Moving forwards, many of the most powerful aura abilities will only affect Core units from a Character’s (sub-)faction. This represents a more realistic form of in-situ command, with Characters acting like they’re supposed to from a narrative perspective. After all, a Space Marine Captain should be issuing orders and inspiring units of his battle-brothers on the front line, not babysitting a squadron of Repulsor Executioners at the back of the battlefield!
A crucial side-effect of this change is that Characters themselves won’t be affected by aura abilities that utilise the Core keyword – they’re supposed to be commanding others, not inspiring themselves to do better! In the example shown above, the Space Marine Captain won’t be able to re-roll his hit rolls of 1 and will instead have to rely on his own merit to strike home. To be fair, he’ll usually hit on a 2+ anyway!
I really like it. I never liked characters being beat sticks. They should be used to buff others units that are doing the killing and not doing the killing themselves. Kind of like how farseers work in Eldar
clodax66 wrote: I really like it. I never liked characters being beat sticks. They should be used to buff others units that are doing the killing and not doing the killing themselves. Kind of like how farseers work in Eldar
Yep - I was really used to my daemon prince hitting almost 100% of the time. Now that isn't quite so certain. Add hit mods to that and some combats become a lot more shaky.
clodax66 wrote: I really like it. I never liked characters being beat sticks. They should be used to buff others units that are doing the killing and not doing the killing themselves. Kind of like how farseers work in Eldar
It depends on the faction. Chaos Lords are all about individual power and many of them lust after demonic artifacts and weaponry to increase their power and killiness. Chaos Lords being melee beatstick is reasonable. Ork Warbosses are also a case where being melee beatstick is okay.
More to keep track of, but I like it. It's more control over what does and doesn't receive the benefits of auras. This will be a positive change overall.
As I said in the AdMech thread, I think it's a great change and I'm all for it, but they'll need to do more than copy-paste 8th codices to 9th as for example, Kastelan Robots are terrible without rerolls, and I doubt they'll be "Core". It could also mean that less used characters could be rewritten so as to fill a role of buffer of specific units, like the Datasmith could give the Robots +1 to Hit if he's nearby or something more original. That would give use to forgotten characters if done right.
Makes units and intra-codex balance hell of a lot easier too. Like, Guilliman could be costed better knowing he won't just be surrounded by 6 tanks in game.
clodax66 wrote: I really like it. I never liked characters being beat sticks. They should be used to buff others units that are doing the killing and not doing the killing themselves. Kind of like how farseers work in Eldar
It depends on the faction. Chaos Lords are all about individual power and many of them lust after demonic artifacts and weaponry to increase their power and killiness. Chaos Lords being melee beatstick is reasonable. Ork Warbosses are also a case where being melee beatstick is okay.
But it is still a pretty neat change.
That is a good point. Maybe for some factions those abilities will affect all units or certain characters will get core trait. Not to be cynical, but GW might mess that up
I like the implications of what this COULD mean. However, I'm concerned for what will end up counting as a core unit.
I'm hoping at least some of the Marine craziness with Aggressors and the like will be reined in.
However... I'm also mindful that this change reduces lethality just as weapon damage increases will upswing to counter it. Which way will the seesaw ultimately fall?
This I think is an overall good change. Im not a big subscriber to the "auras are the root of all evil" arguments, but allowing for more rules nuance as to what can and cannot be affected by abilities is unreservedly a good thing.
After all, a Space Marine Captain should be issuing orders and inspiring units of his battle-brothers on the front line, not babysitting a squadron of Repulsor Executioners at the back of the battlefield!
Makes definitely sense.
What kind of units can we expect to be 'core'?
After all, a Space Marine Captain should be issuing orders and inspiring units of his battle-brothers on the front line, not babysitting a squadron of Repulsor Executioners at the back of the battlefield!
Makes definitely sense.
What kind of units can we expect to be 'core'?
In the article, they mentioned Lychguard, Bikes, Terminators and Tomb Blades as core specifically, with 'some' vehicles getting it.
They graphics mostly show troops getting it, and exclude a bladeguard from 'core'
In the article, they mentioned Lychguard, Bikes, Terminators and Tomb Blades as core specifically, with 'some' vehicles getting it.
They graphics mostly show troops getting it, and exclude a bladeguard from 'core'
Thats a Captain in the last fig, not a Bladeguard.
With all the sweeping changes going on to weapon profiles, auras, and other fundamental rules of the game i'm thinking GW could do with wrapping it all up in a new edition of the game ... oh wait.
After all, a Space Marine Captain should be issuing orders and inspiring units of his battle-brothers on the front line, not babysitting a squadron of Repulsor Executioners at the back of the battlefield!
Makes definitely sense.
What kind of units can we expect to be 'core'?
In the article, they mentioned Lychguard, Bikes, Terminators and Tomb Blades as core specifically, with 'some' vehicles getting it.
They graphics mostly show troops getting it, and exclude a bladeguard from 'core'
That's the indomitus captain in the graphic you are refering. So far we got nothing about the Bladeguard.
Obviously it could be messed up with poor execution, but right now this seems to me like a fantastic move in the right direction. Both fluffy and a balance improvement, my favorite kind of change.
Hey! I like this! Obviously we need to see the rest of it, but at first glance this is moving in a really good direction. I'm hoping they will also use it to curb things like Aggressors rolling and re-rolling 40+ dice per phase, etc.
I'd be willing to guess that most non-vehicle squad units will get it. I think they're trying to incentivise heroes leading units of similarly sized forces, not babysitting much larger war machines. Not sure how I think it'll go with Tyranids - would Carnifexes be "core", or would they be too close to being like vehicles?
I wonder if we can expect points drops on all the units which were paying for their ability to be buffed in their points...ofc we wont. Because that was never a factor in how they are costed.
So much for all the play-testing...because the game is so entirely different now it's like starting over.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'd be willing to guess that most non-vehicle squad units will get it. I think they're trying to incentivise heroes leading units of similarly sized forces, not babysitting much larger war machines. Not sure how I think it'll go with Tyranids - would Carnifexes be "core", or would they be too close to being like vehicles?
I'm not sure that Tyranids even have generic aura abilities besides Synapse. Venomthropes/Malanthropes are very specific about what they affect, and Old One Eye specifically only buffs Carnifexes.
Tycho wrote: Hey! I like this! Obviously we need to see the rest of it, but at first glance this is moving in a really good direction. I'm hoping they will also use it to curb things like Aggressors rolling and re-rolling 40+ dice per phase, etc.
This is a really good direction IMO.
From the unit descriptions they are likely a core unit / terminators are core in this leak. LOL.
I like that its a subtle way to bring back some of the force organisation charge in army construction, without making it a hard line. You can take loads of units ,but now auras won't have as much effect if you take a lot of specialists. In theory it might help balance it out - a very specialist heavy army might have powerful specialists; but in contrast won't get the buffs to their core units, which might make a more core focused army just as powerful and able to compete well.
Super Ready wrote: I like the implications of what this COULD mean. However, I'm concerned for what will end up counting as a core unit.
I'm hoping at least some of the Marine craziness with Aggressors and the like will be reined in.
However... I'm also mindful that this change reduces lethality just as weapon damage increases will upswing to counter it. Which way will the seesaw ultimately fall?
This may very well be the rumored big nerf to Aggressors.
Xenomancers wrote: I wonder if we can expect points drops on all the units which were paying for their ability to be buffed in their points...ofc we wont. Because that was never a factor in how they are costed.
I think you're being sarcastic, but yeah, I'd say that's literally correct. The biggest problem with auras on certain offending armies was that they weren't costed as if under the effects of multiple stacked aura buffs.
I'm wondering if forbidding units to benefit from more than 1 aura at the same time would be a nice plan or not. If they changed auras to something more original than just rerolls it could lead to more tactical decisions. After all a soldier can't listen to the advice of 3 officers at the same time while firing.
"Go for his eyes with your knife, Jenkins !" "Flank him he's less armoured this side !
"Hold your knife in a reverse-grip !"
They said the Auras will be updated with the respective Codizes, which is a bit funny considering the then old Auras might be much more powerful than the new ones, since they can still blob up everything they like and not just cores.
Xenomancers wrote: I wonder if we can expect points drops on all the units which were paying for their ability to be buffed in their points...ofc we wont. Because that was never a factor in how they are costed.
I think you're being sarcastic, but yeah, I'd say that's literally correct. The biggest problem with auras on certain offending armies was that they weren't costed as if under the effects of multiple stacked aura buffs.
Which makes sense because you can't guarantee that players would take buffing aura units in army composition. Just because a unit could be under 2 or 4 or more buffs at once doesn't mean it should be costed at the high end because then you basically remove the option of chioce. You either take the unit with all the buffs or you don't take the unit (or taking it puts you at a disadvantage).
The same is tricky when costing buff units as well, esp if you allow buffs to stack and such. Do you cost it for a whole army worth under the aura or a few units or what. It's not simple.
I like the basic idea, we'll see how the ultimate execution goes. I think there will still be problems with rerolls, but this at least puts some limits on how they can be applied.
Xenomancers wrote: I wonder if we can expect points drops on all the units which were paying for their ability to be buffed in their points...ofc we wont. Because that was never a factor in how they are costed.
You're being sarcastic, but are literally correct. The biggest problem with auras on certain offending armies was that they weren't costed as if under the effects of multiple stacked aura buffs.
Well you can't cost things that way...it is illogical to do that. You could charge for the ability but fairly they didn't seem to be charging enough.
This fix does nothing but change the units that are going to be abusing auras.
harlokin wrote: How will my Archon now buff my Cult and Coven units??.....oh, wait
Well it wont be buffing your ravagers anymore - better pray the venom gets core.
Then the joke is on them, I don't own any Ravagers .....My Archons are traditionally of the slightly disappointing beatstick variety, and my Venoms are Flayed Skull
Xenomancers wrote:So much for all the play-testing...because the game is so entirely different now it's like starting over.
In what way does that mean it wasn't playtested? I'm not saying that it's perfectly balanced, but in what way does the game being very different forgo it having been playtested?
catbarf wrote:I'm not sure that Tyranids even have generic aura abilities besides Synapse. Venomthropes/Malanthropes are very specific about what they affect, and Old One Eye specifically only buffs Carnifexes.
Ah, that's true! The Swarmlord might be one of the few that has a generic Hive Fleet aura.
Xenomancers wrote: I wonder if we can expect points drops on all the units which were paying for their ability to be buffed in their points...ofc we wont. Because that was never a factor in how they are costed.
So much for all the play-testing...because the game is so entirely different now it's like starting over.
How do you know that? Are you on the GW balance team figuring the points?
Because I can do basic math and compare results across factional lines. Tau, Eldar, even certain Chaos armies are all pointed as though theyre getting full support from various special rules.
harlokin wrote: How will my Archon now buff my Cult and Coven units??.....oh, wait
Well it wont be buffing your ravagers anymore - better pray the venom gets core.
Then the joke is on them, I don't own any Ravagers .....My Archons are traditionally of the slightly disappointing beatstick variety, and my Venoms are Flayed Skull
I'd personally lay good odds that Dedicated Transports will get Core.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: They said the Auras will be updated with the respective Codizes, which is a bit funny considering the then old Auras might be much more powerful than the new ones, since they can still blob up everything they like and not just cores.
Which is why it is important to update all the marine supplements ASAP.
Xenomancers wrote:So much for all the play-testing...because the game is so entirely different now it's like starting over.
In what way does that mean it wasn't playtested? I'm not saying that it's perfectly balanced, but in what way does the game being very different forgo it having been playtested?
catbarf wrote:I'm not sure that Tyranids even have generic aura abilities besides Synapse. Venomthropes/Malanthropes are very specific about what they affect, and Old One Eye specifically only buffs Carnifexes.
Ah, that's true! The Swarmlord might be one of the few that has a generic Hive Fleet aura.
All data collected in 8th edition is now useless is what I am saying. The game has changed too much.
The only arguable army-wide effects besides Synapse and Venom/Malanhtropes is the Malanthrope's conditional rule to taste the dead enemy and give the entire army a reroll buff to the end of the battle.
Synapse being restricted to CORE units wouldn't make sense, so I think we are in clear. We have nothing, so we have nothing to lose.
Which is why it is important to update all the marine supplements ASAP.
If memory serves, there was a statement about the supplements getting a Day 1 FAQ to update things when the SM prime codex drops with all the changes. I expect we'll see this as part of that.
How do you know that? Are you on the GW balance team figuring the points?
Because I can do basic math and compare results across factional lines. Tau, Eldar, even certain Chaos armies are all pointed as though theyre getting full support from various special rules.
harlokin wrote: How will my Archon now buff my Cult and Coven units??.....oh, wait
Well it wont be buffing your ravagers anymore - better pray the venom gets core.
Then the joke is on them, I don't own any Ravagers .....My Archons are traditionally of the slightly disappointing beatstick variety, and my Venoms are Flayed Skull
I'd personally lay good odds that Dedicated Transports will get Core.
Wow you can do math? What is the forumula for charging a unit for auras it might not even use? You are talking out of your butt dude.
iGuy91 wrote: Hooooly crap.
That is a massive, massive meta-shaking change. Depending on what gets 'core' list comp is going to shift dramatically.
Characters also not getting their own reroll auras makes for an interesting change too.
(Also - Snickers as a Necron player who basically never got aura buffs to begin with)
You realize this is likely to affect My Will Be Done and the new Relentless March, right?
Unless for some reason Warriors and Immortals aren't classed as <Core> but Lychguard and Tomb Blades are there isn't gonna be much difference to the Necron playstyle of 8th with regards to who gets selected for MWBD.
Beyond that the only source of Aura reroll the Necrons had was the reroll 1s to wound from the Lord. We'll see if the new Codex adds more rerolls to the army but as it stands not much of anything changes with Necrons with this new design philosophy.
Yes, I can. Otherwise I wouldnt know that, for example, a 10 point Guardian and a 5 point Guardsman are wildly disparate in cost, while having extremely similar functional abilities.
But good on you for admitting you lack basic number skills. That takes real courage.
Xenomancers wrote:So much for all the play-testing...because the game is so entirely different now it's like starting over.
In what way does that mean it wasn't playtested? I'm not saying that it's perfectly balanced, but in what way does the game being very different forgo it having been playtested?
catbarf wrote:I'm not sure that Tyranids even have generic aura abilities besides Synapse. Venomthropes/Malanthropes are very specific about what they affect, and Old One Eye specifically only buffs Carnifexes.
Ah, that's true! The Swarmlord might be one of the few that has a generic Hive Fleet aura.
All data collected in 8th edition is now useless is what I am saying. The game has changed too much.
Do you think that GWs playtesting efforts for 9th were done with 8th edition rules? Or are you referring to the communities data? I really, really don't see what your point is. Every new release changes the game.
Aaranis wrote: I'm wondering if forbidding units to benefit from more than 1 aura at the same time would be a nice plan or not. If they changed auras to something more original than just rerolls it could lead to more tactical decisions. After all a soldier can't listen to the advice of 3 officers at the same time while firing.
This is explicitly not happening- Core units will get all auras:
WarCom Article wrote:However – and very much as intended – a nearby Core unit of Space Marines will be significantly more effective when in the presence of their Captain and/or a Lieutenant, just as they should be.
Sooooooo why shouldn't a Captain be inspiring anything shooting to begin with? Inconsistency is inconsistency.
It's stupid because it's GW showing they can't write rules. This is literally the same as every other nerfhammer thing they've done. The fact people are for it shows they have memories of goldfish.
Super fluffy and needed change to the game. I like it as long as they apply it with common sense.
As a Drukhari player, I hope they take a look at how our Auras work with open topped vehicles, now that they are touching this stuff... Make an Archon the Warlord it should be instead of making him hide behind huge ships to reroll gakky dice.
All data collected in 8th edition is now useless is what I am saying. The game has changed too much.
This statement was already true.
No major game mechanics had changed. Combat slightly but that was mostly just wordy. Tanks can shoot into melee. You cant fall back and shoot with fly (unless you have a ability that lets you). Big changes but not that big. This aura change fundamentally changes the way the game is played for many armies.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Sooooooo why shouldn't a Captain be inspiring anything shooting to begin with? Inconsistency is inconsistency.
