. This list features almost no actual SM from their own Codex. Gee, that sure sounds like the SM book is OP and everyone will spam it to exclusion of everything else!
Incidentally, same is true for most of Custode lists - broken FW junk for days, with few lists featuring all plastic army (but a lot of all-resin FW ones) - I really hope GW finally publishes Index FW smashing that pay to win nonsense if only because then maybe we'll have less whining about people wanting to play these armies with underpowered plastic models, not cherrypicked resin crap the books get bad rap for even though they don't actually contain these to begin with...
Contemptors are broken? How? Can you please explain how one of the few fw units that hasn't been nerfed into the ground is broken? Without any of the ridiculous stuff from out of those perfectly balanced codexes, none of which gave us any broken units or rules that required later errata and FAQs to fix? While I wait for your answer I'll be touching up the paint on my totally broken 880 point Fellblade and 680 point Cerberus. I'm so glad gw rewarded me for the money and time I spent on them by giving them such outrageouslyOP rules.
Dysartes wrote:...am I the only person flabbergasted at the blatant stupidity in running a GT at the moment? Especially in the US?
Nope, not really. I stopped being surprised by general human stupidity a long time ago. Doesn't mean it doesn't make me want to smack them though.
Yeah, but it's a special kind of stupid when we do it here in the US. It's one thing to see someplace like El Salvadore make bad choices, there's always the tacit understanding that if wasn't for bad options they wouldn't have any options at all. The US doing it is "watching a man with every advantage in the world calmly, deliberately, and decisively stick his todger in a pan of hot bleach".
True, which makes it even more infuriating.
Daedalus81 wrote:Melee is essential and getting into a rumble in the middle of the board is bound to happen.
Spoletta wrote: Are you really suggesting that contemptors are properly costed at the moment?
Really?
Yeah without doctorines and Super Chapter Tactics and all the other BS that came out becuase of the GW codex they're not meta busting see choas versions.
Spoletta wrote: Are you really suggesting that contemptors are properly costed at the moment?
Really?
For the relic? Probably not, because gw inexplicably decided to make all contemptors the same price regardless of their rules, so all the rest went up, while it went down. But I think you're getting good confused with broken, which was the charge that was made. There's a difference.
I think there also might be a case of people assuming that just because things have the same name that they are the same, similar to leviathans. It was the loyalist version that everyone was complaining about, but the hellforged was lumped in with it, even though it has an inferior invul, and no access to loyalist rules, even though it has the same price.
No one's going to mention the battle sanctum? 55 points for a gigantic LoS blocker that walls off your deployment zone and grants light cover, heavy cover, miracle dice, and leadership?
The sheer size of footprint alone makes it worth considering at that price point.
slave.entity wrote: No one's going to mention the battle sanctum? 55 points for a gigantic LoS blocker that walls off your deployment zone and grants light cover, heavy cover, miracle dice, and leadership?
The sheer size of footprint alone makes it worth considering at that price point.
Yeah, it's pretty sexy, especially since you can get your CP back on the Fortification Network detachment. Of course that means you can only take it at Incursion or higher, but that's most matched play games anyway. In some battles on a big enough board, I'd even take two; I have one build that I'm considering which focuses on MD optimization, and two of these really push it over the top.
slave.entity wrote: No one's going to mention the battle sanctum? 55 points for a gigantic LoS blocker that walls off your deployment zone and grants light cover, heavy cover, miracle dice, and leadership?
The sheer size of footprint alone makes it worth considering at that price point.
Yeah, it's pretty sexy, especially since you can get your CP back on the Fortification Network detachment. Of course that means you can only take it at Incursion or higher, but that's most matched play games anyway. In some battles on a big enough board, I'd even take two; I have one build that I'm considering which focuses on MD optimization, and two of these really push it over the top.
It's going to get nerfed. The next cheapest fortification is the Aegis Defence Line at 80 points and it's a tiny fraction of the size of the battle sanctum.
I think the Westeros GT is in sweden who have handled things very differently. They as a coutry appear to be managinf their way out of the crisis.
USA and England on the other hand appear to be backsliding or something as their numbers keep getting worse.
And, to be clear, the muppets over in Tournament Discussions who keep posting about running events at the Battle Bunker (wherever in the UK that is) also need to be taking flak for being massively irresponsible. I'm not just picking on the US here.
As a general rule, I don't think any IRL tournaments should be occurring at present.
Karol wrote: Looks like the game is going to be a lot about rushing objectives turn one, and trying to win on secondaries. I just hope it is not going to end with one or two gigantic mosh pits, in most games.
Look at the GK list - 5x5 terminators and 3 GMDKs. No paladins. Though he was over in points and he apparently got a yellow card and busted one unit down to strikes.
In any case he has enough terminator units to stick two each onto objectives and then a fifth unit for the home objective. One might be so inclined to take Assassinate against this army and that would definitely cause a loss, because that will cause you to put more energy into GMDKs instead of the terminators, which is a fatal mistake. At the same time the GK player can take 'While We Stand', which is 2 GMDKs and Draigo trying to draw you into preventing that secondary, but its something you should ignore and instead focus on terminators.
Melee is essential and getting into a rumble in the middle of the board is bound to happen.
Oh I am not saying that this is very bad for armies like custodes or GK. It is just seems kind of a boring to me.
I wonder if GKGM and draigo are going to fall under the 1 cpt/gm per detachment though. If they do, then the way of playing is going to be non valid. I have been really happy, in general, how my army is shaped in 9th. On top of it all I got a marine army for free, so very optimistic about 9th. Just need a store to open to play and I will be good.
It's going to get nerfed. The next cheapest fortification is the Aegis Defence Line at 80 points and it's a tiny fraction of the size of the battle sanctum.
Maybe GW wants to sell faction buildings to all armies , just like they do for AoS. And there is no better entice to take one, then make it too good not to do it.
Played Sallies today. He was 3x Aggressors, 3x Eradicators, 3x Suppressors, 3x Eliminators, a bunch of Primaris infantry, 3x scout bikes, 5 scouts, a redemptor, and a pile of characters.
We played strike force mission 23 and given that it was a 28" no mans land I sat back a couple inches in the even he deployed his Eradicators on the line. I was fine with forcing him to advance if he wanted to get those shots off. He opted not take the bait and instead stashed them out of LOS for a turn 2 alpha. I instead opted to cross to the other side of the table with a heldrake and then catapulted it forward with Warp Time. So my turn 1 the drake was in combat with them taking them out of the equation for 2 turns minimum. The redemptor came over as well as a chaplain, but they weren't able to get enough off the drake, which flew away next turn to lick its wounds. On my turn 2 he threw up Born Protectors, but I worked through that and got a Vindicator shot off and wiped them out.
I lost 5 Enlightened and a Rhino and killed 3 Aggressors, 3 Eradicators, 5 Scouts, 5 Primaris Assault Marines, and was in a position to work down the rest of his army. We started super late so had to end there. So, I imagine he could have taken 6 Eradicators and had better odds to get work done on my units, but that would have mean sacrificing something that was up front getting him objectives. Outriders would have been a good swap for the scout bikes, but the 3++ on them is more than sufficient to block shots and score points. In fact Outriders would probably have worked more in my favor by putting fewer models on the table especially since I had two Moirax with Grav Pulsars.
I wonder if GKGM and draigo are going to fall under the 1 cpt/gm per detachment though. If they do, then the way of playing is going to be non valid. I have been really happy, in general, how my army is shaped in 9th. On top of it all I got a marine army for free, so very optimistic about 9th. Just need a store to open to play and I will be good.
Bet on it. You won't see 3 GMDKs in the near future. While the terminator list is pretty static its great to see terminators be useful and melee be more significant.
A.T. wrote: The Galatus? That's on that hasn't seen the table in a long time (or ever, really).
Well, all FW Contemptors got a point drop (while, famously, most everything in the game went up).
There's a reason the other list shown had 3 Imperial Fist Relic Contemptors. It applies to the Custodes Contemptor variants as well.
Not sure if they got that point drop (even larger relative point drop compared to "the rest of the game") in anticipation to some changes in the upcoming FW rules. But as of now, using new-Relic/FW-Contemptor points with their old rules is very strong.
Also most Contemptors (at least the Marine ones) are fast and don't degrade on speed, which is more important than ever (combined with a smaller board).
Also most Contemptors (at least the Marine ones) are fast and don't degrade on speed, which is more important than ever (combined with a smaller board).
slave.entity wrote: No one's going to mention the battle sanctum? 55 points for a gigantic LoS blocker that walls off your deployment zone and grants light cover, heavy cover, miracle dice, and leadership?
The sheer size of footprint alone makes it worth considering at that price point.
Just to be clear here. It is an exceptional model, but is definitely not a LoS blocker. It is full of windows and doesn't have the obscuring trait, so hiding something in there isn't posible.
Irbis wrote:I like how people still whine about SM when out of 31 lists, this tournament saw grand total of TWO marine list. TWO. That's 6.5%, oh no, look at the spam!
There are also 4 half SM soups (I wonder why, when SM are sooo much better than anyone else?), 3 Imperial soups that maybe had SM, and a Blood Angels list. So, at WORST, less than 1/3 of the armies contained SM, and only half of that contained enough SM to have them as main component. Even a Fox News scaretainment show would find it hard to spin these numbers into "force them to have SM tournaments only". Seriously?
Except it gets even worse. Let's look at the winning list. The Sister/Marine one. Except ""Marines"" on it consists mostly of broken Forge World gak spam. This list features almost no actual SM from their own Codex. Gee, that sure sounds like the SM book is OP and everyone will spam it to exclusion of everything else!
Incidentally, same is true for most of Custode lists - broken FW junk for days, with few lists featuring all plastic army (but a lot of all-resin FW ones) - I really hope GW finally publishes Index FW smashing that pay to win nonsense if only because then maybe we'll have less whining about people wanting to play these armies with underpowered plastic models, not cherrypicked resin crap the books get bad rap for even though they don't actually contain these to begin with...