It's stupid because it's GW showing they can't write rules. This is literally the same as every other nerfhammer thing they've done. The fact people are for it shows they have memories of goldfish.
Great point. Standing near a captain to shoot better was already stupid. Agreed. So why should we draw any distinction?
Moving forward...how much more should core units cost? 10% more? 20%?
If you make a change like this you must cost for the "core" ability. If you don't - it is a clear indicator of not knowing how to balance rules.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Sooooooo why shouldn't a Captain be inspiring anything shooting to begin with? Inconsistency is inconsistency.
It's stupid because it's GW showing they can't write rules. This is literally the same as every other nerfhammer thing they've done. The fact people are for it shows they have memories of goldfish.
(fills out another box on the Dakka bingo card)
Why does this display an inability to write rules?
In what way are selective auras different from stratagems that target specific units?
I do like this idea a lot but as a DE player the new DE book will have to change HUGELY otherwise its going to suck really bad for DE or make DE not ave the Core rules.
In general its a good idea and I see Chapter master style units and specialist auras (like Drazhar) not having the "Core" stipulations at all.
Archon's Aura doesn't effect units in vehicles, and its only core most likely will be Kabal which no one cares about RR'1s for them at all, its 5-10 poison shots, they have a terrible gun. This means the Archon is officially a dead model, it already have a crappy one b.c how weak it is (A Canoness is stronger, let me repeat that, a CANONESS IS BETTER)
Haemonculus/Urien Aura is key to Coven (All coven) working and that includes the vehicles, if Grots and Talos can not get the +1T and +1str aura they are effectly pointless to play, right now Custodes for the same points as Grots are everything better, literally they are just better, DE players relays on that +1T to weather the storm of massive T5-6 shooting and Talos even more so HB's are going to 2 wounds soon, and Talos wants that +1str aura so we have something other than Lances, DC, to hurt T8.
Succubus, wouldn't effect some of the worst units like Hellions and Reaevers, thats just maddening to force that on her.
Unlikely. They only target 1 unit to begin with. My money is they don't change. We'll see.
Right there are a lot of "not an aura" type abilities. I imagine those could be exceptions to this. We've also see the (Aura) keyword on other stuff so we know it will be called out.
This is demonstrably false. As you yourself go on to admit. Im beginning to recall why you're unable to grokk quite literally anything placed in your path.
Aaranis wrote: As I said in the AdMech thread, I think it's a great change and I'm all for it, but they'll need to do more than copy-paste 8th codices to 9th as for example, Kastelan Robots are terrible without rerolls, and I doubt they'll be "Core". It could also mean that less used characters could be rewritten so as to fill a role of buffer of specific units, like the Datasmith could give the Robots +1 to Hit if he's nearby or something more original. That would give use to forgotten characters if done right.
Makes units and intra-codex balance hell of a lot easier too. Like, Guilliman could be costed better knowing he won't just be surrounded by 6 tanks in game.
9th giveth the ability to shoot your bots twice in melee and 9th taketh away the ability to still hit the majority of the time by having re-roll everything from Cawl. Archon buffing Ravagers was to me a common and unsightly sight in 8th. I hope Talos become core, it would be real silly if Haemonculus could not babysit their big babies. I wonder if targeted abilities like MWBD and psychic powers will be limited in any way, it seems a little unfair that Necrons can order their tanks to shoot harder, but not Adeptus Astartes. I hope that FW Dreadnoughts don't become core, I don't think they need to be.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Sooooooo why shouldn't a Captain be inspiring anything shooting to begin with? Inconsistency is inconsistency.
It's stupid because it's GW showing they can't write rules. This is literally the same as every other nerfhammer thing they've done. The fact people are for it shows they have memories of goldfish.
(fills out another box on the Dakka bingo card)
Why does this display an inability to write rules?
In what way are selective auras different from stratagems that target specific units?
Stack army with core units. Buff whole army.
Don't do it - get less value.
OFC your point is taken. Stratagems that buff entire units buff more based on the number of models and does not increase stratagem cost (in most cases). This is fundamentally unbalanced. I suspect stratagems will also follow this core unit trend. Might not be a problem. If units that aren't core get a big drop in price.
vict0988 wrote: I wonder if targeted abilities like MWBD and psychic powers will be limited in any way, it seems a little unfair that Necrons can order their tanks to shoot harder, but not Adeptus Astartes. I hope that FW Dreadnoughts don't become core, I don't think they need to be.
I doubt dreads will be core. It's a huge relief to not deal with Stormcannon rerolls.
We also saw that "Witchfire", "Malediction", etc keywords are coming back, right?
This is demonstrably false. As you yourself go on to admit. Im beginning to recall why you're unable to grokk quite literally anything placed in your path.
How can you make a claim that my subjective opinion is false? Major has a different meaning to me I guess. Insults don't really help any kind of argument you are making ether. BTW - do you have that formula for how they were charging auras?
This is demonstrably false. As you yourself go on to admit. Im beginning to recall why you're unable to grokk quite literally anything placed in your path.
How can you make a claim that my subjective opinion is false? Major has a different meaning to me I guess. Insults don't really help any kind of argument you are making ether. BTW - do you have that formula for how they were charging auras?
This is demonstrably false. As you yourself go on to admit. Im beginning to recall why you're unable to grokk quite literally anything placed in your path.
You are talking to the guy who repeatdly stated he couldn't wait for GW to "crash and burn" as a result of 3D printers because he was struggling to do anything with his Ultramarines prior to the second Codex. After the release of the aforementioned second Codex, he became for a couple of months one of the biggest defender of GW (what a surprise) before switching back to his old habits when GW came with the nerfhammer.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Sooooooo why shouldn't a Captain be inspiring anything shooting to begin with? Inconsistency is inconsistency.
It's stupid because it's GW showing they can't write rules. This is literally the same as every other nerfhammer thing they've done. The fact people are for it shows they have memories of goldfish.
(fills out another box on the Dakka bingo card)
Why does this display an inability to write rules?
In what way are selective auras different from stratagems that target specific units?
Stratagems were already poorly handled to begin with, but it shows inconsistency in which, as we already were told, some vehicles get it but not others for arbitrary reasons besides "We don't want your Captain to give rerolls to THIS unit", and chances are we will have NO fluff explanation as to why.
So basically that would be not far off from just letting the Ironclad Dread benefit from March of the Ancients because a regular shooting Dread with that Character protection is something people just don't like. If there's a problem where you need to select just a few units to work with a rule when it was generalized to begin with, there was already a core problem. Price the Captain accordingly instead of saying he only inspires a couple of units.
How can you make a claim that my subjective opinion is false? Major has a different meaning to me I guess.
We know.
We also know that the core rules fundamentally changed every aspect of the game from 8th to 9th. Your statement therefore is that nothing changed from 8th to 9th, which you yourself have admitted is false.
BTW - do you have that formula for how they were charging auras?
Keep on moving those goalposts. Or did you now want to engage on how Tau, Eldar, Thousand Sons and Daemons arent pointed as though they had multiple overlapping buffs assumed in existence?
Stratagems were already poorly handled to begin with, but it shows inconsistency in which, as we already were told, some vehicles get it but not others for arbitrary reasons besides "We don't want your Captain to give rerolls to THIS unit", and chances are we will have NO fluff explanation as to why.
So basically that would be not far off from just letting the Ironclad Dread benefit from March of the Ancients because a regular shooting Dread with that Character protection is something people just don't like. If there's a problem where you need to select just a few units to work with a rule when it was generalized to begin with, there was already a core problem. Price the Captain accordingly instead of saying he only inspires a couple of units.
Costing a captain too high means that then he's worthless UNLESS he's buffing more powerful units. You're painting yourself in the corner with a change like that. Bobby G, QED.
They could have said INFANTRY and BIKES, right? This is no different except it exerts more control. The "vehicles" are probably things like the new attack bike or other small things classing as vehicles where the occupants can interact with a Captain more directly.
If Gravis/Terminator is excepted then its a matter of those units feeling capable without the efforts of the Captain due to their gear or experience. Regardless of the fluff justification I don't see why a keyword selection is any different than what we have now. Rejecting the rules writing comes down to personal preference at that point.
Hey SM players, your Tanks and Dreads cannot re-roll shooting hits anymore or wounds but these shiny new eradicators and heavy intercessors which are good at shooting can...buy more models
blaktoof wrote: Hey SM players, your Tanks and Dreads cannot re-roll shooting hits anymore or wounds but these shiny new eradicators and heavy intercessors which are good at shooting can...buy more models
Sucks for those brand new land speeders and tanks. So, buy fewer models? I'm so confused without the GW cabal telling me how to buy things! Those evil sinister bastards.
blaktoof wrote: Hey SM players, your Tanks and Dreads cannot re-roll shooting hits anymore or wounds but these shiny new eradicators and heavy intercessors which are good at shooting can...buy more models
So what's GW's plan with the new speeder and Gladiator tanks then? Loss leader? Inherently less profit that infantry models? They miraculously have the Core keyword? Your conspiracy hypothesis breaks down rather quickly.
Yes! I like it! Less rerolling is a good thing. I suspect this will also apply to many things like psychic powers, litanys, prayers, and hopefully strategems, hopefully curtailing WOMBO COMBO "tactics". Yeah, good change.
clodax66 wrote: I really like it. I never liked characters being beat sticks. They should be used to buff others units that are doing the killing and not doing the killing themselves. Kind of like how farseers work in Eldar
It depends on the faction. Chaos Lords are all about individual power and many of them lust after demonic artifacts and weaponry to increase their power and killiness. Chaos Lords being melee beatstick is reasonable. Ork Warbosses are also a case where being melee beatstick is okay.
But it is still a pretty neat change.
This is a good point. Csm characters in older editions didn't really do a lot to "help" the other units in your army, they were primarily just nasty killing machines. Loyalists, on the other hand, had "Rites of Battle" which allowed other units to use their captains leadership for things like morale, target priority, etc. They needed it, because most of their units were L8. Meanwhile csmdidn't as most of our units were L9 or L10, signifying that they were veterans of uncounted wars who didn't need someone shouting in their ears to fight better, they just knew how to get the job done. This was a distinction between the two factions. It would be nice if gw would bring this back by making csm units less reliant on HQs by improving some of their stats. Will they do that? Probably not, but it would be nice.
Moving forwards, many of the most powerful aura abilities will only affect Core units from a Character’s (sub-)faction. This represents a more realistic form of in-situ command, with Characters acting like they’re supposed to from a narrative perspective. After all, a Space Marine Captain should be issuing orders and inspiring units of his battle-brothers on the front line, not babysitting a squadron of Repulsor Executioners at the back of the battlefield!
A crucial side-effect of this change is that Characters themselves won’t be affected by aura abilities that utilise the Core keyword – they’re supposed to be commanding others, not inspiring themselves to do better! In the example shown above, the Space Marine Captain won’t be able to re-roll his hit rolls of 1 and will instead have to rely on his own merit to strike home. To be fair, he’ll usually hit on a 2+ anyway!
What's "core" and receives buffs and what doesn't is invariably going to be arbitrary, or even worse, sub-faction locked. This is in the same vein where C/SM tank crewmen are/were apparently not part of any chapter or legion's doctrine despite their existence on the TO&E and more than one legion/chapter having armored units as integral parts of their doctrine.
MWBDmay not be, but I don't see any reason it wouldn't change to 'select one <Dynasty> Core Unit.'
For one buff to single unit isn't that big nor is +1 to hit as big thing as rr all rolls. It's aura affecting pretty much entire gunline that has been issue and which makes giving point cost that's fair impossible. You either underpay or overpay. Single targeted buff is lot easier to assign point cost.
Stratagems were already poorly handled to begin with, but it shows inconsistency in which, as we already were told, some vehicles get it but not others for arbitrary reasons besides "We don't want your Captain to give rerolls to THIS unit", and chances are we will have NO fluff explanation as to why.
So basically that would be not far off from just letting the Ironclad Dread benefit from March of the Ancients because a regular shooting Dread with that Character protection is something people just don't like. If there's a problem where you need to select just a few units to work with a rule when it was generalized to begin with, there was already a core problem. Price the Captain accordingly instead of saying he only inspires a couple of units.
Costing a captain too high means that then he's worthless UNLESS he's buffing more powerful units. You're painting yourself in the corner with a change like that. Bobby G, QED.
They could have said INFANTRY and BIKES, right? This is no different except it exerts more control. The "vehicles" are probably things like the new attack bike or other small things classing as vehicles where the occupants can interact with a Captain more directly.
Thats really under the assumption that giant tanks with the reroll were problems to begin with. They already created a new unit entry for the Chapter Master. If you dont want something expensive you can get the Captain. Rerolling all hits regardless of modifiers should be expensive. You don't want that for anything with dinky offense to begin with.
And Roboute was too powerful because you really can't price rerolling all wounds for ANYTHING in an aura like his. He was too good with Razorbacks but he was too good with even just Predators and Intercessors and Grav Devastators, etc.
Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.
Puts a balance lever in place that needed to be in place. Silly to have a 68pt captain applying the same RR 1s to hit buff equally to a 50pt scout squad and a 750pt astraeus super heavy tank.
Ideally, they'd replace the use of characters as bubble buddies for your army with some...other job for them to do, particularly with factions who are suffering in the HQ department like DE.
Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.
Which is exactly why I expect Endless Cacophonies to be severly nerfed / limited in the future Codex.
Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.
Which is exactly why I expect Endless Cacophonies to be severly nerfed / limited in the future Codex.
or just remove it and buff the usual targets with either pts drop or output potential buff.
Termies, Havocs and oblits are overcosted when they dont have VotlW + EC on them.
MWBDmay not be, but I don't see any reason it wouldn't change to 'select one <Dynasty> Core Unit.'
For one buff to single unit isn't that big nor is +1 to hit as big thing as rr all rolls. It's aura affecting pretty much entire gunline that has been issue and which makes giving point cost that's fair impossible. You either underpay or overpay. Single targeted buff is lot easier to assign point cost.
Yeah, this change seems like it was specifically targeted to reign in how prolific Auras are. Auras have probably been one of the biggest complaints of the previous edition and this seems like a good change.
As you pointed out, Auras in general are significantly more powerful than targeted abilities in most cases. I don't see MWBD changing to core for this reason. Same as our new Chronometron.
If Gravis/Terminator is excepted then its a matter of those units feeling capable without the efforts of the Captain due to their gear or experience. Regardless of the fluff justification I don't see why a keyword selection is any different than what we have now. Rejecting the rules writing comes down to personal preference at that point.
Maybe when they ment termintor cores, they ment termintors which are not elite options for their specific armies.
Change doesn't affect me that much, because GK were never aura masters, but it seems like it is going to have an impact on marines etc No more 2 drop pods with 15 devastators, a chaplain and a cpt is going to be sad for some people here.
What I wish though, that core rule changes were included in the core rule book. Assuming of course this is a play tested change, that GW planned and not some sudden knee jerk to 9th working different, then what GW thought it would.
Super Ready wrote: I like the implications of what this COULD mean. However, I'm concerned for what will end up counting as a core unit.
I'm hoping at least some of the Marine craziness with Aggressors and the like will be reined in.
If Terminators get it, I’d guess Aggressors do too.
What I wish though, that core rule changes were included in the core rule book.
It is not a "core rule change". Which keyword affects or not a specific unit is very much a Codex thing. Also, not ALL auras will be changed according to GW. As a result, the general core rule according to which auras affect all units and also the unit which is the source of the aura is still very much valid.
I’d also say be prepared for incredibly stupid things to slip through. Those new non-captain HQ auras etc? Watch them be core only so the Chief Apothecary who’s following around the chapter master doesn’t affect him because whoops.
Super Ready wrote: I like the implications of what this COULD mean. However, I'm concerned for what will end up counting as a core unit.
I'm hoping at least some of the Marine craziness with Aggressors and the like will be reined in.
If Terminators get it, I’d guess Aggressors do too.
Core is fine if they lose shoot twice. No single unit should be firing 144 shots in a turn, especially at their point cost.
What I wish though, that core rule changes were included in the core rule book.
It is not a "core rule change". Which keyword affects or not a specific unit is very much a Codex thing. Also, not ALL auras will be changed according to GW. As a result, the general core rule according to which auras affect all units and also the unit which is the source of the aura is still very much valid.
Changing how auras work is a core change to me. Same as retro activly adding keywords. And if this means GW is going to be adding the aura changes on a codex by codex basis, then it is even worse, because it creates a situation where armies that get codex in lets say 18 months get non 9th ed rules for that time, and I can't think when something like that doesn't create problems.
And if the change is only ment for space marine captins and Lts, then it is a stupid change. Because it will spill over in to armies that never had access to over laping auras, but happen to share a profile with marines like GK or some CSM.
This is definitely going to screw my sisters, but I still like it quite a lot.
Also, I'm calling it now. Aggressors and eradicators are not core and the double attack rules change into RR all hits. Would make them more balanced and fluffier.
Changing how auras work is a core change to me. Same as retro activly adding keywords. And if this means GW is going to be adding the aura changes on a codex by codex basis, then it is even worse, because it creates a situation where armies that get codex in lets say 18 months get non 9th ed rules for that time, and I can't think when something like that doesn't create problems.
The basic concept of auras isnt changing Karol. What is changing is the implementation of those auras for certain armies. That's never going to be handled in a core rulebook, because rules for specific armies dont go in the core rulebook.
And if the change is only ment for space marine captins and Lts, then it is a stupid change. Because it will spill over in to armies that never had access to over laping auras, but happen to share a profile with marines like GK or some CSM.
Both GK and CSM have multiple auras that can (and frequently do) overlap.
Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.
Which is exactly why I expect Endless Cacophonies to be severly nerfed / limited in the future Codex.
or just remove it and buff the usual targets with either pts drop or output potential buff.
Termies, Havocs and oblits are overcosted when they dont have VotlW + EC on them.
Yes! Remove shoot twice and +1 to wound strategems like Cacophony and VOTLW and rework units so that they actually work without buffs. Price them accordingly. Done. Kill WOMBO COMBO.
Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.
Which is exactly why I expect Endless Cacophonies to be severly nerfed / limited in the future Codex.
We are still referring to the current rules though and what people were wishing for.
Also all y'all completely forgot about the arbitrary "these units don't benefit from Chapter Tactic equivalents" but okay.
Thats really under the assumption that giant tanks with the reroll were problems to begin with. They already created a new unit entry for the Chapter Master. If you dont want something expensive you can get the Captain. Rerolling all hits regardless of modifiers should be expensive. You don't want that for anything with dinky offense to begin with.
And Roboute was too powerful because you really can't price rerolling all wounds for ANYTHING in an aura like his. He was too good with Razorbacks but he was too good with even just Predators and Intercessors and Grav Devastators, etc.
Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.
Dreads and DA speeders certainly were. I'll agree it doesn't change much if stuff like Eradicators and Aggressors still get rerolls. People are preferring those units over tanks already. We'll just have to wait and see the full shake out.
And absolutely, Oblits should pay more CP to shoot twice. But it is an old as dirt strat. I'm certain it will see tweaks in the new book.
What I wish though, that core rule changes were included in the core rule book.
It is not a "core rule change". Which keyword affects or not a specific unit is very much a Codex thing. Also, not ALL auras will be changed according to GW. As a result, the general core rule according to which auras affect all units and also the unit which is the source of the aura is still very much valid.
Changing how auras work is a core change to me. Same as retro activly adding keywords. And if this means GW is going to be adding the aura changes on a codex by codex basis, then it is even worse, because it creates a situation where armies that get codex in lets say 18 months get non 9th ed rules for that time, and I can't think when something like that doesn't create problems.
And if the change is only ment for space marine captins and Lts, then it is a stupid change. Because it will spill over in to armies that never had access to over laping auras, but happen to share a profile with marines like GK or some CSM.
100% this.. I don't know if the rule itself will be good or not. but the introduction of a new keyword and new mechanic after the core book but before the first codex stinks like GW just screwing their game up again.. Also how does everyone feel knowing that their rulebooks are now invalidated.. In so much that you can't give a brand new never heard of 40k person the rule book and they be fully aware of the rules.. it'll have to be here's the rule book, plus FAQ plus this other document that describes core
This is demonstrably false. As you yourself go on to admit. Im beginning to recall why you're unable to grokk quite literally anything placed in your path.
You are talking to the guy who repeatdly stated he couldn't wait for GW to "crash and burn" as a result of 3D printers because he was struggling to do anything with his Ultramarines prior to the second Codex. After the release of the aforementioned second Codex, he became for a couple of months one of the biggest defender of GW (what a surprise) before switching back to his old habits when GW came with the nerfhammer.
TL;DR : he is an idiot and a buffoon. Don't answer to him
This is the problem with the world today. People like this speaking about what others have said and bending the truth with malicious slander.
I am not and never have been a defender of GWs rules. They are terrible at writing rules. Routinely I call out the Anti-marine hate on Dakka because it is omnipresent. Anytime marines have something remotely powerful it is instagibbed. Now the armies core identity has been deleted. Meanwhile for months or years other armies best performing tournament winning abilities will remain untouched. Because marines are not allowed to be relevant for long. Also I manage to make my points without insulting people.
Thats really under the assumption that giant tanks with the reroll were problems to begin with. They already created a new unit entry for the Chapter Master. If you dont want something expensive you can get the Captain. Rerolling all hits regardless of modifiers should be expensive. You don't want that for anything with dinky offense to begin with.
And Roboute was too powerful because you really can't price rerolling all wounds for ANYTHING in an aura like his. He was too good with Razorbacks but he was too good with even just Predators and Intercessors and Grav Devastators, etc.
Also regardless of the concern of "pricing Captains too expensive" thats like saying the CSM shoot twice strat should have a different CP cost on anything not Obliterators, but you're not going to use it on anything not Obliterators to begin with.
Dreads and DA speeders certainly were. I'll agree it doesn't change much if stuff like Eradicators and Aggressors still get rerolls. People are preferring those units over tanks already. We'll just have to wait and see the full shake out.
And absolutely, Oblits should pay more CP to shoot twice. But it is an old as dirt strat. I'm certain it will see tweaks in the new book.
But then you'll have the arbitrary "this unit doesn't get rerolls because...reasons". It's inconsistency to say those two Gravis units don't get rerolls but Inceptors and Heavy Intercessors do. There's a problem with the core units and the Captain already.
And yes even if you priced double shooting for Oblits at 3CP and CSM troops at ZERO CP you'd still not use it on the Chaos Marines. Some offense just isn't worth buffing to begin with.
Both GK and CSM have multiple auras that can (and frequently do) overlap.
That is what I am saying. 8th for me was a history of GW fixing something in the marine codex, or calling something a fix that mirrors stuff from the marine codex. But a cheaper dreadnought, or higher point cost razorback was a very different thing for someone playing the marine codex and someone playing a GK one. Also non of the GK or CSM auras can compare to what marines had, but both had their models costed as if they did. This is hardly a solitary thing in w40k or limited to those two armies. One day someone will explain to me why a powerfist on a s3 model costs as much as on a s4 one.
The basic concept of auras isnt changing Karol. What is changing is the implementation of those auras for certain armies. That's never going to be handled in a core rulebook, because rules for specific armies dont go in the core rulebook.
Not sure this will translate well, but we have something we call hair spliting. If the MKOL changes to rules to wrestling events run only in my weight cathegory and age group , then it is a change to the rule set as a whole. Also even if the change is true only for necron and marines, and further books are not going to have identical or similar changes to their auras, then marines still take up the majority of players around the world. So in my MKOL rules change example, it would be as if the change was done to all male wrestlers.
But again it does not matter as much to me, I don't think it will break the game. Seems like the change is a good thing, but I would rather have big changes like that, and a change to all marines is a big change in my eyes, be in the core rule book. I guess it could be worse and GW could have just put it in in to a 2ed or 3ed CA book this year.
If GW tested it, and I like to assume they did, the change should have been in the core rules.
Ah and the pessimist inside me hope that this change doesn't end with chaos lords not being able to buff DG vehicles, but GW making some sort of DG poison techmarine that has an aura that very much buffs the vehicles. Same with marines and techmarines. I like to think this is a good change to fix some bad rule interaction and not opening the door to people being forced to buy more models.
Here I thought that the army's core identity was being flexible jack-of-all-trades units with good base statlines at a premium cost.
If the army's identity came to actually revolve around blobbing up and eliminating randomness through tedious and time-consuming re-rolls, good riddance.
Lord Clinto wrote: I like this rule but am kind of bummed that it's an "extra" rule pasted in, not in the actual BRB...
What do you mean? It's not an extra rule.
They are not saying that auras will affect only CORE units. They are saying that some auras will have that interaction with some units. We already know that some auras will for sure affect non-CORE units.
Since it is an interaction between specific abilities and keywords, it is correct that it is introduced into the datasheet that contains the ability.
It is surely not a rule that should go into the rulebook.
Since when was "foot commander standing among a squadron of buttoned-up battle tanks so that his inspiring presence may inspire them to greater accuracy" a core identity of the Space Marine army?
Xenomancers wrote: Because marines are not allowed to be relevant for long.
Space Marines, who dominated 8th at the start and for the entire second half of the edition, and who are showered with constant updates and new toys, are not allowed to have nice things? That's a hot take if I've ever seen one.
This is the problem with the world today. People like this speaking about what others have said and bending the truth with malicious slander.
I am not and never have been a defender of GWs rules. They are terrible at writing rules. Routinely I call out the Anti-marine hate on Dakka because it is omnipresent. Anytime marines have something remotely powerful it is instagibbed. Now the armies core identity has been deleted. Meanwhile for months or years other armies best performing tournament winning abilities will remain untouched. Because marines are not allowed to be relevant for long. Also I manage to make my points without insulting people.
Not really.
This is a far, far cry from a Ynnari / GSC-style gutting of an army.
Marines get off very, very lightly for the unprecedented mess they made of the game for the past 12 months.
Lord Clinto wrote: I like this rule but am kind of bummed that it's an "extra" rule pasted in, not in the actual BRB...
What do you mean? It's not an extra rule.
They are not saying that auras will affect only CORE units. They are saying that some auras will have that interaction with some units. We already know that some auras will for sure affect non-CORE units.
Since it is an interaction between specific abilities and keywords, it is correct that it is introduced into the datasheet that contains the ability.
It is surely not a rule that should go into the rulebook.
What is the keyword system if not part of core rule though?
If GW keeps adding new keywords retroactively, I'd imagine it will soon turn into the USR rule bloat of pre-8th ed. Let's face it - keyword is just another USR but without the lengthy explanation.
If GW tested it, and I like to assume they did, the change should have been in the core rules.
How is this addressed in the core rulebook? What army specific rules are addressed in the BRB? Where are my rules for my Deathwatch Kill Teams in there?
They dont exist because the BRB is not the place for these faction specific rules, anymore than Synapse or Psychic Locus doesnt go in the GT packet.
Not sure this will translate well, but we have something we call hair spliting. If the MKOL changes to rules to wrestling events run only in my weight cathegory and age group , then it is a change to the rule set as a whole. Also even if the change is true only for necron and marines, and further books are not going to have identical or similar changes to their auras, then marines still take up the majority of players around the world. So in my MKOL rules change example, it would be as if the change was done to all male wrestlers.
This isnt even remotely analagous. What would be analagous is if your MKOL made a change to the rules for you specifically. Not anyone else. You.
Here I thought that the army's core identity was being flexible jack-of-all-trades units with good base statlines at a premium cost.
If the army's identity came to actually revolve around blobbing up and eliminating randomness through tedious and time-consuming re-rolls, good riddance.
Maybe some armies need auras to make units that are their core esthetic, and without them they are just a worse version of some other army. But I don't know enough marine list building to be in the know, if it is the case.
Here I thought that the army's core identity was being flexible jack-of-all-trades units with good base statlines at a premium cost.
If the army's identity came to actually revolve around blobbing up and eliminating randomness through tedious and time-consuming re-rolls, good riddance.
I am speaking of the play-style identity. Powerful buff HQ is the signature of the marines now. Now these buff HQ have lost the ability to buff the majority of their army. Also if you really consider it = rerolls speed up the game - the more players kill the less actions to take in the next turn. All for the cost of picking up a few dice on 1's and 2's and rerolling them.
This is the problem with the world today. People like this speaking about what others have said and bending the truth with malicious slander.
I am not and never have been a defender of GWs rules. They are terrible at writing rules. Routinely I call out the Anti-marine hate on Dakka because it is omnipresent. Anytime marines have something remotely powerful it is instagibbed. Now the armies core identity has been deleted. Meanwhile for months or years other armies best performing tournament winning abilities will remain untouched. Because marines are not allowed to be relevant for long. Also I manage to make my points without insulting people.
Not really.
This is a far, far cry from a Ynnari / GSC-style gutting of an army.
Marines get off very, very lightly for the unprecedented mess they made of the game for the past 12 months.
I was horrified and saddened by what happened to GSC.. Their identity was nerfed out of the gate. Then a SM chapter came along that was better at it then they were... There is no reason to play purple guardsmen.
skchsan wrote: What is the keyword system if not part of core rule though?
The keyword system isnt changing. If anything, its functioning exactly as designed. GW are simply adding specificity that was not present in 8th for certain abilities.
Ghaz wrote: Am I the only one expecting a "Core if" mechanic (e.g., Necron Destroyers are core if the warlord is a Destroyer Lord)?
That'd be awesome, it happens quite a lot in AoS if I'm not mistaken, Elite units that become Troops depending on the subfaction. Could be the same but with the CORE keyword. It gives armies with less variety a lot more open to new types of playstyle.
This isnt even remotely analagous. What would be analagous is if your MKOL made a change to the rules for you specifically. Not anyone else. You.
If you think that a change to how marine and necron auras work , affects one person, then I think am writing all of this in worse english they I normaly do.
How is this addressed in the core rulebook?
It isn't. That is the problem. The aura change is a big change, that affects multiple armies.
If you think that a change to how marine and necron auras work , affects one person, then I think am writing all of this in worse english they I normaly do.
You've missed the point. Again.
Each player in your wrestling analogy represents an army. GW isnt making changes to the underlying rules for how auras work. They are applying specific alterations to individual auras in individual armies with respect to how those auras will interact with units in their respective codices.
Here I thought that the army's core identity was being flexible jack-of-all-trades units with good base statlines at a premium cost.
If the army's identity came to actually revolve around blobbing up and eliminating randomness through tedious and time-consuming re-rolls, good riddance.
I am speaking of the play-style identity. Powerful buff HQ is the signature of the marines now. Now these buff HQ have lost the ability to buff the majority of their army.
It would appear that unless the majority of your army was heavy support battletanks or dreadnoughts and the like, this is not actually the case, and if it was, you were playing a list likely to be invalidated or radically changed in some way by any new codex regardless as often happens with such builds. It would appear that most infantry units, at least going by the vibe of the article, will be "core", perhaps not all, but enough that the bulk of units in most armies should be "core".
Ghaz wrote: Am I the only one expecting a "Core if" mechanic (e.g., Necron Destroyers are core if the warlord is a Destroyer Lord)?
That'd be awesome, it happens quite a lot in AoS if I'm not mistaken, Elite units that become Troops depending on the subfaction. Could be the same but with the CORE keyword. It gives armies with less variety a lot more open to new types of playstyle.
I can definitely see that working for Dark Angels: termies (and maybe some gravis) become core if Deathwing, bikes,speeders and other FA become core if Ravenwing.
And yes even if you priced double shooting for Oblits at 3CP and CSM troops at ZERO CP you'd still not use it on the Chaos Marines. Some offense just isn't worth buffing to begin with.
It's late game, your Obliterators are dead, you're running low on CPs and your CSMs are in a critical fight for an objective.
I am speaking of the play-style identity. Powerful buff HQ is the signature of the marines now. Now these buff HQ have lost the ability to buff the majority of their army.