Contemptors are broken? How? Can you please explain how one of the few fw units that hasn't been nerfed into the ground is broken? Without any of the ridiculous stuff from out of those perfectly balanced codexes, none of which gave us any broken units or rules that required later errata and FAQs to fix? While I wait for your answer I'll be touching up the paint on my totally broken 880 point Fellblade and 680 point Cerberus. I'm so glad gw rewarded me for the money and time I spent on them by giving them such outrageouslyOP rules.
Dysartes wrote:...am I the only person flabbergasted at the blatant stupidity in running a GT at the moment? Especially in the US?
Nope, not really. I stopped being surprised by general human stupidity a long time ago. Doesn't mean it doesn't make me want to smack them though.
Yeah, but it's a special kind of stupid when we do it here in the US. It's one thing to see someplace like El Salvadore make bad choices, there's always the tacit understanding that if wasn't for bad options they wouldn't have any options at all. The US doing it is "watching a man with every advantage in the world calmly, deliberately, and decisively stick his todger in a pan of hot bleach".
True, which makes it even more infuriating.
Daedalus81 wrote:Melee is essential and getting into a rumble in the middle of the board is bound to happen.
Sounds fun. Can't wait to try it.
The dude who won took relic contemptors over exorcists. When your anti-tank unit is so much better than another faction's anti-tank unit that the fact that they can guarantee 6 damage whenever they feel like isn't enough to bridge the gap, that's pretty broken ngl.
I'm sorry that your fellblade sucks, but one forgeworld unit being gak doesn't mean that every forgeworld unit is gak. Sidebar: How salty you are really fethed your grammar there.
Also most Contemptors (at least the Marine ones) are fast and don't degrade on speed, which is more important than ever (combined with a smaller board).
Wut? They sure do, often going 9"/6"/4".
I think he's talking about the double the wounds for the purposes of the damage table trait.
I think he's talking about the double the wounds for the purposes of the damage table trait.
No.
Was that FAQed?
In my FW Index, they don't go down. Even in 8th, that's been one of their "FW-pay-to-win"-perks.
Lol , you realise that the relic contemptor is the only one that has that natively and is the only one going down in cost right
And as a sidenote the gw rules Team is writing so even Double lol.
Sure. But it's the relic that's been showing up everywhere since the change. And GW rules team didn't write that datasheet. That is still from the FW index from 2017.
Presumably the points dropped because it'll get more sensible rules at some point? As stated above, that is the working hypothesis.
I think he's talking about the double the wounds for the purposes of the damage table trait.
No.
Was that FAQed?
In my FW Index, they don't go down. Even in 8th, that's been one of their "FW-pay-to-win"-perks.
Lol , you realise that the relic contemptor is the only one that has that natively and is the only one going down in cost right
And as a sidenote the gw rules Team is writing so even Double lol.
Sure. But it's the relic that's been showing up everywhere since the change. And GW rules team didn't write that datasheet. That is still from the FW index from 2017.
Presumably the points dropped because it'll get more sensible rules at some point? As stated above, that is the working hypothesis.
That assumes that the prices in the ca would be sensible, which they are not. As Seen here gw just blanket changed them probably because "they are the Same". Same with leviathans, and just blanket changed them without consideration, price this one approoriatly and it Stops beeing an issue.
But gw won't because actually hiring an Editor, coordinating the rules Team, listening to playtesters etc cost time and time is money.
And why Invest much when your custommers are fine with rebuying another dex a year later for that matter.
Eihnlazer wrote: Gaunt spam and boy spam will easily win againgst most armies in 9th due to the way scoring works. But you litterally have to take 120+ bodies and basically have to just advance full tilt to jump on objectives from turn 1 and on.
If you let your opponent block your movement or if they build specifically with the intent of killing 130 models in 3 turns then you will loose however.
9th ed firepower isn't that much lower than 8th where 60 orks a turn was easy, 119 was record i faced.
List with over 200 plaguebearers were a thing (not a thing to win super-big tournaments with, but people definitely tried) before Marine Codex 2.0 hit, but as soon as Nu-Marine-Aggressors/Centurions hit the scene (even before the Iron Hands / Raven Guard supplements), those lists were just gone, even with the old -2 rules and 7 points a Plaguebearer. And that was before blast and new coherency rules.
That said, I am pretty sure you can catch people out with it, if they bring lists tuned for a highly elite meta full of Custodes and Death Guard tanks and whatnot. At least I hope it is, because horde-lists should exist as a thing you have to worry about and as a corrective against a one-dimensional arms-race in a meta going for most elite / anti-elite stuff.
I think he's talking about the double the wounds for the purposes of the damage table trait.
No.
Was that FAQed?
In my FW Index, they don't go down. Even in 8th, that's been one of their "FW-pay-to-win"-perks.
Lol , you realise that the relic contemptor is the only one that has that natively and is the only one going down in cost right
And as a sidenote the gw rules Team is writing so even Double lol.
Sure. But it's the relic that's been showing up everywhere since the change. And GW rules team didn't write that datasheet. That is still from the FW index from 2017.
Presumably the points dropped because it'll get more sensible rules at some point? As stated above, that is the working hypothesis.
No unit that I can remember has ever had its points changed to account for future rules. Because you simply change the points when those future rules come out.
The reason is very simple. A relic contemptor is the same points as a normal contemptor. No one compared their rules when they threw this together, 2 contemptors? same points. done, next!.
To all the people complained about FW pay to win etc etc.
A few facts for you GW main studio (yes the people who broke the game with, Ynarri, and Impossible to hit Eldar and the crown jewel of Marines 2.0) have been responsible for all the 40k rules even for FW models since 2018.
FW said at the time they dropped the index's they were playtested against guard and eldar stuff but it was a rush job planned as a holding answer to allow people to use them.
Funnily enough GK, deathwatch Blood angles, Space puppies and Dark angles have had acess to these "broken pay to win units" for all of 8th too and guess what nothing, the units as written were not broken.
Funny how adding 4 additional buffing rules if not more with zero point's cost make unit's OP. Which was all caused by GW writer's forgetting about the units in the books they promised would be updated in 8th edition.
The roumered internal argument that got GW control of FW rules was this would happen less if all the rules were done by them, why is anyone but the hardest Codex's are God's holy scripture believers NOT surprised that once again GW make an absolute joke of their first wholesale adjustment of FW models in 9th.
Hint it because it's exactly the same story as when they took control in 8th.
Ice_can wrote: To all the people complained about FW pay to win etc etc.
A few facts for you GW main studio (yes the people who broke the game with, Ynarri, and Impossible to hit Eldar and the crown jewel of Marines 2.0) have been responsible for all the 40k rules even for FW models since 2018.
I know that. But what Warhammer 40k rules have been published since 2018? Basically the Custodes stuff, the Maelific Lords errata and that's it.
99.99% of all Warhammer 40KFW rules currently in play pre-date that "take over".
And yes, the fact that giving the FW rules to the guys who wrote the rules for "Ynnari & Space Marines 2.0" is almost certainly an immeasurable improvement over the (still) current FW rules shows how mind-numbingly absurd those FW indexes are.
If FW was "only" Ynnari/Marine 2.0 levels of broken, we'd be in a much, much better place.
Ice_can wrote: To all the people complained about FW pay to win etc etc.
A few facts for you GW main studio (yes the people who broke the game with, Ynarri, and Impossible to hit Eldar and the crown jewel of Marines 2.0) have been responsible for all the 40k rules even for FW models since 2018.
I know that. But what Warhammer 40k rules have been published since 2018? Basically the Custodes stuff, the Maelific Lords errata and that's it.
99.99% of all Warhammer 40KFW rules currently in play pre-date that "take over".
And yes, the fact that giving the FW rules to the guys who wrote the rules for "Ynnari & Space Marines 2.0" is almost certainly an immeasurable improvement over the (still) current FW rules shows how mind-numbingly absurd those FW indexes are.
If FW was "only" Ynnari/Marine 2.0 levels of broken, we'd be in a much, much better place.
Did you really just go there?
You realise that, before dex 2.0 from gw the contemptor regardless of variety was just considered, meh to okay? right?
You also realise that the malefic lord was less an issue and that there is a 1:1 improved version in the game now for the old price , right?
Also conveniently ignoring ALL ca points changes.
Just, stop. It shows that you don't have experience with these units or rules.
If people weren't running Contemptors pre Marine 2.0, it's because they were running even more absurd FW dreads like Deredeos or Leviathans and using the CSM ruleset instead of the Marine one, because it was stronger.
Doesn't make the FW dreads less absurd and only make you look more foolish for claiming they weren't around in abundance since the earliest days of the edition.
Hell, the very first WHW Heat right after the release of 8th was won by (actual loyalist, pre Chaos Marines getting a Codex) Raven Guard FW Contemptor spam in the late summer of 2017.
They have been a way to buy yourself a tournament win if you wanna spend the money ever since.
Sunny Side Up wrote: If people weren't running Contemptors pre Marine 2.0, it's because they were running even more absurd FW dreads like Deredeos or Leviathans and using the CSM ruleset instead of the Marine one, because it was stronger.
Doesn't make the FW dreads less absurd and only make you look more foolish for claiming they weren't around in abundance since the earliest days of the edition.
Hell, the very first WHW Heat right after the release of 8th was won by (actual loyalist, pre Chaos Marines getting a Codex) Raven Guard Contemptor spam in the late summer of 2017.
They have been a way to buy yourself a tournament win if you wanna spend the money ever since.
PFT, the csm leviathan is worse then the SM one even before sm 2.0 just fyi.
Same with the contemptor.
But you were allways an "objective " person in regards to FW weren't you.
But just as you again are proven wrong you double down , again.
Newsflash: It don't matter who writes rules in GW overall, because they are gak quality regardless 90% of the time, if you were indeed in favour of balance you'd be pissed for the fact what the new 9th editions pts value are OVERALL. And not hark on a single unit, because who the feth cares about a single unit for a single army that is regardless overperforming, which looks at the virtual clone +1 for other factions units and states that they don't work, whilest the other faction has to make do with an clearly inferior unit.
No, the relic contemptor point drop is just a little drop in an ocean of reasons to start questioning GW's balance and rules , not to mention their modus operandi of selling them.