It would appear that unless the majority of your army was heavy support battletanks or dreadnoughts and the like, this is not actually the case, and if it was, you were playing a list likely to be invalidated or radically changed in some way by any new codex regardless as often happens with such builds. It would appear that most infantry units, at least going by the vibe of the article, will be "core", perhaps not all, but enough that the bulk of units in most armies should be "core".
I had a reply typed out to address this point, but deleted it as it was coming across snarky.
Thank you for putting across my very thoughts in a much more succinct manner.
But then you'll have the arbitrary "this unit doesn't get rerolls because...reasons". It's inconsistency to say those two Gravis units don't get rerolls but Inceptors and Heavy Intercessors do. There's a problem with the core units and the Captain already.
And yes even if you priced double shooting for Oblits at 3CP and CSM troops at ZERO CP you'd still not use it on the Chaos Marines. Some offense just isn't worth buffing to begin with.
*shrug* there's still a fair bit we don't know so I won't jump to conclusions.
I'm happy that GW is willing and able to put another button they can push to limit balance swings.
Alright, so marines's thing isnt to be stuck to HQs for buffs, thats just a consequence of 8th's design. Theyre a jack of all trade army with a solid defensive profile (t4, 3+).
And this change doesn't need to be in the core rulebook, its litterally just adding a keyword to certain auras and datasheet. Its already covered by the same rule that says you can't use a CM reroll on a model of another chapter.
But then you'll have the arbitrary "this unit doesn't get rerolls because...reasons". It's inconsistency to say those two Gravis units don't get rerolls but Inceptors and Heavy Intercessors do. There's a problem with the core units and the Captain already.
And yes even if you priced double shooting for Oblits at 3CP and CSM troops at ZERO CP you'd still not use it on the Chaos Marines. Some offense just isn't worth buffing to begin with.
*shrug* there's still a fair bit we don't know so I won't jump to conclusions.
We already know it'll be most Infantry and some vehicles getting the Core keyword per the article. So if even Terminators, the most elite of the elite, get the rule even though fluff wise they should be independent and get the job done, it means anything else besides maybe Fliers (they can't hear the Captain unless he's on board, sure whatever) would be an arbitrary "we don't know how to price units and auras close to correctly at all". Then we already have issues with auras, like with Archons interacting with anything, that still have yet to be fixed.
I was horrified and saddened by what happened to GSC.. Their identity was nerfed out of the gate. Then a SM chapter came along that was better at it then they were... There is no reason to play purple guardsmen.
We already know it'll be most Infantry and some vehicles getting the Core keyword per the article. So if even Terminators, the most elite of the elite, get the rule even though fluff wise they should be independent and get the job done, it means anything else besides maybe Fliers (they can't hear the Captain unless he's on board, sure whatever) would be an arbitrary "we don't know how to price units and auras close to correctly at all". Then we already have issues with auras, like with Archons interacting with anything, that still have yet to be fixed.
As noted by others - you can't cost the value of an aura that affects a 3/4/500 point unit the same as a 100 point unit. You will create adverse consequences. Points are not the solution to every problem.
I'm sure Archons will get dealt with in their book.
This is the problem with the world today. People like this speaking about what others have said and bending the truth with malicious slander.
I am not and never have been a defender of GWs rules. They are terrible at writing rules. Routinely I call out the Anti-marine hate on Dakka because it is omnipresent. Anytime marines have something remotely powerful it is instagibbed. Now the armies core identity has been deleted. Meanwhile for months or years other armies best performing tournament winning abilities will remain untouched. Because marines are not allowed to be relevant for long. Also I manage to make my points without insulting people.
Not really.
This is a far, far cry from a Ynnari / GSC-style gutting of an army.
Marines get off very, very lightly for the unprecedented mess they made of the game for the past 12 months.
Wait, I lost track of this thread for a sec, is Xeno saying that...captain and lieutenant reroll auras are the CORE IDENTITY of space marines?
A rule that GW explicitly states is going to ALL ARMIES and an ability that is shared by very nearly every single other faction in the game is the CORE IDENTITY of space marines getting gutted?
This is a far, far cry from a Ynnari / GSC-style gutting of an army.
Marines get off very, very lightly for the unprecedented mess they made of the game for the past 12 months.
The past 12 months, of which something like 6 or 7 have been marked by a global pandemic that saw shops stop hosting events?
Please be less hyperbolic. Most of us never got a chance to ever actually play with the stuff from our faction's Psychic Awakening books.
Exactly...it was approximately a 3 month period of ironhand silliness which everyone even space marine players were like...wut? That got gutted pretty good. Ironhands still strong in competitive though.
The majority of people have not really been playing for 6 months.
We already know it'll be most Infantry and some vehicles getting the Core keyword per the article. So if even Terminators, the most elite of the elite, get the rule even though fluff wise they should be independent and get the job done, it means anything else besides maybe Fliers (they can't hear the Captain unless he's on board, sure whatever) would be an arbitrary "we don't know how to price units and auras close to correctly at all". Then we already have issues with auras, like with Archons interacting with anything, that still have yet to be fixed.
As noted by others - you can't cost the value of an aura that affects a 3/4/500 point unit the same as a 100 point unit. You will create adverse consequences. Points are not the solution to every problem.
I'm sure Archons will get dealt with in their book.
You certainly can if the unit isn't too powerful to begin with. Look at the complaints with Aggressors for example. They talked about hoping they dont get Core because of the double shooting. Ya think maybe the latter part is ACTUALLY the problem?
We already know it'll be most Infantry and some vehicles getting the Core keyword per the article. So if even Terminators, the most elite of the elite, get the rule even though fluff wise they should be independent and get the job done, it means anything else besides maybe Fliers (they can't hear the Captain unless he's on board, sure whatever) would be an arbitrary "we don't know how to price units and auras close to correctly at all". Then we already have issues with auras, like with Archons interacting with anything, that still have yet to be fixed.
As noted by others - you can't cost the value of an aura that affects a 3/4/500 point unit the same as a 100 point unit. You will create adverse consequences. Points are not the solution to every problem.
I'm sure Archons will get dealt with in their book.
You certainly can if the unit isn't too powerful to begin with. Look at the complaints with Aggressors for example. They talked about hoping they dont get Core because of the double shooting. Ya think maybe the latter part is ACTUALLY the problem?
Ultramarines actually have the best aggressors. Can move and shoot them for free and double shoot - they've got full reroll too. If that is a problem why aren't they dominating events? It is clearly not a problem. The problem is stratagems that allow salamanders aggressors who get damage buffs to their flame weapons that Ultras can't get but can still move and shoot twice like ultras can. These are balance issues that are easy to spot. Which units can stack the most rules at once? They are going to dominate the game and they do. The issue has always been rules stacking not any individual ability.
I know this core keyword with auras is a bad fix because it doesn't even fix aggressors or eradicators getting rerolls...But bad units like repulsors are actually called out as not getting the buffs. Heck if they drop in points a bunch I'll be ecstatic...I am realistic though. They will probably go UP in price.
So as someone whose melee characters can't receive reroll buffs, get ready to experience some serious rage. It's AMAZING how many 2+ rolls a character can miss when it's important.
On the whole this is for the better. There were simply too many rerolls in the game already and far too many units, especially space marine ones, could easily get over 90% accuracy. The real crux of the matter will be what units receive core and what don't.
I am interested in how this will impact Chaos Space Marines. That book has relied on powerful character for a while now. Considering the limited HQ slots and this, that army has to see a significant rework right? For that matter what about the lord discordant? He's meant to buff demon engines but surely those won't be core right? Same goes for wraith units with the spirit seer.
It's not elegant for this to be in the Core rulebook. I guess not all auras will work the same... and they should release a huge FAQ for all the factions that don't have a Codex telling us what is CORE and what not...
Lord Clinto wrote: I like this rule but am kind of bummed that it's an "extra" rule pasted in, not in the actual BRB...
So. How would you put in corebook that satisfies this
A) some aura but not all affect only core
B) most infantry but not all are core
C) most vehicles but not all are non-core.
Literally only way would be huge list of aura's affected and core units in rulebook. You created huge flipflopping between rulebook and codex
This is simply the best way to do this. It's the same keyword checking we've been doing for a full edition now, just with more differentiation.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Denegaar wrote: It's not elegant for this to be in the Core rulebook. I guess not all auras will work the same... and they should release a huge FAQ for all the factions that don't have a Codex telling us what is CORE and what not...
It says in the article that you don't have to worry about it(paraphrase) until your codex comes out. So...nothing outside of SM and Necrons is core atm.
Denegaar wrote: It's not elegant for this to be in the Core rulebook. I guess not all auras will work the same... and they should release a huge FAQ for all the factions that don't have a Codex telling us what is CORE and what not...
What codex's actually contain multiple aura's that arn't already keyed to keywords, units or some other such qualifiers?
I'm genuinely asking as plenty of xeno codex's heck even guard seem to be lightly effected by this if at all.
We already know it'll be most Infantry and some vehicles getting the Core keyword per the article. So if even Terminators, the most elite of the elite, get the rule even though fluff wise they should be independent and get the job done, it means anything else besides maybe Fliers (they can't hear the Captain unless he's on board, sure whatever) would be an arbitrary "we don't know how to price units and auras close to correctly at all". Then we already have issues with auras, like with Archons interacting with anything, that still have yet to be fixed.
As noted by others - you can't cost the value of an aura that affects a 3/4/500 point unit the same as a 100 point unit. You will create adverse consequences. Points are not the solution to every problem.
I'm sure Archons will get dealt with in their book.
You certainly can if the unit isn't too powerful to begin with. Look at the complaints with Aggressors for example. They talked about hoping they dont get Core because of the double shooting. Ya think maybe the latter part is ACTUALLY the problem?
Ultramarines actually have the best aggressors. Can move and shoot them for free and double shoot - they've got full reroll too. If that is a problem why aren't they dominating events? It is clearly not a problem. The problem is stratagems that allow salamanders aggressors who get damage buffs to their flame weapons that Ultras can't get but can still move and shoot twice like ultras can. These are balance issues that are easy to spot. Which units can stack the most rules at once? They are going to dominate the game and they do. The issue has always been rules stacking not any individual ability.
I know this core keyword with auras is a bad fix because it doesn't even fix aggressors or eradicators getting rerolls...But bad units like repulsors are actually called out as not getting the buffs. Heck if they drop in points a bunch I'll be ecstatic...I am realistic though. They will probably go UP in price.
-3 flyers weren't dominating events and they were a problem. Smite Spam wasn't dominating events...2 out of the 3 times it was a problem, and it was still a problem. A unit doesn't have to instantly give free wins to be a problem. It can just...be a problem. Ultramarine and Salamanders aggressors are a problem because they mean that no other marine faction can take aggressors. If an aggressor is good enough to be worth it's points shooting once(, then it's SIGNIFICANTLY better than its points shooting twice(which only ultramarines can reliably do) or shooting with a bunch of buffs (salamanders).
It's why girlyman use to be such a problem. Anything that was good without girlyman became INSANE with him.
Here I thought that the army's core identity was being flexible jack-of-all-trades units with good base statlines at a premium cost.
If the army's identity came to actually revolve around blobbing up and eliminating randomness through tedious and time-consuming re-rolls, good riddance.
I am speaking of the play-style identity. Powerful buff HQ is the signature of the marines now. Now these buff HQ have lost the ability to buff the majority of their army. Also if you really consider it = rerolls speed up the game - the more players kill the less actions to take in the next turn. All for the cost of picking up a few dice on 1's and 2's and rerolling them.
Please tell me the litany of other replies you got already got through to you and you've realized how silly this is.
That's like whining about losing the gladius at the beginning of 8th because the 'marines core identity is free rhinos now!'
Denegaar wrote: It's not elegant for this to be in the Core rulebook. I guess not all auras will work the same... and they should release a huge FAQ for all the factions that don't have a Codex telling us what is CORE and what not...
What codex's actually contain multiple aura's that arn't already keyed to keywords, units or some other such qualifiers?
I'm genuinely asking as plenty of xeno codex's heck even guard seem to be lightly effected by this if at all.
I guess not many? I don't know either, I only play one army... and basically I have 4 auras in my codex.
If I would get the SM treatment right now, probably only one of them would be useful. That's why I think every Codex should address the thing differently and not in the Core Rulebook.
ERJAK wrote: So as someone whose melee characters can't receive reroll buffs, get ready to experience some serious rage. It's AMAZING how many 2+ rolls a character can miss when it's important.
What does it being important have to do with it? In my experience, Celestine regularly misses 2 of her 6 attacks. I expect it at this point.
ERJAK wrote: So as someone whose melee characters can't receive reroll buffs, get ready to experience some serious rage. It's AMAZING how many 2+ rolls a character can miss when it's important.
What does it being important have to do with it? In my experience, Celestine regularly misses 2 of her 6 attacks. I expect it at this point.
ERJAK wrote: So as someone whose melee characters can't receive reroll buffs, get ready to experience some serious rage. It's AMAZING how many 2+ rolls a character can miss when it's important.
What does it being important have to do with it? In my experience, Celestine regularly misses 2 of her 6 attacks. I expect it at this point.
Because when it's important it's 4 of 6.
I feel the pain in these words, as a Necron player with no rerolls from my Overlord that 2+ WS with 3 attacks felt like a 5+ when I needed it most....
Here I thought that the army's core identity was being flexible jack-of-all-trades units with good base statlines at a premium cost.
If the army's identity came to actually revolve around blobbing up and eliminating randomness through tedious and time-consuming re-rolls, good riddance.
why the hell was that the armys identity? it most certainly wasnt for me.
all this powergamer bs being gotten rid of is better for the game.
Here I thought that the army's core identity was being flexible jack-of-all-trades units with good base statlines at a premium cost.
If the army's identity came to actually revolve around blobbing up and eliminating randomness through tedious and time-consuming re-rolls, good riddance.
why the hell was that the armys identity? it most certainly wasnt for me.
all this powergamer bs being gotten rid of is better for the game.
Agreed. Factions identity based on cheesy interactions are not fun for me. I prefer more tactics and cool stuff.
Most Marine INFANTRY will get CORE. My prediction only. It’ll avoid craziness like Leviathans or Relic Contemptors that simply can’t miss. It’s gonna be a fun, positive change I think!
Ghaz wrote: Am I the only one expecting a "Core if" mechanic (e.g., Necron Destroyers are core if the warlord is a Destroyer Lord)?
You're not alone. I can easily see that happening. Just like in AoS where certain units become "Battleline" if the general is ____, or if you took a unit of x.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You certainly can if the unit isn't too powerful to begin with. Look at the complaints with Aggressors for example. They talked about hoping they dont get Core because of the double shooting. Ya think maybe the latter part is ACTUALLY the problem?
How threatening is double shooting without rerolls? It also doesn't solve much in regards to dreads.
Aggressors double tapping with full rerolls on to T4 = 71
Without rerolls = 48
Without double tap, but with rerolls = 35
Without double tap or rerolls = 24
Seems like you might crater Aggressors with their slow movement and low range.
Yes.
You can still have your stupid intercessors - or heavy intercessors - hitting 8 out 9 times, and wounding 14 out of 18 times, and having all the AP (unless that gets taken too - come on GW, you know it makes sense).
You hopefully just can't boost the damage output of already faintly ludicrous tanks/monsters by 55% so will allow for GW to balance them more accurately (maybe #newGW #playtesters etc etc).
FWIW I think its sensible. There is a major difference for instance between a Ravager, and a Ravager that rerolls 1s to hit and 1s to wound. Since not taking the second is ultimately irrational, everything ends up balanced around taking those buffs, which in turn hinders balance and limits design space.
Xenomancers wrote: I know this core keyword with auras is a bad fix because it doesn't even fix aggressors or eradicators getting rerolls...But bad units like repulsors are actually called out as not getting the buffs. Heck if they drop in points a bunch I'll be ecstatic...I am realistic though. They will probably go UP in price.
While it is possible, let's not jump the gun on assuming what is and isn't going to be CORE. So far, we know of exactly three SM units with it, AFAIK - Heavy Intercessors, Terminator squads and Bike squads.
While I'd say Troops units are likely to be CORE, I'm making no further assumptions until I see the book - same for the 'Crons.
"Well It makes repulsors unplayable...and they are already unplayable."
In what way? I played with mine in a game two days ago at my house and it did just fine. Is this one of those "It's not A+++ OP NUTS" therefore it cannot ever touch a table top, trashist of trash type comments?
Just throwing this in here, since the main talk about the changes to auras has been Space Marines. Frontline Gaming did mention in their podcast today that there are many other major changes in the book to overperforming units. They also discussed the change to auras, but take from that what you may.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You certainly can if the unit isn't too powerful to begin with. Look at the complaints with Aggressors for example. They talked about hoping they dont get Core because of the double shooting. Ya think maybe the latter part is ACTUALLY the problem?
How threatening is double shooting without rerolls? It also doesn't solve much in regards to dreads.
Aggressors double tapping with full rerolls on to T4 = 71
Without rerolls = 48
Without double tap, but with rerolls = 35
Without double tap or rerolls = 24
Seems like you might crater Aggressors with their slow movement and low range.
Yeah no-one is going to be crying if Agressors disappeared from play.
The balance has been so out of orbit imbalanced since marine 2.0 codex simply put it's the one gimic list that wasn't gutted rules qise in the change from 8th to 9th.
Count yourself luck people arn't dancing on the grave of codex marines as a competitive codex, as I think a lot of people are at that point of fed up. Heck when you have one of the biggest Self proclaimed Primaris Fanboys outright come out and say Marines especially Primaris are OP you know GW went Tooooooooooooooo far.
"Well It makes repulsors unplayable...and they are already unplayable."
In what way? I played with mine in a game two days ago at my house and it did just fine. Is this one of those "It's not A+++ OP NUTS" therefore it cannot ever touch a table top, trashist of trash type comments?
Garage Hammer is pretty irrelevant for balance discussions though. I saw a game in 8th where a Relic Blade Vanguard Sergeant killed a Dreadnought in one go, but I'm not gonna recommend people do that. That would be silly.
Repulsors would need a price cut because they were partly priced for being in a reroll aura.
"Well It makes repulsors unplayable...and they are already unplayable."
In what way? I played with mine in a game two days ago at my house and it did just fine. Is this one of those "It's not A+++ OP NUTS" therefore it cannot ever touch a table top, trashist of trash type comments?
Table Hammer is pretty irrelevant for balance discussions though.
"Well It makes repulsors unplayable...and they are already unplayable."
In what way? I played with mine in a game two days ago at my house and it did just fine. Is this one of those "It's not A+++ OP NUTS" therefore it cannot ever touch a table top, trashist of trash type comments?
Table Hammer is pretty irrelevant for balance discussions though.
I'm going to predict that core units for Marines will be most Infantry Bikes and dreads. GW has shown, repeatedly, that that is what they see as the "core" of the Marine army
The limiting auras to <CORE> bit is an ok change in theory. In reality, it all depends on how generous they are with the keyword, and specifically whether they give it to Space Marine Gravis elites. If they do, it may ironically end up being yet another one of those things that actually punishes Space Marines less than everybody else.
Then there's also the weirdness of things like devastators (assuming they don't get <CORE> ) being worse at hitting stuff than a space marine in a tac squad armed with the same weapon. Which feels really dumb. But on the other hand, if you do give devastators <CORE>, then that has its own host of problems re: making infantry even more clearly superior than tanks as an anti-tank platform.
I don't really like the making auras not work on the characters themselves, as it leads to stupid things like librarians being worse at hitting stuff than stock troopers, and chaos lords being worse at hitting stuff than units buffed with prescience. I don't see a great argument for why characters should be less reliable at hitting stuff than modestly buffed troops.
There's also the issue that, taken to extremes, you get really stupid stuff like a shadowseer's -1 to wound aura not impacting himself, or even a KFF not working on the owner. But I expect that not even GW would be that silly.
All that said...it would have been better just to nerf auras in the first place. This could still end up being that if the <CORE> list is extremely restrictive (e.g. for space marines, ONLY troops + stuff like termies and vanguard vets, no gravis infantry besides heavy intercessors, no vehicles, MAYBE bikes).
"Well It makes repulsors unplayable...and they are already unplayable."
In what way? I played with mine in a game two days ago at my house and it did just fine. Is this one of those "It's not A+++ OP NUTS" therefore it cannot ever touch a table top, trashist of trash type comments?
Garage Hammer is pretty irrelevant for balance discussions though. I saw a game in 8th where a Relic Blade Vanguard Sergeant killed a Dreadnought in one go, but I'm not gonna recommend people do that. That would be silly.
Repulsors would need a price cut because they were partly priced for being in a reroll aura.
This is something that's getting mentioned a lot today. How can you be sure they're priced with rerolls in mind?
It's not like you're assured rerolls, you can build a list without if you wished.you
The Charictors I get as Nothing should be hitting 97% of the time like chapter Masters and Captains currently do.
That reroll on a 2+ is ironically better than a 1+ WS.
Plenty of things besides characters can hit on a 2+ rerolling 1s, though. Almost anything in the heretic astartes faction, for example. Or terminators in almost every space marine faction. Basically the entire space wolf faction. Etc etc.
Space Wolves in particular will be in the very odd situation of having their basic troops usually hitting more reliably than Ragnar Blackmane.
Crimson wrote: I kinda hoped that they would have replaced the marine auras with IG style commands but this still certainly is an improvement.
Following the trend, I feel like this will also even out the oddity of two tank commanders issues orders on each other/tank commander issuing order on itself.
"Well It makes repulsors unplayable...and they are already unplayable."
In what way? I played with mine in a game two days ago at my house and it did just fine. Is this one of those "It's not A+++ OP NUTS" therefore it cannot ever touch a table top, trashist of trash type comments?
Garage Hammer is pretty irrelevant for balance discussions though. I saw a game in 8th where a Relic Blade Vanguard Sergeant killed a Dreadnought in one go, but I'm not gonna recommend people do that. That would be silly.
Repulsors would need a price cut because they were partly priced for being in a reroll aura.
This is something that's getting mentioned a lot today. How can you be sure they're priced with rerolls in mind?
It's not like you're assured rerolls, you can build a list without if you wished.you
Uh you DID see the price of them and the pretty low firepower for the price right? It's basically the same situation with Land Raiders: they pay too much for transport capacity and all the weapons at the same time.
This is a fantastic change, love it to bits. I half-wonder if certain characters will lose their re-roll aura entirely due to not really being "commander" units. Daemon Princes, for example, could lose their re-roll aura entirely in favor of something more selfish.
So wait - do we KNOW Repulsors aren't getting the benefits? Because I could easily see the baseline Repulsor getting CORE because it's a dedicated transport, but the Executioner not getting it.
Of course, in the face of that, I could also see Predators getting it just so GW has a reason to sell some again ...
Tycho wrote: So wait - do we KNOW Repulsors aren't getting the benefits? Because I could easily see the baseline Repulsor getting CORE because it's a dedicated transport, but the Executioner not getting it.
Of course, in the face of that, I could also see Predators getting it just so GW has a reason to sell some again ...
No-one knows anything that isn’t in that WHC article. People are but speculating.
This sounds like a good change. But, I would soooo like to see a more active representation of C&C, like commanders using CP to give orders during the command phase.
Tycho wrote: So wait - do we KNOW Repulsors aren't getting the benefits? Because I could easily see the baseline Repulsor getting CORE because it's a dedicated transport, but the Executioner not getting it.
Of course, in the face of that, I could also see Predators getting it just so GW has a reason to sell some again ...
GW has always considered the core of a marine army it's infantry, bikes and dreads. tanks are supposed to be the "occasional support unit" so I expect the rules to reflect that
"When you take a terminator/gravis/phobos captain all terminator/gravis/phobos gain core"
and all of the various captains being priced accordingly. This would certainly provide an opportunity cost to taking certain units and also be fairly fluffy on top of it all (ie the gravis captain is substantially more expensive than the terminator or phobos captain). Apply this as well to LTs and it MAY justify the ridiculous amount of them. Additionally it seems like this would make the various captains play as they are supposed to, going into battle with the troops they are designated to lead instead of a Phobos Capt popping up next to some aggressors and being like "shoot there!" instead of rolling with his Infiltrators and Reivers.
Also NEVER make Dreadnoughts core. I can imagine the captain saying
"Ancestor, shoot there!" and his response being
"Child I have been shooting heretics for nigh on 3 thousands years I dont need your insubordination!" *misses* "Ah, the dream....yes...twins they were"
Denegaar wrote: It's not elegant for this to be in the Core rulebook.
I think it is. That way they can tweak it out in different codex.
yukishiro1 wrote: Space Wolves in particular will be in the very odd situation of having their basic troops usually hitting more reliably than Ragnar Blackmane.
He doesn't need reroll, he has more than twice the number of attacks that these basic troops do so he'll hit more times than they do anyway .
Thinking about my army, I can't think of any SORORITAS unit beside the characters and the exorcist that would not receive the CORE keyword, so this just means no more Cannoness babysitting Exorcists... and I like that .
I like to take this as evidence that this community can be very positive when positive things actually appear to be happening!
Yeah, I think this is definitely one of those things that moves the game in a generally better direction. Now I just hope they continue to look at balance as I think Marines can survive this and still be really strong, but it could hurt some of the Xenos armies. That said, if they took this step, I'm sure they're accounting for that as well and will balance it.
I take it as vindication for those who told the people predicting endless marine buffs to hold their horses and wait for more data
What's that saying about broken clocks?
"When you take a terminator/gravis/phobos captain all terminator/gravis/phobos gain core"
and all of the various captains being priced accordingly. This would certainly provide an opportunity cost to taking certain units and also be fairly fluffy on top of it all (ie the gravis captain is substantially more expensive than the terminator or phobos captain). Apply this as well to LTs and it MAY justify the ridiculous amount of them. Additionally it seems like this would make the various captains play as they are supposed to, going into battle with the troops they are designated to lead instead of a Phobos Capt popping up next to some aggressors and being like "shoot there!" instead of rolling with his Infiltrators and Reivers.
That could really make marine builds more fluffy. Take your Phobos LT to lead a patrol detachment of Phobos marines, and your "Standard" Captain to run your Battalion of "non-phobos" marines, etc.
I'm optimistic about this change, I hate the re-roll auras for the most part anyway so I'm happy with any means of limiting them. However if the Avatar of Khaine and Autarch don't buff Aspect Warriors I'm gonna be pissed!
Count yourself luck people arn't dancing on the grave of codex marines as a competitive codex, as I think a lot of people are at that point of fed up. Heck when you have one of the biggest Self proclaimed Primaris Fanboys outright come out and say Marines especially Primaris are OP you know GW went Tooooooooooooooo far.
Highly unlikely they'll be uncompetitive. They're beatable now with above average effort.
I have no idea to whom you reference or why that person is a key figure on primaris.
CEO Kasen wrote: I like to take this as evidence that this community can be very positive when positive things actually appear to be happening!
I take it as vindication for those who told the people predicting endless marine buffs to hold their horses and wait for more data
My skepticism isn't cleared yet - there's a lot of weapon buffs going out and the book still has way too many units - but if this codex somehow actually turns out to be completely reasonable, then my own words would never taste more delicious. I would devour them and my own hat lightly drizzled in balsamic vinaigrette with a side of fine pastas while tears of pure joy from being utterly and horrendously wrong trickle down my cheeks.
"Well It makes repulsors unplayable...and they are already unplayable."
In what way? I played with mine in a game two days ago at my house and it did just fine. Is this one of those "It's not A+++ OP NUTS" therefore it cannot ever touch a table top, trashist of trash type comments?
Table Hammer is pretty irrelevant for balance discussions though.
That's an interesting take. . .
yeah, cuz a majority of games played are tourney ones, am I getting that right??? something tells me that isnt so
Tycho wrote:
I like to take this as evidence that this community can be very positive when positive things actually appear to be happening!
Yeah, I think this is definitely one of those things that moves the game in a generally better direction. Now I just hope they continue to look at balance as I think Marines can survive this and still be really strong, but it could hurt some of the Xenos armies. That said, if they took this step, I'm sure they're accounting for that as well and will balance it.
I take it as vindication for those who told the people predicting endless marine buffs to hold their horses and wait for more data
What's that saying about broken clocks?
"When you take a terminator/gravis/phobos captain all terminator/gravis/phobos gain core"
and all of the various captains being priced accordingly. This would certainly provide an opportunity cost to taking certain units and also be fairly fluffy on top of it all (ie the gravis captain is substantially more expensive than the terminator or phobos captain). Apply this as well to LTs and it MAY justify the ridiculous amount of them. Additionally it seems like this would make the various captains play as they are supposed to, going into battle with the troops they are designated to lead instead of a Phobos Capt popping up next to some aggressors and being like "shoot there!" instead of rolling with his Infiltrators and Reivers.
That could really make marine builds more fluffy. Take your Phobos LT to lead a patrol detachment of Phobos marines, and your "Standard" Captain to run your Battalion of "non-phobos" marines, etc.
I really like the idea of it and its basically been how I've run my Astartes for a while.
"Well It makes repulsors unplayable...and they are already unplayable."
In what way? I played with mine in a game two days ago at my house and it did just fine. Is this one of those "It's not A+++ OP NUTS" therefore it cannot ever touch a table top, trashist of trash type comments?
Table Hammer is pretty irrelevant for balance discussions though.
That's an interesting take. . .
yeah, cuz a majority of games played are tourney ones, am I getting that right??? something tells me that isnt so
You mean the crummy games where the players take one of each unit and purposely make bad moves because they're fluff bunnies, like charging a clearly superior melee unit because? Those are the games you really want to talk about when it comes to balance?
"When you take a terminator/gravis/phobos captain all terminator/gravis/phobos gain core"
and all of the various captains being priced accordingly. This would certainly provide an opportunity cost to taking certain units and also be fairly fluffy on top of it all (ie the gravis captain is substantially more expensive than the terminator or phobos captain). Apply this as well to LTs and it MAY justify the ridiculous amount of them. Additionally it seems like this would make the various captains play as they are supposed to, going into battle with the troops they are designated to lead instead of a Phobos Capt popping up next to some aggressors and being like "shoot there!" instead of rolling with his Infiltrators and Reivers.
That could really make marine builds more fluffy. Take your Phobos LT to lead a patrol detachment of Phobos marines, and your "Standard" Captain to run your Battalion of "non-phobos" marines, etc.
I really like the idea of it and its basically been how I've run my Astartes for a while.
I was one of those weird girls who ran Codex compliant lists (tacts, assault marines, devastators, etc) back in 5-7th and I got a lot of flak when the Gladius rules came out. Fluffy army compilation is far more satisfying than weird hyper optimized lists with like 4 factions that fulfill bizarre niche places. NO! My boys just marched off the strike cruise and are ready to party, FOR MACRAGGE!!!!!!
You mean the crummy games where the players take one of each unit and purposely make bad moves because they're fluff bunnies, like charging a clearly superior melee unit because? Those are the games you really want to talk about when it comes to balance?
Yes, because that's how majority of the players play so that is the level which is most important, not the tiny number of hyper competitive tournament players.
Table Hammer is pretty irrelevant for balance discussions though.
That's an interesting take. . .
yeah, cuz a majority of games played are tourney ones, am I getting that right??? something tells me that isnt so
I don't think that has anything to do with tournaments; That's a raised eyebrow at wording that unintentionally implies that games played on tables are irrelevant to balance discussion, and that true meta knowledge can only be obtained from, I don't know, the floor, or on the back of a giant tortoise, or pushing models around in zero-g.
I don't think that has anything to do with tournaments; That's a raised eyebrow at wording that unintentionally implies that games played on tables are irrelevant to balance discussion, and that true meta knowledge can only be obtained from, I don't know, the floor, or on the back of a giant tortoise, or pushing models around in zero-g.
If its good enough for Sir Terry, its good enough for a 40k game. Just make sure the tortoise and elephants are well cared for before, during and after.
Denegaar wrote: It's not elegant for this to be in the Core rulebook.
I think it is. That way they can tweak it out in different codex.
yukishiro1 wrote: Space Wolves in particular will be in the very odd situation of having their basic troops usually hitting more reliably than Ragnar Blackmane.