And so long they can release literally units like eradicators and a good lot of people decide that they don't care that these exist at such a state, or force people to rebuy their dex after 1 year and 1 month, or ignore the fact that whole armies more or less have vanished overnight from competitve play not to mention casual through FAQ's and CA's (GSC says hello) . so long gw won't change and wont even start adressing balance issues.
the new gw is the old gw with a PR department. there have been 60+ paid relases for rules alone for 8th edition. GW has lost oversight regardless, and is perfectly willing to just shove stuff out the frontdoor, hence SW pre release FAQ and supplements. Hence the initial release of 8th indexes with typos and missing keywords.
Sure. New GW is the old GW and that's way FW is still blatantly pay-to-win and will not change.
People like you desperately trying to white knight they resin-bought tournament points is cute. You played the game and parted from your money to get an edge over better skilled players. I am not excusing GW of offering that option, but neither should you delude yourself into why GW does it that way: because suckers will pay the FW premium to toast opponents with the more "pedestrian" plastic models at the local tournament. That's how that symbiotic relationship works.
Sunny Side Up wrote: Sure. New GW is the old GW and that's way FW is still blatantly pay-to-win and will not change.
People like you desperately trying to white knight they resin-bought tournament points is cute. You played the game and parted from your money to get an edge over better skilled players. I am not excusing GW of offering that option, but neither should you delude yourself into why GW does it that way: because suckers will pay the FW premium to toast opponents with the more "pedestrian" plastic models at the local tournament. That's how that symbiotic relationship works.
Dude, lol.
FW stuff isn't nearly half as broken as regular GW.
You say contemptor i point to whole subfactions.
You point to Decimator, i to obliterator and whole subfaction traits again.
You point to Leviathan, i point to the smashcaptain.
You point to any FW flyer in existance, i point to DE / Eldar flyers.
Knights, better bet it was a castelan of GW's making.
CP setup so that everyone and their mother could run loyal 32, also Gw's making.
It literally has nothing to do with what material the models are made off, GW' can't balance. And doesn't want to.
Sunny Side Up wrote: Sure. New GW is the old GW and that's way FW is still blatantly pay-to-win and will not change.
People like you desperately trying to white knight they resin-bought tournament points is cute. You played the game and parted from your money to get an edge over better skilled players. I am not excusing GW of offering that option, but neither should you delude yourself into why GW does it that way: because suckers will pay the FW premium to toast opponents with the more "pedestrian" plastic models at the local tournament. That's how that symbiotic relationship works.
Dude, lol.
FW stuff isn't nearly half as broken as regular GW.
You say contemptor i point to whole subfactions.
You point to Decimator, i to obliterator and whole subfaction traits again.
You point to Leviathan, i point to the smashcaptain.
You point to any FW flyer in existance, i point to DE / Eldar flyers.
Knights, better bet it was a castelan of GW's making.
CP setup so that everyone and their mother could run loyal 32, also Gw's making.
It literally has nothing to do with what material the models are made off, GW' can't balance. And doesn't want to.
Also nice personal attack btw.
With you on this one, for every FW unit in a winning tourney list there's probably half a dozen that haven't even seen the table in 2 editions. The biggest outliers have always been GW's rules, even the much maligned unkillable leviathan- not forgeworlds problem, that models rules didn't change at all, it was the GW teams stacking rules that enabled it.
If the mere existence of a few underpowered FW units somehow excuses their ridiculous pay-to-win nonesense, then the same applies to GW and all the Castellan, Ynnari, whatever stuff can be excused because Mutilators and Necron Monoliths exists.
Everytime I read an exchange like this I look at the FW units for IG and think "pay to win? What?"
None of them really stick out as broken. The Macharius Vulcan is the only one that comes to mind as maybe stronger in firepower than its plastic cousin the Stormlord, but lacks wounds and firedeck for not that much of a different price.
I might be wrong but "broken FW" might more be "broken FW loyalist marines" if at all
How many FW units have seen tournament play that weren't op though? I'd wager the number is rather low.
Both the terrible and OP units are a clear sign of low quality rules writing - even compared to the GW stuff. IMHO it wouldn't be too bad if FW disappeared completely for 40k.
Pyroalchi wrote: Everytime I read an exchange like this I look at the FW units for IG and think "pay to win? What?"
None of them really stick out as broken. The Macharius Vulcan is the only one that comes to mind as maybe stronger in firepower than its plastic cousin the Stormlord, but lacks wounds and firedeck for not that much of a different price.
I might be wrong but "broken FW" might more be "broken FW loyalist marines" if at all
Everytime I read an exchange like this I look at 2017 Ynnari Harlequins or at a 2018 House Hawkshroud Castellan and think "unbalanced? what?".
@ Jidmah: the whole Death Korps of Krieg? They turn up in tournaments occassionally but are not really OP, are they? Neither are Macharius or Malcadors
Edit: @ sunnyside up: I have to admit that was before my time
Pyroalchi wrote: Yes no top placements, but have they seen tournaments play? (Serious question, I don't know) Because that was the question, wasn't it?
na
FW ends up if ever at tournaments as a single unit type or due to how soup was initially messed up.
Overall, the single most abusive FW combination you could field was due to a gw introduced formation and a Specific FW army subfaction of R&H, built upon fearless FNP 4+ units and arty. Was it more abusive then Taudar though, or 500pts handicap marines? ehh, debatable overall.
DKoK, though, never really. Mostly because why pick the more DKoK version when it allways pays more, when all the options for them are available for regular guard anyways.
Pyroalchi wrote: Yes no top placements, but have they seen tournaments play? (Serious question, I don't know) Because that was the question, wasn't it?
For the discussion at hand, it's irrelevant whether you show up to a tournament and have no chance of winning or do not show up at all.
Jidmah wrote: How many FW units have seen tournament play that weren't op though? I'd wager the number is rather low.
Both the terrible and OP units are a clear sign of low quality rules writing - even compared to the GW stuff. IMHO it wouldn't be too bad if FW disappeared completely for 40k.
one issue though, by the same vein you could argue that all non comp units should get curbed and in cases of some bloated dexes, that are a lot of units.
Heck Grots were for most of their existence such a unit. As were possessed, etc.
the actual number of competitively viable units is extremely low overall for 40k. Chaos is a prade exemple of this, considering that you often need specific subfaction trait combinations and units of a slew of multiple dexes to create high end comp list.
take arhiman supreme in a body of AL with some daemon support as an exemple. that army has how many diffrent units exactly?
slave.entity wrote: No one's going to mention the battle sanctum? 55 points for a gigantic LoS blocker that walls off your deployment zone and grants light cover, heavy cover, miracle dice, and leadership?
The sheer size of footprint alone makes it worth considering at that price point.
Yeah, it's pretty sexy, especially since you can get your CP back on the Fortification Network detachment. Of course that means you can only take it at Incursion or higher, but that's most matched play games anyway. In some battles on a big enough board, I'd even take two; I have one build that I'm considering which focuses on MD optimization, and two of these really push it over the top.
It's going to get nerfed. The next cheapest fortification is the Aegis Defence Line at 80 points and it's a tiny fraction of the size of the battle sanctum.
That's an indictment of the aegis, not a reason to nerf the sanctum.
The current issue with FW is the same that we have with basically all of the current FW AND GW points - they didn't put any effort into balancing them. All this BS about playtesting this and that is worthless when those testers that have spoken out about it didn't get to provide feedback about those points in time. All it did was tell GW that they fethed up, and they're apparently not willing to admit or even fix that.
The next opportunity will be when they release the army builder, but I wouldn't hold my breath for that.
nekooni wrote: The current issue with FW is the same that we have with basically all of the current FW AND GW points - they didn't put any effort into balancing them. All this BS about playtesting this and that is worthless when those testers that have spoken out about it didn't get to provide feedback about those points in time. All it did was tell GW that they fethed up, and they're apparently not willing to admit or even fix that.
The next opportunity will be when they release the army builder, but I wouldn't hold my breath for that.
considering the quality of the App, we should be happy if it even started.....
Sunny Side Up wrote: Sure. New GW is the old GW and that's way FW is still blatantly pay-to-win and will not change.
People like you desperately trying to white knight they resin-bought tournament points is cute. You played the game and parted from your money to get an edge over better skilled players. I am not excusing GW of offering that option, but neither should you delude yourself into why GW does it that way: because suckers will pay the FW premium to toast opponents with the more "pedestrian" plastic models at the local tournament. That's how that symbiotic relationship works.
Dude, lol. FW stuff isn't nearly half as broken as regular GW. You say contemptor i point to whole subfactions. You point to Decimator, i to obliterator and whole subfaction traits again. You point to Leviathan, i point to the smashcaptain. You point to any FW flyer in existance, i point to DE / Eldar flyers. Knights, better bet it was a castelan of GW's making. CP setup so that everyone and their mother could run loyal 32, also Gw's making.
It literally has nothing to do with what material the models are made off, GW' can't balance. And doesn't want to.
Also nice personal attack btw.
The issue with forgeworld is factionally way more broken than GW prime is.
Tell me who would win in a game between SM and SoB right now? Hard to call without seeing the lists right?
Now tell me who would win between Forgeworld SM and Forgeworld SoB.
@ Jidmah: I'm honestly confused. You asked which FW units das tournament play that were not OP. I mentioned DKOK. You answer that those so not count since they never placed on top. One might come to the idea that this might be because they were not OP.
What exactly were you asking for then? FW units that were not OP but still part of armies that placed on top?
Sunny Side Up wrote: Sure. New GW is the old GW and that's way FW is still blatantly pay-to-win and will not change.
People like you desperately trying to white knight they resin-bought tournament points is cute. You played the game and parted from your money to get an edge over better skilled players. I am not excusing GW of offering that option, but neither should you delude yourself into why GW does it that way: because suckers will pay the FW premium to toast opponents with the more "pedestrian" plastic models at the local tournament. That's how that symbiotic relationship works.
Dude, lol.
FW stuff isn't nearly half as broken as regular GW.
You say contemptor i point to whole subfactions.
You point to Decimator, i to obliterator and whole subfaction traits again.
You point to Leviathan, i point to the smashcaptain.
You point to any FW flyer in existance, i point to DE / Eldar flyers.
Knights, better bet it was a castelan of GW's making.
CP setup so that everyone and their mother could run loyal 32, also Gw's making.
It literally has nothing to do with what material the models are made off, GW' can't balance. And doesn't want to.