He doesn't need reroll, he has more than twice the number of attacks that these basic troops do so he'll hit more times than they do anyway .
Thinking about my army, I can't think of any SORORITAS unit beside the characters and the exorcist that would not receive the CORE keyword, so this just means no more Cannoness babysitting Exorcists... and I like that .
Ignoring the fact that the other reason they won't have to babysit is because no one will take them over rets without some kind of buff. lol
CEO Kasen wrote: I like to take this as evidence that this community can be very positive when positive things actually appear to be happening!
I take it as vindication for those who told the people predicting endless marine buffs to hold their horses and wait for more data
My skepticism isn't cleared yet - there's a lot of weapon buffs going out and the book still has way too many units - but if this codex somehow actually turns out to be completely reasonable, then my own words would never taste more delicious. I would devour them and my own hat lightly drizzled in balsamic vinaigrette with a side of fine pastas while tears of pure joy from being utterly and horrendously wrong trickle down my cheeks.
Honestly this is typical for GW though, typically they talk up the buffs first and then discuss the inevitable nerfs and changes. Losing re-roll aura's on your tanks tends to hurt less when you're excited about 2 shot 1d6+2 damage multi-melta's
CEO Kasen wrote: If its good enough for Sir Terry, its good enough for a 40k game. Just make sure the tortoise and elephants are well cared for before, during and after.
"Like hell the Aurora Coriolis doesn't count as dense cover!"
Denegaar wrote: It's not elegant for this to be in the Core rulebook.
I think it is. That way they can tweak it out in different codex.
What do you actually think should appear in the BRB? I'm finding it difficult to work out what those complaining that this doesn't appear actually think would be useful?
Auras, stratagems, etc state explicitly which units they effect. This new piece of information has no effect on that, it simply adds another keyword that can be given as a reduction. Do we need a section in the court ruled explaining that some auras only effect INFANTRY or that some auras only effect CARNIFEXES? If not, then why CORE?
Honestly this is typical for GW though, typically they talk up the buffs first and then discuss the inevitable nerfs and changes. Losing re-roll aura's on your tanks tends to hurt less when you're excited about 2 shot 1d6+2 damage multi-melta's
Sometimes it's funny to see the salt get mined by GW.
If people really wanted to stick it to GW they'd chill out and stop giving them massive social media impressions.
You mean the crummy games where the players take one of each unit and purposely make bad moves because they're fluff bunnies, like charging a clearly superior melee unit because? Those are the games you really want to talk about when it comes to balance?
Yes, because that's how majority of the players play so that is the level which is most important, not the tiny number of hyper competitive tournament players.
Not when talking balance. When talking balance garagehammer is utterly irrelevant. Who cares how many wounds assault marines do on average dice if you're playing half drunk in your basement against your best pal at 2 am?
CEO Kasen wrote: I like to take this as evidence that this community can be very positive when positive things actually appear to be happening!
Positive things have been happening all along.
Multimeltas were bad. Firstborn suffered. HBs went unused.
Just a lot of people weren't willing to take other changes in context, because those changes were tied to marines.
Wouldn't that be out of context, because these changes were presented in the context of Marine buffs?
I certainly welcome the 2W Firstborn/CSM, but not responding with total jubilation at the gun upgrade news was more or less understandable. Weapons not being killier was not a problem it is widely perceived that 8th/9th has, so the response wasn't going to universally be positive, and the HB and MM buffs didn't indicate a larger direction for the game that the community thinks it needed to go.
This change with the Core units and buffing, though? It implies the game is aware of, and doing something about, aura wrangling and reroll spam that seems more widely agreed to be a problem; hence, positivity and hope.
CEO Kasen wrote: If its good enough for Sir Terry, its good enough for a 40k game. Just make sure the tortoise and elephants are well cared for before, during and after.
"Like hell the Aurora Coriolis doesn't count as dense cover!"
"Aurora Coriolis? At this time of year, at this time of day, in this part of the disc, localised entirely around your deployment zone?"
CEO Kasen wrote: I like to take this as evidence that this community can be very positive when positive things actually appear to be happening!
I take it as vindication for those who told the people predicting endless marine buffs to hold their horses and wait for more data
My skepticism isn't cleared yet - there's a lot of weapon buffs going out and the book still has way too many units - but if this codex somehow actually turns out to be completely reasonable, then my own words would never taste more delicious. I would devour them and my own hat lightly drizzled in balsamic vinaigrette with a side of fine pastas while tears of pure joy from being utterly and horrendously wrong trickle down my cheeks.
This comment is very bizarre.. And for some reason I really want a nice salad now..
I have to say this thread has not disappointed one bit.. Xenomancer true to form has frantically claimed marines are now totally nerfed into the ground and the repulsor is unplayable ( has he mentioned he bought 3 and he never got to use them coz they suck?) and ohh its the worse thing ever and marines suck now. Suck I tells you!!!
Others have argued this is unfair because marines have only rheealllly teeehcnicaly dominated for 6 months (or something) so the nerf is unwarrented as clearly there are no problems with marines and people are over-reacting.
Just like before 2.0 the same people were saying how marines still suck because not enough rules. Same people are now saying marines suck and we dont yet know a single startegem, trait, relic or psychic power.. Who wants to bet there will be things that marines to ignore one or all of these limitations or just give rerolls to stuff anyway..
This is not a marine specific rule nerf.. yet: #marinesmosteffected Ohh noo.....
Personally, I dont care. Why would I care about the autarch I never took lol Any auras or traits I am likely to get will be a buff at this point after so many nerfs.
Interesting what they will do with this rule. I predict an absolute dumpster fire of a roll out of this and at least 3 rounds of FAQ before things that are core supposed to be core. But curtailing of auras is a good thing and no longer need to have the entire army blobbing up around a dude in a ruin coz reasons. STep in the right direction.
You mean the crummy games where the players take one of each unit and purposely make bad moves because they're fluff bunnies, like charging a clearly superior melee unit because? Those are the games you really want to talk about when it comes to balance?
Yes, because that's how majority of the players play so that is the level which is most important, not the tiny number of hyper competitive tournament players.
Not when talking balance. When talking balance garagehammer is utterly irrelevant. Who cares how many wounds assault marines do on average dice if you're playing half drunk in your basement against your best pal at 2 am?
But how do you determine if someone playing at home is playing "garagehammer" or playing with another competitively minded person with competitive lists/tactics?
The Core keyword is used to identify units that form the fighting… well, core, of an army. These are most commonly represented by units of line infantry, though this doesn’t mean it’s exclusive to Troops, nor just Infantry.
In the case of the first two books, Codex: Space Marines and Codex: Necrons many Elite units such as Terminator Squads and Lychguard, as well as Fast Attack units like Bike Squads and Tomb Blades, have the Core keyword. Even some Vehicles will be Core units too, where appropriate.
So given the units GW has decided to tell us, we know they are looking at the "core" units to different types of play experiences and thematic army.
So I expect the SM that at least one unit will be Core to support:
First Born Marines - Tactical Squad and possibly Assault and Devastator Squads
Scout Company & Phobos Marines - Scouts, Infiltrators and Incursors
Primaris X Marines - Intercessors & Assault Intercessors
Gravis Marines - Heavy Intercessors
First Company (like Deathwing and Wolf Guard) - Terminator & Assault Terminator squads, Vangard and Sternguard Veterans
Bike Company (and Ravenwing) - Bike Squads and Outriders
I would not expect speciality squads to make the cut, outside of those central to a theme, like those I listed for First Company, Bike, and Scout Companies. Otherwise, the rule doesn't end up doing much if everybody and the brother is Core.
It would be interesting if they take this as an opportunity to add Auras to speciality characters to support thematic units. Like the Techmarine enhancing vehicles. Still that might just be seen a transferring the problem from one character to others.
Niiai wrote: I doubt this will matter much to Nids. The warrior buff only works on warriors. Old one Eye will not be abel to have +2 to his hit chance of 3.
GSC will miss BS3+ to hit on their ridgerunners when they get around to it.
It won't hurt nids at all. In general most horde armies will be unaffected, because most of them rely on weight of dice rather than quality anyway. Also most of their unit buffs are targeted rather than auras- ie orders, psychic spells, strategems etc.
"Well It makes repulsors unplayable...and they are already unplayable."
In what way? I played with mine in a game two days ago at my house and it did just fine. Is this one of those "It's not A+++ OP NUTS" therefore it cannot ever touch a table top, trashist of trash type comments?
Table Hammer is pretty irrelevant for balance discussions though.
That's an interesting take. . .
yeah, cuz a majority of games played are tourney ones, am I getting that right??? something tells me that isnt so
You mean the crummy games where the players take one of each unit and purposely make bad moves because they're fluff bunnies, like charging a clearly superior melee unit because? Those are the games you really want to talk about when it comes to balance?
If those are the games that people play, yes.
If people enjoy playing those games where they take one of each unit and make "bad" moves because spectacle and narrative is more interesting than mathhammer, why should their games be discounted? Don't we want to encourage people to play like that, and find value in knowing what happens when people play like that?
You mean the crummy games where the players take one of each unit and purposely make bad moves because they're fluff bunnies, like charging a clearly superior melee unit because? Those are the games you really want to talk about when it comes to balance?
Yes, because that's how majority of the players play so that is the level which is most important, not the tiny number of hyper competitive tournament players.
Not when talking balance. When talking balance garagehammer is utterly irrelevant. Who cares how many wounds assault marines do on average dice if you're playing half drunk in your basement against your best pal at 2 am?
But how do you determine if someone playing at home is playing "garagehammer" or playing with another competitively minded person with competitive lists/tactics?
It's pretty easy to tell just based on the tonality of posts and lists. You're not exactly asking rocket science here.
Do football coaches take games their kids play in their backyards into account when strategizing in the superbowel?
There is a difference between acknowledging that people can play the game in any way fashion they'd like, and pretending that beerhammer matches have the same merit and legitimacy as high-level play when discussing game mechanics.
BlaxicanX wrote: Do football coaches take games their kids play in their backyards into account when strategizing in the superbowel?
There is a difference between acknowledging that people can play the game in any way fashion they'd like, and pretending that beerhammer matches have the same merit and legitimacy as high-level play when discussing game mechanics.
That all depends on what kind of game you're regarding as important.
If you think that kids play in the backyard is an important and valid way of playing, then that definitely should be given the same legitimacy.
If GW want to promote a game where people take the kinds of armies that GW themselves play with (aka, beerhammer style lists), then beerhammer armies should be considered more valuable for playtesting.
Again, I'm not saying one should or shouldn't be prioritised over another. I'm just saying that disregarding a widely accepted style of play because you think it's "casual" and therefore "not worth considering" is pretty narrow minded and exclusionary.
"Well It makes repulsors unplayable...and they are already unplayable."
In what way? I played with mine in a game two days ago at my house and it did just fine. Is this one of those "It's not A+++ OP NUTS" therefore it cannot ever touch a table top, trashist of trash type comments?
Table Hammer is pretty irrelevant for balance discussions though.
That's an interesting take. . .
yeah, cuz a majority of games played are tourney ones, am I getting that right??? something tells me that isnt so
You mean the crummy games where the players take one of each unit and purposely make bad moves because they're fluff bunnies, like charging a clearly superior melee unit because? Those are the games you really want to talk about when it comes to balance?
If those are the games that people play, yes.
If people enjoy playing those games where they take one of each unit and make "bad" moves because spectacle and narrative is more interesting than mathhammer, why should their games be discounted? Don't we want to encourage people to play like that, and find value in knowing what happens when people play like that?
No because it doesn't fix the obvious glaring problems you choose to ignore. Your logic is saying Scatterbikes are fine if you only took one squad, but said one squad shouldn't have been able to exist to begin with.
Plugging your ears and going "LALALALA I CANT HEAR YOU EVERYTHING IS FINE" only gets you so far. Oh, and one-of-everything lists look ugly on the table too.
The best part in my opinion is that the new tech marine will be welcomed now that he does a better job helping vehicles hit things. Unless they get a specific one as well
BlaxicanX wrote: Do football coaches take games their kids play in their backyards into account when strategizing in the superbowel?
There is a difference between acknowledging that people can play the game in any way fashion they'd like, and pretending that beerhammer matches have the same merit and legitimacy as high-level play when discussing game mechanics.
no but when that kid playing street hockey with you acts like he's playing in the Stanley cup finals and nerd rages that you don't take the game as seriously as he does it tends to result in people feeling equal aprts pity and contempt for ragey overserious
BlaxicanX wrote: Do football coaches take games their kids play in their backyards into account when strategizing in the superbowel?
I figured a superbowel is one that is totally immune to the effects of Taco Bell...
Sorry, I couldn't resist!
I'll see myself out.
On a more on topic note, as always I advocate a "wait and see" attitude with all these new things that are coming. People screaming that the sky is falling are making sweeping proclamations with insufficient information. Don't do this, people. At least wait until the book/unit/FAQ drops before you bitch about it.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:No because it doesn't fix the obvious glaring problems you choose to ignore.
I'm not talking about those "glaring problems", I'm talking about the ones that happen when people exacerbate the issues for themselves.
Things like buff HQs hiding behind tank walls buffing them, for example, which doesn't seem to be what GW intended people to do, from their own, more casual and cinematic style of beerhammer.
Your logic is saying Scatterbikes are fine if you only took one squad, but said one squad shouldn't have been able to exist to begin with.
My logic is saying if one unit of scatterbikes doesn't break the game, then create such a situation that the equivalent of only unit can exist - such as splitting up the squad weapons.
More than that, my logic is saying "if the vast majority of players don't have an issue with X unit when they play casually, but these players who play in a more competitive way do, then we need to address what it is the comp players are doing that makes it more broken".
Oh, and one-of-everything lists look ugly on the table too.
That's more of a subjective taste. Unless you've themed your army around it, spam (especially spamming certain "rare" units) rarely looks good either.
Give me a demi-company with 3x Tacticals, Assault Marines, Devastators, a Dreadnought, support tank, and Captain any day over a mismatched spread of duplicates of only the meta options.
Tell me: Does the bingo card you keep referencing have any squares for those who breathlessly defend GW all the time, or is it all about insulting people who show any level of criticism?
Tell me: Does the bingo card you keep referencing have any squares for those who breathlessly defend GW all the time, or is it all about insulting people who show any level of criticism?
there is a differance between critizing something and pushing a easily disproven conspiracy theory.
yukishiro1 wrote: Then there's also the weirdness of things like devastators (assuming they don't get <CORE> ) being worse at hitting stuff than a space marine in a tac squad armed with the same weapon. Which feels really dumb. But on the other hand, if you do give devastators <CORE>, then that has its own host of problems re: making infantry even more clearly superior than tanks as an anti-tank platform.
Hot Take: Zero First Born units get 'Core'. Only Primaris units.
Tell me: Does the bingo card you keep referencing have any squares for those who breathlessly defend GW all the time, or is it all about insulting people who show any level of criticism?
Ok... where is this bingo card and how do I get one ?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: That all depends on what kind of game you're regarding as important.
That's tautological. Context is what decides whether something is "important" or not. If the discussion is about judgement of the competitive viability of certain rules, than yes games that are explicitly not competitive in nature hold no merit- hence the football metaphor.
"All the things are equally important! Every opinion holds equal value!" is a platitude that has never been true in any situation. The concepts of "experts" in a field or subject exists for a reason.
BrianDavion wrote: no but when that kid playing street hockey with you acts like he's playing in the Stanley cup finals and nerd rages that you don't take the game as seriously as he does it tends to result in people feeling equal parts pity and contempt for ragey overserious
That's a poor comparison because in this context it is explicitly Stanley Cup games that are being discussed. And for the record, yeah it would be perfectly logical for Wayne Gretsky to tell you that he doesn't care about your opinion when you try to argue with him about Hockey plays and you qualify your statements with the street matches you've played.
Overall I think that this is an excellent concept. The "cannot benefit from your own aura" thing is a bit weird, and it will lead to odd situations where characters are worse at doing things than the people around them, but otherwise this seems like a good change.
Of course, I said it's a great concept. GW are just great at coming up with fantastic concepts.