Also nice personal attack btw.
The issue with forgeworld is factionally way more broken than GW prime is.
Tell me who would win in a game between SM and SoB right now? Hard to call without seeing the lists right?
Now tell me who would win between Forgeworld SM and Forgeworld SoB.
SM and SM by virtue of there not beeing any SoBFW.
Options are just that, options. How much do you not see off SM, i rekon it's a higher rate of units that get never picked in that dex then SoB.
Jidmah wrote: How many FW units have seen tournament play that weren't op though? I'd wager the number is rather low.
Both the terrible and OP units are a clear sign of low quality rules writing - even compared to the GW stuff. IMHO it wouldn't be too bad if FW disappeared completely for 40k.
one issue though, by the same vein you could argue that all non comp units should get curbed and in cases of some bloated dexes, that are a lot of units.
Heck Grots were for most of their existence such a unit. As were possessed, etc.
the actual number of competitively viable units is extremely low overall for 40k. Chaos is a prade exemple of this, considering that you often need specific subfaction trait combinations and units of a slew of multiple dexes to create high end comp list.
take arhiman supreme in a body of AL with some daemon support as an exemple. that army has how many diffrent units exactly?
DG super bros?
I still see no reason why there should be a second shop within GW that releases models at higher prices and with inferior rules that are not of a notably higher quality than the main line - quite the opposite. Even rules wise, many FW units are in direct competition with comparable plastic kits, making one or the other obsolete.
FW is a relic from times when GW themselves couldn't make models as big or detailed as resin and when not every unit in the codices had official models. These times are over, 3D printing and a myriad of third party vendors have taken the niche that FW tried to fill, and frankly do a much better job at it.
Things like leviathans, grot tanks, the custodes units, DKOK or R&H are clearly popular enough to just be made available through GW's regular store and books.
If the mere existence of a few underpowered FW units somehow excuses their ridiculous pay-to-win nonesense, then the same applies to GW and all the Castellan, Ynnari, whatever stuff can be excused because Mutilators and Necron Monoliths exists.
That's not how it works.
It's exactly how it works, you're singling out FW as "pay to win" and targeting people who buy and use it without applying the same standard to non-fw entries who also "pay to win" but just with plastic.
Pyroalchi wrote: @ Jidmah: I'm honestly confused. You asked which FW units das tournament play that were not OP. I mentioned DKOK. You answer that those so not count since they never placed on top. One might come to the idea that this might be because they were not OP.
What exactly were you asking for then? FW units that were not OP but still part of armies that placed on top?
Not necessarily on top, but at least more wins than losses should be a thing. The years of following tactical discussions on dakka and other communities, people only ever care for FW out of two reasons: 1) They have bought/build a model they like and want to make it work. 2) Rules have borked one of the units and it's over the curve. Most people exploiting these loopholes aren't even considering buying FW models to do so.
For example, I have literally never seen someone run or even ask for Mekboss Buzzgob outside of times when he gave ridiculous discounts on stompas or when had a free KFF - both cases being nothing but shoddy rules-writing.
If the mere existence of a few underpowered FW units somehow excuses their ridiculous pay-to-win nonesense, then the same applies to GW and all the Castellan, Ynnari, whatever stuff can be excused because Mutilators and Necron Monoliths exists.
That's not how it works.
It's exactly how it works, you're singling out FW as "pay to win" and targeting people who but and use it without applying the same standard to non-fw entries who also "pay to win" but just with plastic.
Not anymore than the responses are singling out some GW rules like Craftworld Ynnari or the Raven Castellan in an endless CP set-up to create a false balance of non-FW models allegedly having the same problems and thus distracting from the FW-specific problem.
Jidmah wrote: How many FW units have seen tournament play that weren't op though? I'd wager the number is rather low.
Both the terrible and OP units are a clear sign of low quality rules writing - even compared to the GW stuff. IMHO it wouldn't be too bad if FW disappeared completely for 40k.
one issue though, by the same vein you could argue that all non comp units should get curbed and in cases of some bloated dexes, that are a lot of units.
Heck Grots were for most of their existence such a unit. As were possessed, etc.
the actual number of competitively viable units is extremely low overall for 40k. Chaos is a prade exemple of this, considering that you often need specific subfaction trait combinations and units of a slew of multiple dexes to create high end comp list.
take arhiman supreme in a body of AL with some daemon support as an exemple. that army has how many diffrent units exactly?
DG super bros?
I still see no reason why there should be a second shop within GW that releases models at higher prices and with inferior rules that are not of a notably higher quality than the main line - quite the opposite. Even rules wise, many FW units are in direct competition with comparable plastic kits, making one or the other obsolete.
FW is a relic from times when GW themselves couldn't make models as big or detailed as resin and when not every unit in the codices had official models. These times are over, 3D printing and a myriad of third party vendors have taken the niche that FW tried to fill, and frankly do a much better job at it.
Things like leviathans, grot tanks, the custodes units, DKOK or R&H are clearly popular enough to just be made available through GW's regular store and books.
Also true, doesn't change the fact that in regards to balance it doesn't matter.
If the mere existence of a few underpowered FW units somehow excuses their ridiculous pay-to-win nonesense, then the same applies to GW and all the Castellan, Ynnari, whatever stuff can be excused because Mutilators and Necron Monoliths exists.
That's not how it works.
It's exactly how it works, you're singling out FW as "pay to win" and targeting people who but and use it without applying the same standard to non-fw entries who also "pay to win" but just with plastic.
Not anymore than the responses are singling out some GW rules like Craftworld Ynnari or the Raven Castellan in an endless CP set-up to create a false balance of non-FW models allegedly having the same problems and thus distracting from the FW-specific problem.
Yeah, FW Indizes were rushed and it was a mismanagement by GW that they never updated them. Some FW models became OP either because GW didn't think of them when designing Codizes or they got unfitting points. Many FW models though were very weak compared to GW counterparts.
Wait so now my mostly useless Achillus Dreadnoughts that have accomplished nothing in all of 8th are FW-pay to win garbage?
What a time to be alive. Adeptus Custodes FW rules were written by GW team proper. And that shows because after the beta-state they were changed in actual sensible senses and have been some of the most balanced units in the game compared with the codex counterparts. Unlinke most FW stuff they aren't useless or OP, but they were usable and strong without being too strong. Removing FW from Custodes is like removing the tanks from Imperial Guard, you take half the army.
Of course I would love to FW go to die and all the good stuff of FW be rolled in normal codex and most of it be made in proper plastic. The minimal lost of quality is worth it for proper avaibility and not having to work with resin.
If the mere existence of a few underpowered FW units somehow excuses their ridiculous pay-to-win nonesense, then the same applies to GW and all the Castellan, Ynnari, whatever stuff can be excused because Mutilators and Necron Monoliths exists.
That's not how it works.
It's exactly how it works, you're singling out FW as "pay to win" and targeting people who but and use it without applying the same standard to non-fw entries who also "pay to win" but just with plastic.
Not anymore than the responses are singling out some GW rules like Craftworld Ynnari or the Raven Castellan in an endless CP set-up to create a false balance of non-FW models allegedly having the same problems and thus distracting from the FW-specific problem.
2019 LVO top 9, there is 1 FW unit in the form of a knight lancer as far as I can see.
2020 there were 3 lists in the top 8 with FW models, all of them space marines.
Explain to me what happened between 2019 and 2020 which might suddenly make space marine FW units appear a lot more? Then explain to me how that has anything to do with the fact the model is from FW please. The only rational answer is actually neglect, GW neglect the FW range and forget about it intentionally. Pay to win actually translates to = pay to be forgotten.
Galas wrote: Wait so now my mostly useless Achillus Dreadnoughts that have accomplished nothing in all of 8th are FW-pay to win garbage?
What a time to be alive. Adeptus Custodes FW rules were written by GW team proper. And that shows because after the beta-state they were changed in actual sensible senses and have been some of the most balanced units in the game compared with the codex counterparts. Unlinke most FW stuff they aren't useless or OP, but they were usable and strong without being too strong. Removing FW from Custodes is like removing the tanks from Imperial Guard, you take half the army.
Of course I would love to FW go to die and all the good stuff of FW be rolled in normal codex and most of it be made in proper plastic. The minimal lost of quality is worth it for proper avaibility and not having to work with resin.
I mostly just hate resin. No, I'm SUPER excited to pay 500$ for a model that MELTS IN THE SUN!!!
I'm hoping the Custodes train doesn't roll through my metas I play in. I just started collecting them a few months ago. We have a couple regular custodes players already, including the #1 rated guy for custodes.
As far as the FW thing goes, if it was play to win I would have won my last 8 GT's as half or more of my army is FW Knights. Heck the army I'm bringing to a GT in September is entirely FW Knights. I run FW units all the time in my IW and WE as well. Still no GT or Major win. I must be doing something wrong.
Galas wrote: Wait so now my mostly useless Achillus Dreadnoughts that have accomplished nothing in all of 8th are FW-pay to win garbage?
What a time to be alive. Adeptus Custodes FW rules were written by GW team proper. And that shows because after the beta-state they were changed in actual sensible senses and have been some of the most balanced units in the game compared with the codex counterparts. Unlinke most FW stuff they aren't useless or OP, but they were usable and strong without being too strong. Removing FW from Custodes is like removing the tanks from Imperial Guard, you take half the army.
Of course I would love to FW go to die and all the good stuff of FW be rolled in normal codex and most of it be made in proper plastic. The minimal lost of quality is worth it for proper avaibility and not having to work with resin.
I mostly just hate resin. No, I'm SUPER excited to pay 500$ for a model that MELTS IN THE SUN!!!
I think any model would melt if you'd throw it into the sun, though.
I think any model would melt if you'd throw it into the sun, though.
I have seen Russian recasts fall on concreate, those things are resistant as steel. On the other hand I have seen a cooked GW resin necron model that melted just from a trip in a bus.
I think any model would melt if you'd throw it into the sun, though.
I have seen Russian recasts fall on concreate, those things are resistant as steel. On the other hand I have seen a cooked GW resin necron model that melted just from a trip in a bus.
I have a recast leviathan I left on black leather seats in a black car on a sunny 95 Fahrenheit day that was fine and a FW Lightning strike fighter that basically ended up a puddle on a 45 degree day in fall because it got direct sunlight.
I think any model would melt if you'd throw it into the sun, though.
I have seen Russian recasts fall on concreate, those things are resistant as steel. On the other hand I have seen a cooked GW resin necron model that melted just from a trip in a bus.
I have a recast leviathan I left on black leather seats in a black car on a sunny 95 Fahrenheit day that was fine and a FW Lightning strike fighter that basically ended up a puddle on a 45 degree day in fall because it got direct sunlight.
Are you surprised?
GW is the market leader , for some time now, got complacent.
Never seen better in the "quality " Resin they sell.
I think any model would melt if you'd throw it into the sun, though.
I have seen Russian recasts fall on concreate, those things are resistant as steel. On the other hand I have seen a cooked GW resin necron model that melted just from a trip in a bus.
I think any model would melt if you'd throw it into the sun, though.
I have seen Russian recasts fall on concreate, those things are resistant as steel. On the other hand I have seen a cooked GW resin necron model that melted just from a trip in a bus.
I have a recast leviathan I left on black leather seats in a black car on a sunny 95 Fahrenheit day that was fine and a FW Lightning strike fighter that basically ended up a puddle on a 45 degree day in fall because it got direct sunlight.
It's not limited to their resin either. I have a couple basilisks that warped in my car's trunk.
Spoletta wrote: This was an 8th edition tournament which got hijacked at the last second into 9th edition.
Most of the partecipants were ready for 8th edition, and in 8th most players didn't bring xenos. After the hijack many switched to another list or faction, but switching to marines and custodes is easy. Switching to xenos is much harder.
If Custodes Troops got the 50% increase Drukhari got and Drukhari got no increase you bet your ass we would be seeing the Drukhari raiding the tournament silly.
Yeah. No way some 8th Edition tournament would've had a quarter of the people bring foot-heavy Custodes lists.
The lists and faction spread screams "9th Ed. winners" and that's what people brought.
And it's been possible to estimate winners in advance so there's been time to prepare custodian etc armies
Spoletta wrote: This was an 8th edition tournament which got hijacked at the last second into 9th edition.
Most of the partecipants were ready for 8th edition, and in 8th most players didn't bring xenos. After the hijack many switched to another list or faction, but switching to marines and custodes is easy. Switching to xenos is much harder.
If Custodes Troops got the 50% increase Drukhari got and Drukhari got no increase you bet your ass we would be seeing the Drukhari raiding the tournament silly.
But they didn't. They got one of the smallest points increases, along with +1 to their invuls, their own version of transhuman physiology, and a stratagem that negates ap -1 and -2. So an army with obsec on everything, 2+, 4++, T5, 3W troops, even better stats on their elites, and a dreadnought that's tougher than a leviathan but cheaper. Yikes. Did I miss anything? Guess loyalist marines should start sweating.
That's the point. Custodians got huge buff so people either dusted off or made custodians. Had de been winners it would have been dark eldars.
slave.entity wrote: No one's going to mention the battle sanctum? 55 points for a gigantic LoS blocker that walls off your deployment zone and grants light cover, heavy cover, miracle dice, and leadership?
The sheer size of footprint alone makes it worth considering at that price point.
Yeah, it's pretty sexy, especially since you can get your CP back on the Fortification Network detachment. Of course that means you can only take it at Incursion or higher, but that's most matched play games anyway. In some battles on a big enough board, I'd even take two; I have one build that I'm considering which focuses on MD optimization, and two of these really push it over the top.
It's going to get nerfed. The next cheapest fortification is the Aegis Defence Line at 80 points and it's a tiny fraction of the size of the battle sanctum.
That's an indictment of the aegis, not a reason to nerf the sanctum.
What do you think is more likely, GW nerfing the battle sanctum or GW buffing the aegis defence line (and like 10 other fortifications that cost ~100 points or more)?
Sunny Side Up wrote: If people weren't running Contemptors pre Marine 2.0, it's because they were running even more absurd FW dreads like Deredeos or Leviathans and using the CSM ruleset instead of the Marine one, because it was stronger.
Doesn't make the FW dreads less absurd and only make you look more foolish for claiming they weren't around in abundance since the earliest days of the edition.
Hell, the very first WHW Heat right after the release of 8th was won by (actual loyalist, pre Chaos Marines getting a Codex) Raven Guard FW Contemptor spam in the late summer of 2017.
They have been a way to buy yourself a tournament win if you wanna spend the money ever since.
You clearly never bothered to read the codex Centemptor entry if you're gonna bother making stupid statements.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Spoiler Alert: removing the FW dreads wouldn't make people run codex Dreads. They'd just not be used period.
A.T. wrote: The Galatus? That's on that hasn't seen the table in a long time (or ever, really).
Well, all FW Contemptors got a point drop (while, famously, most everything in the game went up).
There's a reason the other list shown had 3 Imperial Fist Relic Contemptors. It applies to the Custodes Contemptor variants as well.
Not sure if they got that point drop (even larger relative point drop compared to "the rest of the game") in anticipation to some changes in the upcoming FW rules. But as of now, using new-Relic/FW-Contemptor points with their old rules is very strong.
Also most Contemptors (at least the Marine ones) are fast and don't degrade on speed, which is more important than ever (combined with a smaller board).
Wrong, twice. The only Contemptor that received a points drop was the Relic, and the only Contemptor whose movement doesn't degrade is, once again, the Relic. A quick rundown of the points changes:
Codex, Mortis, and Hellforged Contemptor: ca 2019 - 88 ppm vs ca 2020 - 105 ppm, up 19%
Contemptor Galatus: ca 2019 - 155 ppm vs ca 2020 - 175 ppm, up 13%
Contemptor Achillus: ca 2019 - 130 ppm vs ca 2020 - 160 ppm, up 23%. Though, to be fair, this is misleading, as all its ranged weapons saw a 5 point drop. As they are taken in 2s this would mean the true increase is 15%.
Relic Contemptor: ca 2019 - 110 ppm vs ca 2020 105 ppm, down 4%
In a ca that saw almost everything increased across the board, the decrease on the Relic Contemptor is odd, and the only explanation I can think of is that all Contemptors were priced according to their name, assuming that they had the same rules and stats. They do not. If the Relic Contemptor had received the same % of increase as the other astartes Contemptors it would have gone to 131 ppm, though gw's insistence on pricing things in numbers divisible by five would mean it would be rounded down to 130 ppm.
As ERJAK points out, the under costing of this unit is one of the reasons it was seen as a better choice than Exorcists in the winning list. If the trio of Contempors had costed 75 points more would that have made the Exorcists a better choice? Maybe, maybe not. But 75 points is not inconsequential in a high end competitive list. Yes, the Relic Contemptor is currently significantly underpriced, but that is not the fault of Forge World, it is the fault of gw's bizarre points in ca 2020.
Two final thoughts:
First: although almost all the weapon options for the various Contemptors either stayed the same in ca 2020 or were given small adjustments to make them divisible by 5, the butcher cannon was increased from 25 points to 35, a 40% increase. I find this arbitrary, as it only affects a single faction and the weapon didn't seem to be particularly over performing to me. I'm sure others would disagree.
Second: for those who say that the original Forge World Indexes were OP, I give you those books original points costs for the astartes Contemptors:
Hellforged Contemptor: 116 ppm
Mortis Contemptor: 106 ppm
Relic Contemptor: 135 ppm
So, given we know the points for these units in ca 2019, ca 2020, and the original Forge World Indexes, if it is your opinion that they are too cheap, who exactly made them too cheap? Forge World, or gw?
There ERJAK, I tried to be less salty, did my grammar improve?
Lemondish wrote: I think you guys should probably cool down about FW rules. There's a lot coming regarding them. I predict many people will be surprised
Well, the CA points were surprise enough for me tbh.
The conspiracy theorist in me wonders whether they're holding back the new FW books in order to keep selling the undercosted stuff for a few more months before dropping the hammer and getting the meta chasers to buy something else instead.
But then the realist in me looks at the CA2020 points overall and says: "There's no way the people responsible for this are competent enough to execute any sort of plan at all, much less an evil genius plan."
yukishiro1 wrote: The conspiracy theorist in me wonders whether they're holding back the new FW books in order to keep selling the undercosted stuff for a few more months before dropping the hammer and getting the meta chasers to buy something else instead.
But then the realist in me looks at the CA2020 points overall and says: "There's no way the people responsible for this are competent enough to execute any sort of plan at all, much less an evil genius plan."
That basically sums up why all these conspiracy theories are nonsense. GW constantly fails to write models and books with rules decent enough to generate sales by certain things just not being worthless paperweights, but somehow these people are convinced that GW knows their game well enough to generate sales through minor tweaks.
Not to mention that is has been proven that a healthy, well-balanced game will always generate more sales than one constantly tilting the scales in different directions.
The best they can do in that regard is pretty much what the 9th edition points were. Take the whole thing, shake it up as much as possible and hope for a new meta that favors different units than before.
Proven where? Gw has never been balanced.　instead they do unsubtle　changes and are　best selling miniatures.
You don't　need to be　competent to do subtle changes to sell stuff when you do unsubtle changes. It's easy to nerf to death and buff to op. It's balanced that takes skill.
Other companies go for balanced games...but their sales suck　compared to gw.
tneva82 wrote: Proven where? Gw has never been balanced.　instead they do unsubtle　changes and are　best selling miniatures.
You don't　need to be　competent to do subtle changes to sell stuff when you do unsubtle changes. It's easy to nerf to death and buff to op. It's balanced that takes skill.
Other companies go for balanced games...but their sales suck　compared to gw.
CA19 Necrons changes. None of the units that got buffs became meta.
tneva82 wrote: Proven where? Gw has never been balanced.　instead they do unsubtle　changes and are　best selling miniatures.
You don't　need to be　competent to do subtle changes to sell stuff when you do unsubtle changes. It's easy to nerf to death and buff to op. It's balanced that takes skill.
Other companies go for balanced games...but their sales suck　compared to gw.
CA19 Necrons changes. None of the units that got buffs became meta.