GW are also terrible at the execution of said great concepts, so this may end up being fething awful for the game, no matter how good it looks "on paper".
BlaxicanX wrote: Do football coaches take games their kids play in their backyards into account when strategizing in the superbowel?
No, because the revenue from the Superbowl is bound to broadcasting it to spectators, whereas the revenue for 40k is from collection and active participation in the local hobby community.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: That all depends on what kind of game you're regarding as important.
That's tautological. Context is what decides whether something is "important" or not. If the discussion is about judgement of the competitive viability of certain rules, than yes games that are explicitly not competitive in nature hold no merit- hence the football metaphor.
"All the things are equally important! Every opinion holds equal value!" is a platitude that has never been true in any situation. The context of "experts" in a field or subject exists for a reason.
BrianDavion wrote: no but when that kid playing street hockey with you acts like he's playing in the Stanley cup finals and nerd rages that you don't take the game as seriously as he does it tends to result in people feeling equal parts pity and contempt for ragey overserious
That's a poor comparison because in this context it is explicitly Stanley Cup games that are being discussed. And for the record, yeah it would be perfectly logical for Wayne Gretsky to tell you that he doesn't care about your opinion when you try to argue with him about Hockey plays and you qualify your statements with the street matches you've played.
except that in this case people are talking about the game over all, despite the attempts of some people to make every conversation about compeitive play.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Overall I think that this is an excellent concept. The "cannot benefit from your own aura" thing is a bit weird, and it will lead to odd situations where characters are worse at doing things than the people around them
I'm ok with that, the leader is there to inspire and direct. Others are may be (and often are) more capable at, and more focused on, specific tasks, particularly under the eye of the leader, than the leader themselves may be. Likewise, being so naturally awesome as to somehow inspire ones own self is a wee bit much even for the ego's of 40k, so I'm ok with that change
stratigo wrote: I will wait until I see what is core and not in a marine codex compared to other army codexes.
If all marine infantry is core, but only eldar troop choices get to be, that'd be a bummer.
I would imagine all troops choices and transports will be Core for most factions as a base line. But then I fear a circuimvention next year I.e. If you take character/trait X All units X now have the core keyword.
For example Iyanden could well have wraiths as core if yriel leads them or something..
To be fair guardians (or anything) not gaining core means diddly squat to us. Nobody really used the Autarch since EC(outside of a rush beat-stick). And people used him rarely even before and not primarily for the aura. Pretty sure hes the only aura we have(outside of avatar) so it doesn't really matter. Other stuff is keyword dependant anyway already. We need a ground up re-workd for our codex anyhow so none of this really applies to CWE I think unless they choose to FAQ Doom/guide for reasons in which case its just another nerf so nothing new.
Argive wrote: For example Iyanden could well have wraiths as core if yriel leads them or soemthing.
No, no, no! Let's not go back to the days where Special Characters were need to alter the structure of your force.
It'd be far simpler and cleaner to have something along the lines of "Wraithguard, Wraithblades and Wraithlords gain the CORE keyword in an Iyanden force that is Battleforged (or whatever)" than tying it to specific characters.
Argive wrote: For example Iyanden could well have wraiths as core if yriel leads them or soemthing.
No, no, no! Let's not go back to the days where Special Characters were need to alter the structure of your force.
It'd be far simpler and cleaner to have something along the lines of "Wraithguard, Wraithblades and Wraithlords gain the CORE keyword in an Iyanden force that is Battleforged (or whatever)" than tying it to specific characters.
Potatos patats..
I don't like this idea at all in the slightest however its dressed up. So I hope it doesnt come to that sincerly... But im a realist, GW be doing GW things.. They love to write them rules and then write rules so that special snowflakes can ignore those rules and limitations because that's game design.
So yeh.. I think it will happen. Maybe not straight away but I bet some sort of PA rules drop/ cash grab down the line will do special detachments or some stuff tinkering with keywords in order to boost the power level even more.. Power creep gots to keep on creepin..
stratigo wrote: I will wait until I see what is core and not in a marine codex compared to other army codexes.
If all marine infantry is core, but only eldar troop choices get to be, that'd be a bummer.
I would imagine all troops choices and transports will be Core for most factions as a base line.
But then I fear a circuimvention next year I.e. If you take character/trait X All units X now have the core keyword.
For example Iyanden could well have wraiths as core if yriel leads them or something..
To be fair guardians (or anything) not gaining core means diddly squat to us. Nobody really used the Autarch since EC(outside of a rush beat-stick). And people used him rarely even before and not primarily for the aura. Pretty sure hes the only aura we have(outside of avatar) so it doesn't really matter. Other stuff is keyword dependant anyway already. We need a ground up re-workd for our codex anyhow so none of this really applies to CWE I think unless they choose to FAQ Doom/guide for reasons in which case its just another nerf so nothing new.
I am pre supposing that doom and guide and other such powers will benefit core in the future eldar codex.
I also don't think anyone is going to have their auras and powers change in an FAQ, this will all be based purely on rolling books. It's less a problem than having a ton of the same equipment do different things, and note they are only faqing equipment marines use and not literally any other equipment being left in the dust by the overall weapon buff, which will probably see a bunch of weapons buffed as we get new codexes
Tell me: Does the bingo card you keep referencing have any squares for those who breathlessly defend GW all the time, or is it all about insulting people who show any level of criticism?
That's the free square in the middle! I told my doctor my angina was from forum posting, but he didn't believe me.
Now I just need someone to say this hurts marines less than other armies and someone to make fun of the idea of waiting for the codex, because we can already see what is good and bad without it.
But, any level of criticism? You make it sound like I'd jump on someone for a rational and considered criticism. There's a big gap between "I'm not sure this will pan out" and "GW is clearly incapable of understanding basic math and their own rules, their only goal is to push marines, and people are stupid for expecting us to wait for the rules before forming an absolute".
I crticise GW. Here - I even expressed concern over the codex being a possible shitshow, because I didn't have enough information:
stratigo wrote: I will wait until I see what is core and not in a marine codex compared to other army codexes.
If all marine infantry is core, but only eldar troop choices get to be, that'd be a bummer.
I would imagine all troops choices and transports will be Core for most factions as a base line. But then I fear a circuimvention next year I.e. If you take character/trait X All units X now have the core keyword.
For example Iyanden could well have wraiths as core if yriel leads them or something..
To be fair guardians (or anything) not gaining core means diddly squat to us. Nobody really used the Autarch since EC(outside of a rush beat-stick). And people used him rarely even before and not primarily for the aura. Pretty sure hes the only aura we have(outside of avatar) so it doesn't really matter. Other stuff is keyword dependant anyway already. We need a ground up re-workd for our codex anyhow so none of this really applies to CWE I think unless they choose to FAQ Doom/guide for reasons in which case its just another nerf so nothing new.
I am pre supposing that doom and guide and other such powers will benefit core in the future eldar codex.
I also don't think anyone is going to have their auras and powers change in an FAQ, this will all be based purely on rolling books. It's less a problem than having a ton of the same equipment do different things, and note they are only faqing equipment marines use and not literally any other equipment being left in the dust by the overall weapon buff, which will probably see a bunch of weapons buffed as we get new codexes
Runes of Battle can predominantly affect infantry and bikers anyway so that will be mostly core stuff looks like. Not sure I can see doom staying as current doom*(even for core) if the plan is to curb re-rolls. It would make sense but who knows at this point.. Will see. Maybe we will get a stratagem or two and some relics :p haha
GW are also terrible at the execution of said great concepts, so this may end up being fething awful for the game, no matter how good it looks "on paper".
Agreed in concept if not in words. Everyone is already moving to Eradicators. If they're still in it does nothing unless there's some other piece we're missing.
I didn't call you a breathless white knight, but more that whenever people bring up the "Dakka Bingo Card" it is almost always an attack on those who aren't immediately brimming with supreme happiness at whatever GW has done this week.
As for "everyone" moving to Eradicators, I think this may be overblown.
Hardly. Linking army special rules and structure to special characters is something they did several editions ago, and it was awful.
And you're really against different factions granting CORE to units that are intrinsic to their playstyle?
Iyanden giving CORE to Wraith constructs (not the Wraithknight obviously), or a Hemonculus Coven (or whatever they're called) giving CORE to Grotesques, or a Ravenguard army getting CORE on Land Speeders don't seem like bad ideas to me.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I didn't call you a breathless white knight, but more that whenever people bring up the "Dakka Bingo Card" it is almost always an attack on those who aren't immediately brimming with supreme happiness at whatever GW has done this week.
As for "everyone" moving to Eradicators, I think this may be overblown.
Hardly. Linking army special rules and structure to special characters is something they did several editions ago, and it was awful.
And you're really against different factions granting CORE to units that are intrinsic to their playstyle?
Iyanden giving CORE to Wraith constructs (not the Wraithknight obviously), or a Hemonculus Coven (or whatever they're called) giving CORE to Grotesques, or a Ravenguard army getting CORE on Land Speeders don't seem like bad ideas to me.
this is how it should be, each faction has a specific way of warfighting and the lists/traits/abilities should reflect that. wait doesnt that kinda sound like Rites of War in 30k?
H.B.M.C. wrote: I didn't call you a breathless white knight, but more that whenever people bring up the "Dakka Bingo Card" it is almost always an attack on those who aren't immediately brimming with supreme happiness at whatever GW has done this week.
As for "everyone" moving to Eradicators, I think this may be overblown.
Hardly. Linking army special rules and structure to special characters is something they did several editions ago, and it was awful.
And you're really against different factions granting CORE to units that are intrinsic to their playstyle?
Iyanden giving CORE to Wraith constructs (not the Wraithknight obviously), or a Hemonculus Coven (or whatever they're called) giving CORE to Grotesques, or a Ravenguard army getting CORE on Land Speeders don't seem like bad ideas to me.
this is how it should be, each faction has a specific way of warfighting and the lists/traits/abilities should reflect that. wait doesnt that kinda sound like Rites of War in 30k?
H.B.M.C. wrote: I didn't call you a breathless white knight, but more that whenever people bring up the "Dakka Bingo Card" it is almost always an attack on those who aren't immediately brimming with supreme happiness at whatever GW has done this week.
As for "everyone" moving to Eradicators, I think this may be overblown.
Hardly. Linking army special rules and structure to special characters is something they did several editions ago, and it was awful.
And you're really against different factions granting CORE to units that are intrinsic to their playstyle?
Iyanden giving CORE to Wraith constructs (not the Wraithknight obviously), or a Hemonculus Coven (or whatever they're called) giving CORE to Grotesques, or a Ravenguard army getting CORE on Land Speeders don't seem like bad ideas to me.
this is how it should be, each faction has a specific way of warfighting and the lists/traits/abilities should reflect that. wait doesn't that kinda sound like Rites of War in 30k?
Not a 30k player so you will have to elaborate
But generally speaking I get where you guys are coming from.. But im not sure I'm sold on this becase there's a lot riding in execution and implementation from GW (Ha...) so no idea really as we just don't have the information currently. I don't want to be back in the position where as a player you end up running the same trait/army list because if you don't you are handicapping yourself. Iyanden should synergise with wraiths but not the point where you just wouldn't take wraiths otherwise. Army composition shenanigans just don't sit well with me in a game in which list writing is probably the most vital part..
The more I think about it the more I like the idea of Captains/CMs and LTs no longer being "just what you do". Or not regretting your lord being out of range of Obliterators. It may even allow GW to redo Exalted Sorcerers to give them an ability more arcane than just simply reroll 1s.
Marines also have a ton of spells that almost no one uses. Techmarines barely see time, too. Getting them on the table seems like it could make for more variety (ultimately the competitive lists will probably settle into one particular dynamic).
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh man...if Hellblasters are not CORE...characters with plasma beware as well. So many implications.
My biggest concern with this new core keyword ruleset is how will it affect auras that impact mobility such as Warboss Waaagh! or the Locus of Slaanesh. If these characters are not affected by their own auras it means they can easily fall behind their troops and become completely exposed to get units into melee.
I can definitely see that working for Dark Angels: termies (and maybe some gravis) become core if Deathwing, bikes,speeders and other FA become core if Ravenwing.
Termies are already core, and core doesn’t affect FOC slots. I think what you mean is Troops IF terminator Captain (or Belial if they half ass it again)
You certainly can if the unit isn't too powerful to begin with. Look at the complaints with Aggressors for example. They talked about hoping they dont get Core because of the double shooting. Ya think maybe the latter part is ACTUALLY the problem?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You certainly can if the unit isn't too powerful to begin with. Look at the complaints with Aggressors for example. They talked about hoping they dont get Core because of the double shooting. Ya think maybe the latter part is ACTUALLY the problem?
How threatening is double shooting without rerolls? It also doesn't solve much in regards to dreads.
Aggressors double tapping with full rerolls on to T4 = 71
Without rerolls = 48
Without double tap, but with rerolls = 35
Without double tap or rerolls = 24
Seems like you might crater Aggressors with their slow movement and low range.
That’s ok, they’re marine units. Cratering anything good they have is usually the goal.
Yeah no-one is going to be crying if Agressors disappeared from play.
The balance has been so out of orbit imbalanced since marine 2.0 codex simply put it's the one gimic list that wasn't gutted rules qise in the change from 8th to 9th.
Count yourself luck people arn't dancing on the grave of codex marines as a competitive codex, as I think a lot of people are at that point of fed up. Heck when you have one of the biggest Self proclaimed Primaris Fanboys outright come out and say Marines especially Primaris are OP you know GW went Tooooooooooooooo far.
Honestly this is typical for GW though, typically they talk up the buffs first and then discuss the inevitable nerfs and changes. Losing re-roll aura's on your tanks tends to hurt less when you're excited about 2 shot 1d6+2 damage multi-melta's
Not that a lot of people were taking SM tanks to begin with. Repulsors and raiders are just bad.
yukishiro1 wrote: Then there's also the weirdness of things like devastators (assuming they don't get <CORE> ) being worse at hitting stuff than a space marine in a tac squad armed with the same weapon. Which feels really dumb. But on the other hand, if you do give devastators <CORE>, then that has its own host of problems re: making infantry even more clearly superior than tanks as an anti-tank platform.
Hot Take: Zero First Born units get 'Core'. Only Primaris units.
That's a pretty bad Hot Take given that 2 of the 3 know Core Units are First Born (Terminator Squad and Bike Squad)
Does it seem odd to anyone else that the supposed "tank edition" is becoming increasingly hostile to tanks? Damage inflation, smaller boards, king-of-the-hill scenario design, and now no rerolls?
Breton wrote: I’m also seeing a lot of people assume transports are going to be core. Like the Razorback, and the Repulsor.
Repulsor seems somewhat unlikely since they specifically don't want Captains baby sitting tanks and the Repulsor Executioner is used as an example of things that don't get aura bonuses now.
But, they do specifically say:
WarCom Article on Core wrote:Even some Vehicles will be Core units too, where appropriate.
I'm guessing Rhino is probably candidate #1, maybe Razorback and Impulsor.
AnomanderRake wrote: Does it seem odd to anyone else that the supposed "tank edition" is becoming increasingly hostile to tanks? Damage inflation, smaller boards, king-of-the-hill scenario design, and now no rerolls?
This subsequently means it is a little less hostile to hordes as the scarier blast weapons will not be on CORE units.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Breton wrote: I’m also seeing a lot of people assume transports are going to be core. Like the Razorback, and the Repulsor.
They said some vehicles, and whilst I doubt Rhinos would derive much benefit from the re-rolls in question, I can't think of a vehicle more intrinsic to Marines than the Rhino.
They said some vehicles, and whilst I doubt Rhinos would derive much benefit from the re-rolls in question, I can't think of a vehicle more intrinsic to Marines than the Rhino.
Dreadnoughts? Or more specifically Boxnaughts? I don't know which one I'd call more intrinsic as the vehicle. Although I'd be fine with no dedicated transports in the marine line-up getting core, I could see arguments for either side though.
One more questionable change that is inspired from the need to tune down certain factions. Instead of fixing those factions they prefer to make all to take the hit. Comparing Archon reroll 1 with certain 2 CP stratagem that give full rerolls or integrated in character datasheet auras is insane. Nerfing 4-5 attack characters because they created SM characters with insane amount of attacks and damage than can take down knights ...