TBF, i think the issue is more inline that the rulesteam attempts balance and often fails at it miserably due to a lack of coordination skill and controll/oversight and planning, and that the higher ups on occaison intervene, cue the whole wraithknight debacle.
Not Online!!! wrote: TBF, i think the issue is more inline that the rulesteam attempts balance and often fails at it miserably due to a lack of coordination skill and controll/oversight and planning, and that the higher ups on occaison intervene, cue the whole wraithknight debacle.
Cue "new GW is a lie!!!" - but I think its safe to say they made minimal attempt to balance the game before 8th. CA updates are hardly perfect, but they beat codex creep, codex creep, woops we broke the game, have a new edition to try and fix it. Subdued codex, subdued codex... this is boring, lets go back to the creep. (I feel this covers fantasy and 40k for about 20 years)
Anyway, my main take away continues to be that secondaries are a problem, not this unit is overpowered or that we should all ban forgeworld etc.
This could very well be the most "lists win games" period in a while - because there are various lists I can imagine which will easily allow your opponent to max out on secondaries, while their list gives very little, and that's a near impossible mountain to climb.
Admittedly this will likely shake out over time, but it could result in a very unforgiving meta, even amongst relatively casual players.
Lemondish wrote: I think you guys should probably cool down about FW rules. There's a lot coming regarding them. I predict many people will be surprised
Source? Or is this just speculation? Or information from a guy who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who mops the floors at your local gw every Thursday?
Also: agreed with Tyel on issues regarding secondaries.
Not Online!!! wrote: TBF, i think the issue is more inline that the rulesteam attempts balance and often fails at it miserably due to a lack of coordination skill and controll/oversight and planning, and that the higher ups on occaison intervene, cue the whole wraithknight debacle.
Cue "new GW is a lie!!!" - but I think its safe to say they made minimal attempt to balance the game before 8th. CA updates are hardly perfect, but they beat codex creep, codex creep, woops we broke the game, have a new edition to try and fix it. Subdued codex, subdued codex... this is boring, lets go back to the creep. (I feel this covers fantasy and 40k for about 20 years)
Anyway, my main take away continues to be that secondaries are a problem, not this unit is overpowered or that we should all ban forgeworld etc.
This could very well be the most "lists win games" period in a while - because there are various lists I can imagine which will easily allow your opponent to max out on secondaries, while their list gives very little, and that's a near impossible mountain to climb.
Admittedly this will likely shake out over time, but it could result in a very unforgiving meta, even amongst relatively casual players.
For those that played CA missions, then yes having objectives that influence your list building is a novelty (not 100% true though).
For ITC players, the current secondaries influence list building much much less than the old ITC secondaries.
Lemondish wrote: I think you guys should probably cool down about FW rules. There's a lot coming regarding them. I predict many people will be surprised
Source? Or is this just speculation? Or information from a guy who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who mops the floors at your local gw every Thursday?
Also: agreed with Tyel on issues regarding secondaries.
You jinxed it, calling it now, this thursday, FW indexes !
Okay jokes aside i indeed would like to have actual sources aswell,
Sunny Side Up wrote: Sure. New GW is the old GW and that's way FW is still blatantly pay-to-win and will not change.
People like you desperately trying to white knight they resin-bought tournament points is cute. You played the game and parted from your money to get an edge over better skilled players. I am not excusing GW of offering that option, but neither should you delude yourself into why GW does it that way: because suckers will pay the FW premium to toast opponents with the more "pedestrian" plastic models at the local tournament. That's how that symbiotic relationship works.
maybe back in 7th FW was broken but not 8th and certainly not 9th. There is no Ork FW must have that cant be done better in the regular codex. maybe some people just like the aestehtcic of the models, that would be pretty crazy
People didn''t like leviathan and chaplain dreads more then a bit. The cheap R&H smite bots were also not very fun to play against, specialy when one of them cost less then your single model and had a much better smite with longer range.
The tau suits, before the nerf were unfun to play against too.
Karol wrote: People didn''t like leviathan and chaplain dreads more then a bit. The cheap R&H smite bots were also not very fun to play against, specialy when one of them cost less then your single model and had a much better smite with longer range.
The tau suits, before the nerf were unfun to play against too.
by that logic GK should've been curbed long ago.
As should literally everything else that ever was slighly unfun to play aginst.
What do you mean half the codexes would be empty?
Spoletta wrote: For those that played CA missions, then yes having objectives that influence your list building is a novelty (not 100% true though).
For ITC players, the current secondaries influence list building much much less than the old ITC secondaries.
Would be interested if you could expand on this - because it doesn't seem like that to me.
To my mind in ITC you could try and skew your list so you might only offer up only 3 out of 4 points for certain secondaries. Usually though there were sufficient options that at least for the killing objectives, if your opponent killed most of your list over the course of the game they were probably maxing them out.
And while close games obviously happen, most were not decided by 2-3 points on secondaries. Hold more/kill more (or anything)/the bonus tended to add up.
By contrast in 9th, it seems like you can listbuild into easy traps. Giving an easy Bring it Down/Assassinate is a 15 points for your opponent that is not easily found elsewhere. Abhor the witch seems like an incredibly harsh penalty if you had the temerity to bring 3+ psykers and your opponent decided not to bring any. MSU (or just cheap units in general) was always undermined by ITC's kill more mechanic, which is revived in attrition. And don't bring 3+ psykers. Just don't.
Elfric wrote: There is no Ork FW must have that cant be done better in the regular codex. maybe some people just like the aestehtcic of the models, that would be pretty crazy
You must have missed their most recent feth-up with the chinork.
Karol wrote: People didn''t like leviathan and chaplain dreads more then a bit. The cheap R&H smite bots were also not very fun to play against, specialy when one of them cost less then your single model and had a much better smite with longer range.
The tau suits, before the nerf were unfun to play against too.
Was it the loyalist or csm leviathan that was your problem, or both? There's a big difference between a 4++ and a 5++, especially when they cost the same price.
Elfric wrote: There is no Ork FW must have that cant be done better in the regular codex. maybe some people just like the aestehtcic of the models, that would be pretty crazy
You must have missed their most recent feth-up with the chinork.
Is it really that good?
I frankly doubt it, time will tell, but it is certainly no eradicator
Spoletta wrote: For those that played CA missions, then yes having objectives that influence your list building is a novelty (not 100% true though).
For ITC players, the current secondaries influence list building much much less than the old ITC secondaries.
Would be interested if you could expand on this - because it doesn't seem like that to me.
To my mind in ITC you could try and skew your list so you might only offer up only 3 out of 4 points for certain secondaries. Usually though there were sufficient options that at least for the killing objectives, if your opponent killed most of your list over the course of the game they were probably maxing them out.
And while close games obviously happen, most were not decided by 2-3 points on secondaries. Hold more/kill more (or anything)/the bonus tended to add up.
By contrast in 9th, it seems like you can listbuild into easy traps. Giving an easy Bring it Down/Assassinate is a 15 points for your opponent that is not easily found elsewhere. Abhor the witch seems like an incredibly harsh penalty if you had the temerity to bring 3+ psykers and your opponent decided not to bring any. MSU (or just cheap units in general) was always undermined by ITC's kill more mechanic, which is revived in attrition. And don't bring 3+ psykers. Just don't.
The requirements to full a secondary objective in ITC were much lower compared to the ones in 9th. They mostly avoid the skews. You really need a lot of models on the field to give good points in Thin Theyr Ranks, and you need a lot of vehicle wounds for Bring It Down. Titan slayer requires 3 LoW to be maxed. Assassinate requires 5 chars.
It is much easier to make a list where you don't give max points on any, where in ITC you could count on one hand the factions that didn't automatically give one away.
Also, we have categories. Kill more and Reaper are mutually exclusive, Big Game Hunter and Head Hunter too. You got much more freedom in how you build a list before being seriously impacted by secondaries.
In addition, first turn now tends to be much less lethal and there are only 5 rounds. Compared to the 6 round format, this makes any killing secondary much more risky to be selected, because there will be less games where the opponent ends up tabled.
Anyway, my main take away continues to be that secondaries are a problem, not this unit is overpowered or that we should all ban forgeworld etc.
This could very well be the most "lists win games" period in a while - because there are various lists I can imagine which will easily allow your opponent to max out on secondaries, while their list gives very little, and that's a near impossible mountain to climb.
Admittedly this will likely shake out over time, but it could result in a very unforgiving meta, even amongst relatively casual players.
Agreed the secondaries are problematic as they sit. I still think the ITC ones are better. Wish they would just adopt those.
I'd be curious to see of there are stats from this on how many times the player who went first won the game. My group is still finding that to be too big an advantage in most cases. It's too easy to snowball, and you can do it pretty fast. And even if the points are close at the end of the game, because of when the objectives are typically scored, the player who went first can score their points in the command phase and then use their remaining units to prevent player 2 from scoring. I typically avoid the IGOUGO argument because I've played plenty of IGOUGO style games that didn't have these issues, but in this case, some of the missions really seem to be at least semi-broken in the IGOUGO format.
EDIT:
RE: Anything Forge World being "broken" - My group stopped worrying about that sometime in 6th when GW started making its own units and rules that were just off-the-charts broken. If you're going to claim FW is a potential problem because it's not updated often and the rules are hard to come by - I think that's fair. But it's pretty hard (IMO) to complain about FW being "broken" in the face of some of the things we've seen from GW over the last few editions.
Sunny Side Up wrote: Sure. New GW is the old GW and that's way FW is still blatantly pay-to-win and will not change.
People like you desperately trying to white knight they resin-bought tournament points is cute. You played the game and parted from your money to get an edge over better skilled players. I am not excusing GW of offering that option, but neither should you delude yourself into why GW does it that way: because suckers will pay the FW premium to toast opponents with the more "pedestrian" plastic models at the local tournament. That's how that symbiotic relationship works.
maybe back in 7th FW was broken but not 8th and certainly not 9th. There is no Ork FW must have that cant be done better in the regular codex. maybe some people just like the aestehtcic of the models, that would be pretty crazy
FW wasn't broken in 7th either, Sunny just doesn't know what they're talking about.
I can think of only 2 FW units in 8th that were OP on their own and not because of rules interactions in GW Codizes.
These were Aetaos'rau'keres and malefic lords. But at the same time you had razorwing flock and brimstones on the GW side. All of these were brought down in CA 2017 if I recall correctly. The Leviathan surely was a good unit for Chaos (especially DG) but it never was OP before the Iron Hands supplement.
Not Online!!! wrote: Is it really that good? I frankly doubt it, time will tell, but it is certainly no eradicator
They accidentally made it an AIRCRAFT despite having no minimum speed (so it can still fall back and shoot), while making its weapons no longer suffer from -1 to hit, blast and cost 0 points.
So, for 90 points it is a trukk that has an additional 4d6 S5 AP-2 D3 shots (blast) with FLY, 16" movement and two bombs. And it's a dedicated transport so no blocked slots and no rule of 3. Every weirdboy can have one.
Leviathans in 8th were solid, IH broke them. Contemptor is solid as well. One of the best units for Chaos. But still not broke. I've played many many events and the most common FW units I see are Levi's, and they all fall to thermal cannons. I think some people's opinions of FW is jaded by the fact that they either can't afford it or because they don't know how to deal with the models. I see this at my local store, so I'd assume it's true for other places as well. If you're against something you don't know, as for the book. It's that simple. Anybody with a reasonable amount of skill shouldn't have any issues with dealing with even the most abused FW unit. Save for IH dreads...those are hecka hard to kill. Even with multiple thermal cannons bearing down on it.
A few more GT's this weekend. Vanguard Tactics went Salamanders Successors, Nurgle Soup, Custodes and Harlequins, the Adelaide GT went Orks, Space Wolves, Drukhari and Ultramarines Successors.
Fair to say, this one is looking more like an outlier than an indication of a trend.
Asmodai wrote: A few more GT's this weekend. Vanguard Tactics went Salamanders Successors, Nurgle Soup, Custodes and Harlequins, the Adelaide GT went Orks, Space Wolves, Drukhari and Ultramarines Successors.
Fair to say, this one is looking more like an outlier than an indication of a trend.
That is a much nicer spread of factions, glad to see it.
A few more GT's this weekend. Vanguard Tactics went Salamanders Successors, Nurgle Soup, Custodes and Harlequins, the Adelaide GT went Orks, Space Wolves, Drukhari and Ultramarines Successors.
Fair to say, this one is looking more like an outlier than an indication of a trend.
WOW. Would love to see the lists from the Adelaide GT. Impressive to see Drukhari in there.
A few more GT's this weekend. Vanguard Tactics went Salamanders Successors, Nurgle Soup, Custodes and Harlequins, the Adelaide GT went Orks, Space Wolves, Drukhari and Ultramarines Successors.
Fair to say, this one is looking more like an outlier than an indication of a trend.
WOW. Would love to see the lists from the Adelaide GT. Impressive to see Drukhari in there.
Not Online!!! wrote: Is it really that good?
I frankly doubt it, time will tell, but it is certainly no eradicator
They accidentally made it an AIRCRAFT despite having no minimum speed (so it can still fall back and shoot), while making its weapons no longer suffer from -1 to hit, blast and cost 0 points.
So, for 90 points it is a trukk that has an additional 4d6 S5 AP-2 D3 shots (blast) with FLY, 16" movement and two bombs. And it's a dedicated transport so no blocked slots and no rule of 3. Every weirdboy can have one.
TTS isn't great for running events. For me, I prefer in person events because I like the people that attend they're a great group of people. I've done 2 RTT's and one GT in the last month and a half. Everyone was safe, wearing masks, washing hands, using sanitizer, taking temp, etc. To my knowledge, not one person has gotten sick.
I know I sound repetitive at this point, but the secondaries really are problematic. Certain list types (most obviously elite-heavy, low tank - i.e. space marines) don't give up any kill secondaries, while other lists give your opponent a guaranteed 15, and sometimes even 30 points. The internal balance of the secondaries is also wonky, but that's not as critical a problem as the way they skew lists.
Look at the way these tournaments turned out - despite the claim from GW that the intent was to make secondaries hard to score, the average score for a winning game from a top-4 player is about 85 points, which is an even higher percentage of the total points available than we saw in ITC. You almost never saw a perfect score in ITC; multiple games here saw perfect 100 or near-perfect (95+) scores.
The truth is they didn't make secondaries that are hard to score across the board. Instead, they managed to create a set of secondaries that rewards certain archetypes over others, making the outcome of games even more dependent on list-tailoring and reducing game diversity substantially. For example, in the top 11 lists for the three events (for some reason the 4th place list from WA wasn't posted), there are only 3 lists that take any psykers at all, and one of those is just a single shadowseer. That's a clear result of abhor; people gave up psychic support in order to be able to take it for a free 15CP against psychic armies.
ITC kill secondaries weren't perfectly balanced themselves, but the difference was that ITC secondaries were easier to max in general, so the relative cost of giving your opponent an easy 4 points on one was much lower. The new secondaries being poorly balanced means that if you give your opponent an easy maxed secondary, or, god forbid, two, the game is likely over just based on that.
The truth is they didn't make secondaries that are hard to score across the board. Instead, they managed to create a set of secondaries that rewards certain archetypes over others, making the outcome of games even more dependent on list-tailoring and reducing game diversity substantially. For example, in the top 11 lists for the three events (for some reason the 4th place list from WA wasn't posted), there are only 3 lists that take any psykers at all, and one of those is just a single shadowseer. That's a clear result of abhor; people gave up psychic support in order to be able to take it for a free 15CP against psychic armies.
One million percent this. I keep saying it as well, but these missions are going to lead to a lot of armies resembling 3rd ed Rhino Rush style armies, and there's not going to be nearly the variation one would hope for because the missions themselves don't seem to allow for it.
The truth is they didn't make secondaries that are hard to score across the board. Instead, they managed to create a set of secondaries that rewards certain archetypes over others, making the outcome of games even more dependent on list-tailoring and reducing game diversity substantially. For example, in the top 11 lists for the three events (for some reason the 4th place list from WA wasn't posted), there are only 3 lists that take any psykers at all, and one of those is just a single shadowseer. That's a clear result of abhor; people gave up psychic support in order to be able to take it for a free 15CP against psychic armies.
One million percent this. I keep saying it as well, but these missions are going to lead to a lot of armies resembling 3rd ed Rhino Rush style armies, and there's not going to be nearly the variation one would hope for because the missions themselves don't seem to allow for it.
That's allways an issue with so heavy weighted choseable secondaries.
That's allways an issue with so heavy weighted choseable secondaries.
Yes, but IMO it's not just the secondaries. The missions themselves, from how they're laid out, to how they're scored are also contributing to the issues yukishiro1 is pointing out. I think most of the fixes are simple. It's not like it's a "the sky is falling" type of thing, but they do need looked at IMO. In a lot of cases, with the right list, if you go first, it's just a much longer, slower version of the old school "alpha strike".
I am not convinced on the missions themselves either, but I'm less skeptical than I am on the secondaries. To be clear, the rulebook missions are junk; the first-turn advantage is far too great. The GT missions, however, are much better balanced. The decision to only score primary from holding, and to make scoring start-of-turn, definitely does push the game in certain directions. But I'm not yet ready to say that's necessarily a big problem. With balanced secondaries, I think you'd still see a lot of unit and build diversity.
My approach would be to rework the secondaries first, before reconsidering the basic approach of the missions.
I am not convinced on the missions themselves either, but I'm less skeptical than I am on the secondaries. To be clear, the rulebook missions are junk; the first-turn advantage is far too great. The GT missions, however, are much better balanced. The decision to only score primary from holding, and to make scoring start-of-turn, definitely does push the game in certain directions. But I'm not yet ready to say that's necessarily a big problem. With balanced secondaries, I think you'd still see a lot of unit and build diversity.
My approach would be to rework the secondaries first, before reconsidering the basic approach of the missions.
Yeah, agreed. I think if the secondaries get a decent rework, the problems inherent to the missions themselves (particularly the main rule book missions) become much much easier to address.
One of the biggest gaps from ITC to 9th GT is the lack of any Gangbusters equivalent. We have secondaries for scoring max points against Vehicle lists, and horde lists, but literally nothing for scoring against small Elite units and Bikes. That's definitely going to shape list-building under the current rules. Especially when you can take Elite Bikes (See Custodes and Harlies)
IMO we're in a Bike meta.
Tough, fast, fighty units that aren't tagged Vehicle or Monster, saw minimal points changes generally and no points changes regarding how much the game framework has shifted in their favor. (Small board, LOS blocking cover, need to take and hold objectives for a full turn)
Bluflash wrote: One of the biggest gaps from ITC to 9th GT is the lack of any Gangbusters equivalent. We have secondaries for scoring max points against Vehicle lists, and horde lists, but literally nothing for scoring against small Elite units and Bikes. That's definitely going to shape list-building under the current rules. Especially when you can take Elite Bikes (See Custodes and Harlies)
IMO we're in a Bike meta.
Tough, fast, fighty units that aren't tagged Vehicle or Monster, saw minimal points changes generally and no points changes regarding how much the game framework has shifted in their favor. (Small board, LOS blocking cover, need to take and hold objectives for a full turn)
I agree. After my first few games I think I am changing my army build entirely for 9th. I was taking tons of primaris marines but now I think I'm going fully mobile. 2x intercessors with stalker bolters for the back line. Several units of bladegaurd and characters mounted in impuslors. Several units of prime bikes. Stromtalons or storm hawks and likely the new predators.
I think GW need to decide whether getting secondaries should be easy or hard.
Right now if someone foolishly turns up with say 5 vehicles/monsters with 10 wounds, and a bunch of MSU units and 3 psykers, you can just waltz to 45 points just by attacking them a lot. (Bring it Down, Attrition, Abhor the Witch.)
They then look at your elite infantry list and go "okay, 2-3 characters, 0-2 vehicles, tougher units so attrition is doubtful, no hope on thin their ranks.... uh... how on earth am I going to max out here?"
IMO ITC type missions were only better than GW missions because in GW mission you can literally ignore the objectives and just blow your opponent away. score in the remaining turns with no opposition. So ITC type missions were objective relevant...but the system for picking secondaries affects list construction too much. Stupid examples like taking 19 men in a unit instead of 20 for some kind of benefit (very stupid) and building lists that are impossible to score against (dumber than very stupid).