They said some vehicles, and whilst I doubt Rhinos would derive much benefit from the re-rolls in question, I can't think of a vehicle more intrinsic to Marines than the Rhino.
That assumes any vehical in yhe Marine codex will be getting core, which depending upon how you read the WHC statement on vehicals could be read as implying it's refering to another codex.
Considering they were talking about two books, this means the vehicle core options would have to come from the necron codex. So which necron vehicles do you think are going to get the core rules, the arks maybe?
Ice_can wrote: That assumes any vehical in yhe Marine codex will be getting core, which depending upon how you read the WHC statement on vehicals could be read as implying it's refering to another codex.
They said some vehicles. It's far harder to assume that no Marine vehicles will be core than at least one of them will.
Breton wrote: I’m also seeing a lot of people assume transports are going to be core. Like the Razorback, and the Repulsor.
Repulsor seems somewhat unlikely since they specifically don't want Captains baby sitting tanks and the Repulsor Executioner is used as an example of things that don't get aura bonuses now.
But, they do specifically say:
WarCom Article on Core wrote:Even some Vehicles will be Core units too, where appropriate.
I'm guessing Rhino is probably candidate #1, maybe Razorback and Impulsor.
I agree it won’t be the repulsor, I do t think it will be transports. It’d be hard to explain why the Impulsor can and the Repulsor can’t. I’m thinking speeders, dreads, warsuits, and TFC’s. Stand alone units with iconic, limited synergy, and/or marginal status
Rhinos have only been “core” when they were free. At a cost of about 2 and a half obsec troops and costing you roughly 4x the shots per turn they’re embarked plus game length now going to 5 turns instead of 6+ making each turn that much more vital... they’re just getting more expensive.
Sure they’re iconic, maybe they get the keyword. But who is going to care? Will re-rolling 1-2 storm bolters make you take 3 rhinos instead of another tac squad? How do you fluff this sort of tank getting it, and that more tank less APC not?
Having a greater ability to measure what auras will affect is only a good thing. It makes it easier to balance and cost the effects as well as allowing for greater variety in the design of the characters. All round a good change, pending the execution.
My orks don't have a single re-rolling aura anyway and with SW the only change I see is Bjorn/Wolf Lord being unable to give the re-roll to a couple of razorbacks but if they are CORE units my lists are 100% unaffected by this change.
Nothing gamebreaking anyway. There isn't a single unit that becomes unplayable because now it doesn't have access to re-roll 1s auras.
Karol wrote: Considering they were talking about two books, this means the vehicle core options would have to come from the necron codex. So which necron vehicles do you think are going to get the core rules, the arks maybe?
Your assuming the article was only referring to changes in the Marine or Necron Codex, they make statements that are implying that this is coming to all new codex's so the vehicals may be in the marine codex or they might be referring to either Guard, Admech maybe even Knights.
I could see Box dreadnaughts being core but I don't see marine vehicals or artillery being core, but this is GW so we'll see how well or poorly they assign the keyword.
First off if GW wanted less re-rolls I would have much preferred them to change into a more AoS approach by changing aura's into "during your command phase one unit wholly within 12" gets +1 to hit until your next command Phase"
Secondly based on Terminators getting Core I fully expect the 'usual suspects' of Aggressors/Eliminators ect to get Core. Dreads I don't know, could go either way.
Ordana wrote: First off if GW wanted less re-rolls I would have much preferred them to change into a more AoS approach by changing aura's into "during your command phase one unit wholly within 12" gets +1 to hit until your next command Phase"
Secondly based on Terminators getting Core I fully expect the 'usual suspects' of Aggressors/Eliminators ect to get Core. Dreads I don't know, could go either way.
Last Signals from the frontline episode says the most egregious example of OP units with rerolls are being nerfed in the codex.
Devil in the details. GW has plenty of good ideas but almost universally poor execution.
And they should be criticised if they get them wrong... which they haven't yet.
Plus tbh, specific rerolls is already a vast improvement on (near) universal rerolls.
GW hasn't been criticised?
Are you kidding?
GW get's more criticism for every pixel on their website and every letter they ever printed than Enron got for their entire accounting scandal.
Hell, GW is probably the only company in the world that get's flamed probably multiple times a day for not delivering stuff they never even announced or anticipated and were just made up by some click-bait YouTuber or blogger, lol.
Stuff like GW allegedly writing "nothing but bad, outdated rules" has become so engrained in the internetz that many dakka-ship kinda believe it without question, despite all proof to the contrary.
If anything, the problem is that people just denigrate everything and anything GW ever makes or does on principle, so differentiation is lost.
AnomanderRake wrote: Does it seem odd to anyone else that the supposed "tank edition" is becoming increasingly hostile to tanks? Damage inflation, smaller boards, king-of-the-hill scenario design, and now no rerolls?
you gotta step back and look at what GW wants us to do with the game. their ideal scenerio are infantry forces moving up the board to capture key locations (and clash over them) with a smattering of armor for support.
when you look at the rules with that mind set, I think the rules make sense, vehicles can play agressivly without getting promptly swarmed, but the rules dischourage running 3 5 man scout squads, and a iron hands captain providing bonuses to a repulsor executioner gunline castle.
how well it achomplishes that we'll have to see (I predict Marines will be hammered by this, and guard and eldar will suddenly find they're barely impacted, just like the early chapter tactics) but thats the goal
It won't necessarily work out like this (and I guess technically its a nerf) - but removing buffs on vehicles allows them to be boosted in their base rules, or reduced in points, without having to assume they'll always be operating under the full suite of support that you can apply.
I'm not sure its going to make up for lol-meltas or more widespread damage 2 but we'll have to see.
I'd expect "core" vehicles to be ones that you wouldn't raise an eyebrow to see an entire army of. Kan Wall is a thing, I could see a lot of dreadnought-esque vehicles getting the label. On the flip side an army made up entirely of predators looks pretty whack.
And yeah, let's be frank, aesthetic and what GW perceives as iconic for an army is gonna play a lot more into the non-troop choices than competitive balance.
Sunny Side Up 792105 10930005 wrote:
GW hasn't been criticised?
Are you kidding?
GW get's more criticism for every pixel on their website and every letter they ever printed than Enron got for their entire accounting scandal.
Hell, GW is probably the only company in the world that get's flamed probably multiple times a day for not delivering stuff they never even announced or question:anticipated and were just made up by some click-bait YouTuber or blogger, lol.
.
You actualy made me check what enron is, and I don't think GW achived stuff even remotely comperable to what enron did.
List of companies that get the same flak on a daily basis spread over TV, radio, goverment reports etc
Gazprom, Yukos, Nordstream AG , Axel Springer SE and the owners of lidle/aldi . And those are the ones I remember from the bus adds articles from my way to school today.
Blackie wrote: I love the change. Less re-rolls = more fun!
My orks don't have a single re-rolling aura anyway and with SW the only change I see is Bjorn/Wolf Lord being unable to give the re-roll to a couple of razorbacks but if they are CORE units my lists are 100% unaffected by this change.
Nothing gamebreaking anyway. There isn't a single unit that becomes unplayable because now it doesn't have access to re-roll 1s auras.
But none of the unplayable units become playable either.
Arachnofiend wrote: I'd expect "core" vehicles to be ones that you wouldn't raise an eyebrow to see an entire army of. Kan Wall is a thing, I could see a lot of dreadnought-esque vehicles getting the label. On the flip side an army made up entirely of predators looks pretty whack.
Kan wall? That army/tactic has died in 6th, was taken out the back and shot multiple times in 7th. Kan were then slowly nurse back to being playable at all during 8th and almost got there with CA2019 before getting killed again with 9th's points hike.
I assure you kan wall has not been a thing for almost a decade.
Ordana wrote: First off if GW wanted less re-rolls I would have much preferred them to change into a more AoS approach by changing aura's into "during your command phase one unit wholly within 12" gets +1 to hit until your next command Phase"
Secondly based on Terminators getting Core I fully expect the 'usual suspects' of Aggressors/Eliminators ect to get Core. Dreads I don't know, could go either way.
Last Signals from the frontline episode says the most egregious example of OP units with rerolls are being nerfed in the codex.
So we shall see when the codex drops.
And how many times has Reece said complete BS before?
Didn't he say stuff like Stompa's being crazy good?
Arachnofiend wrote: I'd expect "core" vehicles to be ones that you wouldn't raise an eyebrow to see an entire army of. Kan Wall is a thing, I could see a lot of dreadnought-esque vehicles getting the label. On the flip side an army made up entirely of predators looks pretty whack.
Kanz don't get any re-rolls though. The only buff they're getting from an ork HQ that could be removed (if Kanz are not CORE) is the morale buff.
Core vehicles will likely be all dedicated transports.
But none of the unplayable units become playable either.
Giving them re-rolls is not the way to go. An HQ that babysits tanks to make them more accurate is a stupid thing and I'm glad it's going to disappear.
But none of the unplayable units become playable either.
Giving them re-rolls is not the way to go. An HQ that babysits tanks to make them more accurate is a stupid thing and I'm glad it's going to disappear.
My point is if we're all about making everyone else's stuff worse, we're all going to be playing with nerf chainswords.
I don't care if the captain is sitting back with the (pick your tank) . I care that the "best" army was two captains, one with the front line, one with the whirlwinds (pick your tank) I'm far more interested in pushing more and more units into playable. I'd rather go back to some sort of table wide bonus like Rites of Battle (but more useful) that you can't double up on to push people into Libbys and Chappies. And for the love of God, please make the Chappie aura not a second rate Captain aura. You can reroll all 1's, or you can reroll only the close combat 1's. Why did GW ever think people would take a chaplain?
Arachnofiend wrote: I'd expect "core" vehicles to be ones that you wouldn't raise an eyebrow to see an entire army of. Kan Wall is a thing, I could see a lot of dreadnought-esque vehicles getting the label. On the flip side an army made up entirely of predators looks pretty whack.
Kanz don't get any re-rolls though. The only buff they're getting from an ork HQ that could be removed (if Kanz are not CORE) is the morale buff.
Core vehicles will likely be all dedicated transports.
.
I hope not. we really don't need razorback parking lots
AnomanderRake wrote: Does it seem odd to anyone else that the supposed "tank edition" is becoming increasingly hostile to tanks? Damage inflation, smaller boards, king-of-the-hill scenario design, and now no rerolls?
you gotta step back and look at what GW wants us to do with the game. their ideal scenerio are infantry forces moving up the board to capture key locations (and clash over them) with a smattering of armor for support.
when you look at the rules with that mind set, I think the rules make sense, vehicles can play agressivly without getting promptly swarmed, but the rules dischourage running 3 5 man scout squads, and a iron hands captain providing bonuses to a repulsor executioner gunline castle.
how well it achomplishes that we'll have to see (I predict Marines will be hammered by this, and guard and eldar will suddenly find they're barely impacted, just like the early chapter tactics) but thats the goal
I mean guard obviously won't be. Their big command ability is already a, limited in what it affects, and b, limited to single targets. They'll reword it to "core" but what's not going to be "core" already can't be ordered - ogryns, ratlings, non-Leman Russ tanks, etc.
There's only one open-ended reroll in the whole codex and it's on a catachan-oonly named character. Their psychic power list will be dumpstered most likely (we've already seen most psychic powers are going CORE only) but that's already not much in use. Not being able to use the +1 armor save or -1 to hit power on a tank with "Eliminator-bait the Astropath" is not going to affect guard strategies, it's just kicking a dead horse.
Eldar, though? Really? You don't think, say, limiting DOOM to core-only will impact them? I feel like autarchs already aren't particularly useful, and they're for sure going to become less so.
This will certainly impact marine equivalent armies the most. But they're also the most egregious abusers of open-ended auras.
.....mm, I did just have a thought though. I'm guessing Goliath trucks won't be Core meaning there won't be a way to get the jackal alphus' buff into a squad in a transport, that's gonna change up my army comp for them.
Well, that's the bright side of our codex being probably a year away at least! Won't have to worry about that until laterrrrrrr.
Ordana wrote: And how many times has Reece said complete BS before?
Didn't he say stuff like Stompa's being crazy good?
Oh I'm not saying that it's definitely going to work out and they have been totally qrong before but they did atleast call out IH and IF as broken and seem to be more on point now that the playtesters seems to be a bigger collective.
Hence why I said we will have to see if this is more IH calling it correctly or as you say Stompa's are okay (aka how high are you) level of wrong.
Spoletta wrote: Leman russes will be core, and I think that's it.
I don't see many more vehicles being core.
Maybe venoms.
doubt it. Tank Commander abilities already specify LEMAN RUSS keyword.so no need for them to be core.
It makes sense actually. I can easily imagine that Tank commanders commanding themselves is on the list of things that GW doesn't like. Tank commanders will probably only command CORE vehicles.
My prediction is that 'core' will basically be all the non-character infantry, bikes and cavalry, maybe dreadnoughts. Not any tanks were they transports or not. I guess the new buggy could be 'core' as it is basically a four-wheeled attack bike. It is really not based on how essential the units are for the base identity of the faction or how common they are, it is based on whether it will feel thematically stupid to have a character standing next to them and yelling orders to them.
Well, if there ever was a case for damned if you do, and damned if you don't, I think this shows it.
I am surprised at the response to the way auras work now. It was unanimously appreciated and loved by everyone locally. It seems like nothing but a solid change and reigns in space marines quite a bit, something that I think needed to happen.
Some characters might might sense to buff non-CORE things, eg Lord Discordant or Techmarines. Interesting new design space!
I'm certain of this.
The new nurgle character that was in the codex preview was said to buff Daemon engines. Daemon engines will not be core. Of course his stuff could be pick a unit instead of aura.
Devil in the details. GW has plenty of good ideas but almost universally poor execution.
And they should be criticised if they get them wrong... which they haven't yet.
Plus tbh, specific rerolls is already a vast improvement on (near) universal rerolls.
GW hasn't been criticised?
Are you kidding?
GW get's more criticism for every pixel on their website and every letter they ever printed than Enron got for their entire accounting scandal.
Hell, GW is probably the only company in the world that get's flamed probably multiple times a day for not delivering stuff they never even announced or anticipated and were just made up by some click-bait YouTuber or blogger, lol.
Stuff like GW allegedly writing "nothing but bad, outdated rules" has become so engrained in the internetz that many dakka-ship kinda believe it without question, despite all proof to the contrary.
If anything, the problem is that people just denigrate everything and anything GW ever makes or does on principle, so differentiation is lost.
Seabass wrote: Well, if there ever was a case for damned if you do, and damned if you don't, I think this shows it.
I am surprised at the response to the way auras work now. It was unanimously appreciated and loved by everyone locally. It seems like nothing but a solid change and reigns in space marines quite a bit, something that I think needed to happen.
But we don't know if it will 'nerf' space marines. Terminators getting Core doesn't make it a big leap to think stuff like Aggressors will also get it.
It would only 'fix' Dreadnought lists and while that is a good thing it may well not help the equally problematic Aggressor/Eradicator lists
Consider if core benefit from reroll 1s but core troops benefit from full rerolls for example. The design space for this type of change is huge. Hope they get it right.
Why did GW ever think people would take a chaplain?
Because it buffs close combat? I don't know about SM but the SW equivalent is very good, one of the best HQs in the codex and also the cheapest one. I take it everytime.
Now also SM should have good melee dedicated units and if the player can't spam captains the chaplain could be viable maybe.
Seabass wrote: Well, if there ever was a case for damned if you do, and damned if you don't, I think this shows it.
I am surprised at the response to the way auras work now. It was unanimously appreciated and loved by everyone locally. It seems like nothing but a solid change and reigns in space marines quite a bit, something that I think needed to happen.
But we don't know if it will 'nerf' space marines. Terminators getting Core doesn't make it a big leap to think stuff like Aggressors will also get it.
It would only 'fix' Dreadnought lists and while that is a good thing it may well not help the equally problematic Aggressor/Eradicator lists
That or GW will finally take their dumb double shoot rules of the datasheet and over to a strategum where it always should have been.
.