Call me old fashion but I enjoy simple table quarters type missions with "old school" objectives. Add a bonus objective to change every game. That would be a better game IMO.
But the irony is that ITC had pretty much ironed out their secondary problems, only for GW to throw them out the window and come up with their own secondaries that repeat and in fact amplify all the problems with early ITC secondaries.
But the irony is that ITC had pretty much ironed out their secondary problems, only for GW to throw them out the window and come up with their own secondaries that repeat and in fact amplify all the problems with early ITC secondaries.
Exactly. You see this in the BRB missions as well - they use a method of scoring Adepticon moved away from many years ago due to the issues it creates. This is why I was less than excited when GW was saying "Most play tested edition ever!". The fact that it was play tested has not prevented them from making mistakes that I'm sure many(if not all) of the play testers pointed out.
I mean, you can't tell me, at the very least, the Frontline guys didn't say something ... lol
Lemondish wrote: I think you guys should probably cool down about FW rules. There's a lot coming regarding them. I predict many people will be surprised
Source? Or is this just speculation? Or information from a guy who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who mops the floors at your local gw every Thursday?
Also: agreed with Tyel on issues regarding secondaries.
I'll hold him down. You punch him until he squawks!
Lemondish wrote: I think you guys should probably cool down about FW rules. There's a lot coming regarding them. I predict many people will be surprised
Source? Or is this just speculation? Or information from a guy who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who mops the floors at your local gw every Thursday?
Also: agreed with Tyel on issues regarding secondaries.
I'll hold him down. You punch him until he squawks!
Who? Lemondish or the guy who mops the floor at his local gw?
I'm not sure if I want to see the new fw books anyway, they'll probably just use them to "kick models into the stratosphere that should probably be kept in Apocalypse".
Tyel wrote: I think GW need to decide whether getting secondaries should be easy or hard.
Right now if someone foolishly turns up with say 5 vehicles/monsters with 10 wounds, and a bunch of MSU units and 3 psykers, you can just waltz to 45 points just by attacking them a lot. (Bring it Down, Attrition, Abhor the Witch.)
They then look at your elite infantry list and go "okay, 2-3 characters, 0-2 vehicles, tougher units so attrition is doubtful, no hope on thin their ranks.... uh... how on earth am I going to max out here?"
That's what you get with secondaries though. Game turns to minimize secondaries opponent can score. One reason I have never liked ITC. Units gets relegated to trash because they give up secondaries. Geminia are cool units but weren't taken because they donate assassinate scores. Ork trukks bled secondaries too fast etc etc etc.
It's less what unit does to you than how it bleeds secondaries.
I'll hold him down. You punch him until he squawks!
That makes no sense, no one who is on the ground talks. If you want someone to talk, you either push them against a wall and beat them there, because they have no where to run and can't curl up. Or you hold them and beat their brother or sister, then they general talk very fast, unless they are total donkey-caves. And then you can just ground and pound them, because there is no talking with people that are like that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 790591 10887266 wrote:
That's what you get with secondaries though. Game turns to minimize secondaries opponent can score. One reason I have never liked ITC. Units gets relegated to trash because they give up secondaries. Geminia are cool units but weren't taken because they donate assassinate scores. Ork trukks bled secondaries too fast etc etc etc.
It's less what unit does to you than how it bleeds secondaries.
Like or not, they are part of the game. And some armies can't just decide to not have multiple psykers, msus and 2-3 vehicles. And they don't really get much any buffs for being forced in to playing that way. But maybe the codex for armies will change it or some errata/faq, that only HQ characters count for abhore the witch or attrition will be based on unit point cost too, as in won't work if your 5 man squad costs 3xtimes what other peoples troops cost.
Jidmah wrote: How many FW units have seen tournament play that weren't op though? I'd wager the number is rather low.
Both the terrible and OP units are a clear sign of low quality rules writing - even compared to the GW stuff. IMHO it wouldn't be too bad if FW disappeared completely for 40k.
Custodes would immediately drop out of the meta of course, since GW hasn't bothered to give them more then half an army.
I also think it's questionable to assume that custodes are fine just because FW released a bunch of "codex unit +1" things.
If GW does a R&H on you because they axed some of the models for profit reasons, your army would be ruined just the same.
I also think it's questionable to assume that custodes are fine just because FW released a bunch of "codex unit +1" things.
If GW does a R&H on you because they axed some of the models for profit reasons, your army would be ruined just the same.
They really are the only one.
The only army with as small a range is Harlies, and they don't get the forge world support.
Custodes need a larger plastic release. But lacking that, the answer isn't to get rid of all forgeworld. GW isn't going to suddenly make more units for custodes. You'd just be screwing the army for no benefit.
Half or more of my infantry based Custodes is FW, because it unlocks more variety in units.
What have you guys done to change your competitive armies for either the new meta or 9th in general?
I'm not changing much, if anything in my Knights armies. Just using extra points for summoning daemons to help with secondary missions instead of buying upgrades or carapace weapons.
I also think it's questionable to assume that custodes are fine just because FW released a bunch of "codex unit +1" things.
If GW does a R&H on you because they axed some of the models for profit reasons, your army would be ruined just the same.
They really are the only one.
The only army with as small a range is Harlies, and they don't get the forge world support.
Custodes need a larger plastic release. But lacking that, the answer isn't to get rid of all forgeworld. GW isn't going to suddenly make more units for custodes. You'd just be screwing the army for no benefit.
They could just make the regular guardians, dread and landraider better than the corresponding FW units and instantly no one would give a damn about FW going away.
I also think it's questionable to assume that custodes are fine just because FW released a bunch of "codex unit +1" things.
If GW does a R&H on you because they axed some of the models for profit reasons, your army would be ruined just the same.
They really are the only one.
The only army with as small a range is Harlies, and they don't get the forge world support.
Custodes need a larger plastic release. But lacking that, the answer isn't to get rid of all forgeworld. GW isn't going to suddenly make more units for custodes. You'd just be screwing the army for no benefit.
They could just make the regular guardians, dread and landraider better than the corresponding FW units and instantly no one would give a damn about FW going away.
Thats just not true. I mean, bikers and terminators ok, they are more ugly and have worse rules (The terminators not that much) but FW dreadnoughts and things like Venatari have never been competitive and are wildly used because they are very cool units and models. Thats like saying "If you make the buggies better no one would use ork truks and battlewagongs". Thats true but that doesnt mean they don't have a reason to exist.
I mean, I would love for all custodes FW units to be made plastic ones on the normal codex, that way no one would tell me to not play my Achillus and mi Saggitarum.
So far Most winning lists in GT's have included more Units of eradicators than FW models, but keep complaining it's FW models that are the problem not GW and certainly not Marines.
If 3 models is enough justification to ban FW then Eradicators alone are enough justification to Ban Codex Marines 2.0 and 3.0 wholesale.
Galas wrote: Thats just not true. I mean, bikers and terminators ok, they are more ugly and have worse rules (The terminators not that much) but FW dreadnoughts and things like Venatari have never been competitive and are wildly used because they are very cool units and models. Thats like saying "If you make the buggies better no one would use ork truks and battlewagongs". Thats true but that doesnt mean they don't have a reason to exist.
I mean, I would love for all custodes FW units to be made plastic ones on the normal codex, that way no one would tell me to not play my Achillus and mi Saggitarum.
His argument literally was that custodes would no longer be *competitive* without FW, not that he didn't like the models.
And it's not like anything prevents you from using 30k models for your 40k datasheets, yet you somehow never see that happening, so beautiful models clearly aren't the primary drive for investing into FW.
Galas wrote: Thats just not true. I mean, bikers and terminators ok, they are more ugly and have worse rules (The terminators not that much) but FW dreadnoughts and things like Venatari have never been competitive and are wildly used because they are very cool units and models. Thats like saying "If you make the buggies better no one would use ork truks and battlewagongs". Thats true but that doesnt mean they don't have a reason to exist.
I mean, I would love for all custodes FW units to be made plastic ones on the normal codex, that way no one would tell me to not play my Achillus and mi Saggitarum.
His argument literally was that custodes would no longer be *competitive* without FW, not that he didn't like the models.
And it's not like anything prevents you from using 30k models for your 40k datasheets, yet you somehow never see that happening, so beautiful models clearly aren't the primary drive for investing into FW.
Why is that argument about proxying used in this instance and not others? No, I don't like to proxy my DA vindicators as Impulsors, I like for my units to have proper rules that reflect what they are. It just feels wrong to proxy them. If theres literally no rules for the model then ok, but if the model has rules I would like to use those rules. I have been using my Achillus and Venatari since I bought them, not because of the rules, but I like my models to have rules that let me use them in ways that feel right for them.
I also think it's questionable to assume that custodes are fine just because FW released a bunch of "codex unit +1" things.
If GW does a R&H on you because they axed some of the models for profit reasons, your army would be ruined just the same.
They really are the only one.
The only army with as small a range is Harlies, and they don't get the forge world support.
Custodes need a larger plastic release. But lacking that, the answer isn't to get rid of all forgeworld. GW isn't going to suddenly make more units for custodes. You'd just be screwing the army for no benefit.
They could just make the regular guardians, dread and landraider better than the corresponding FW units and instantly no one would give a damn about FW going away.
I'd give a damn. If I'm a fan of a model, I couldn't care less if there's a "better" standard GW unit. As a casual player who prefers the fluff over crunch, I enjoy the diversity and fluff depth the FW stuff adds.
I also think it's questionable to assume that custodes are fine just because FW released a bunch of "codex unit +1" things.
If GW does a R&H on you because they axed some of the models for profit reasons, your army would be ruined just the same.
They really are the only one.
The only army with as small a range is Harlies, and they don't get the forge world support.
Custodes need a larger plastic release. But lacking that, the answer isn't to get rid of all forgeworld. GW isn't going to suddenly make more units for custodes. You'd just be screwing the army for no benefit.
They could just make the regular guardians, dread and landraider better than the corresponding FW units and instantly no one would give a damn about FW going away.
Ascetically, neither of those space marine handmedowns fit custodes. And the land raider kit especially is old, gross, and should be on its way out. I'd rather have models that work for the army I'm playing than models that do not.
