so I see a lot of people on the forums right now in various states of either distress or excitement about the current state of warhammer. And i think it's really important right now to simply calm down and be patient for a lot of reasons.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things. I mean, we all remember how bad things were in the 8th edition index era, right? I've seen people talking, sometimes rather heatedly, about how "x faction is going to be underpowered, y option is going to be completely broken" and I would just like to say that while discussion is well and good(not to mention the point of the forums), it's too early in the game to be freaking out right now. We don't know when the next xenos release is going to be, we don't know if said releases are going to be big and awesome and exciting or disappointing, we don't know if Necrons/Marines will be broken one way or the other, we don't know if it's going to be just marines forever and ever with no end in sight (but to be fair that is looking pretty likely at this point). For all we know they could drop an equally big release for, say, Eldar next month. Not likely, but the point is that we should wait and see at this point.
I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, I'm saying we shouldn't despair when we haven't even touched the books yet. I, for one, choose to remain optimistic. It might be blasphemy for me to say this, but GW has proven they can listen to fans, and they have proven they can make sound decisions. Whether or not they do is up in the air, but we shouldn't dismiss it as a possibility.
Sorry about the wall of text. Please be good to each other on here and everywhere else, and remember to follow the forum rules!
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
Here, OP, have an exalt for being a good person. I'm fully agreed - I have my concerns, and I'm all too happy to voice them here, after all debating the possibilities is fun - but I do find the attitude of writing off the edition already incredibly silly.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
What you're missing here is that many other companies need to give rules out for free in order to boost sales in the first place, where they need to entice people and pique their interest.
I'm sure some have looked at the possibility of charging for a rulebook, then realising either that it would end up costing them sales, or that getting the printing and publishing sorted would be more effort than it's worth. GW has neither problem.
BlaxicanX wrote: Hahahahahhahhahahahahahahaaa. Oh buddy, someoe get ClockworkZion in here. Talk about broken records! This website is quite the meme sometimes.
9th edition will be ending, and people will assert that we should at least wait for them to try to fix it in 10th before "getting all doom and gloom."
Be nice now, all I'm saying is that we are don't have anything close to the whole story here.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
I see both sides. GW shouldn't exactly give free stuff lol, but it is kind of a problem that you need like 5 books to play now, and it mostly just makes it harder to appreciate upcoming rules/changes when you have to buy out to see them. But yeah, you're right, GW needs to charge for their books, and they do give out a fair amount of free rules.
Hello! OP here. I would like to remind everyone that Rule 1 of these forums is "Be Polite". I love the discussions here, but let's not hurt anyone's feelings.
I apologize if anything I've said comes across as a "broken record" or has been said before, I am new here and I do not know what has been hammered in too much already. I simply wanted to weigh in on the discussion that I think we should be careful about discussing topics that could change within a month.
CommanderWalrus wrote: We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things. I mean, we all remember how bad things were in the 8th edition index era, right?
What if some of us liked the "index era" of 8th edition? Minus a few broken unit entries that were quickly fixed, what if some of us liked an era where all factions' datasheets were given to us at the same time? Before the arms race of new codexes and the bloat of supplements. Before 40k got turned into more of a "gotcha!" card game of strategem shenanigans and CP management that ended up increasing the lethality of the game and decreasing traditional wargame tactics.
No, not all of us remember how "bad" things were in the 8th edition index era, because in many ways the game was a in a better spot than when all codexes and supplements had been released.
Nurglitch wrote: Seems odd for GW to do what their less-successful competitors are doing, rather than following their own recipe for success.
GW like to make more profit and the fandom has shown if they offer scraps, a great deal of the fandom will call said scraps the greatest feast imaginable. 8th showed GW doesn't need to do much to foster goodwill with people and putting out a means of both better supporting the game mechanically whilst also freeing up some of the cost would go a long way. As well, most people will probably still want a physical or much-easier-to-scroll-through PDF anyway and buy it regardless, but every little helps.
And in fairness, GW could piss in bottles of water, sell them with 'we've literally urinated in these lmao' labels and they'd probably still sell out with a lot of people telling them it's the best water ever.
Based purely on the postings on Dakka, my impression is that most people like the new focus on objectives.
Do you have data to back up your claim? Any poll or something?
Firstly, there are no missions (plural) there is one mission (singular) with merely a different deployment shape and objectives location.
There was an initial positivity to the new mission because of its similarity to the Nova mission. The Nova mission having been thought of as superior because it was used for tournament play.
Now, that it's become the default, only way to play, the reality of how stale, how the design fosters a specific style of play, how it rewards specific units/armies over another, how the problem of alpha-strike was inherent to the Nova mission only... Basically, the rose colored glasses have fallen off and players are starting to finally realize that the Nova mission is hot garbage and has been all along.
Aside from posts here on Dakka and my local community...
Tabletop Tactics, Mini-Wargaming, Winters SEO, Hellstorm Wargaming, SN Battle Reports and other prominent YouTube channels have all now stated that the new mission design leaves a lot to be desired because there's no variety. With the new mission, it's the same damn game over and over and over and over.
Calling it trash is my own emphasis, but it's been clear from the start that it was no good and easy to see that the game would become stale because of it.
Heard this song and dance in 8th. It was supposedly the "best edition ever" and yet it had the depth of a kiddy pool and about as fun as taking laps in one as well. People have every right to like or dislike whatever they want as it's all subjective but pressure to have a hive minded or groupthink opinion about Warhammer has just been horrible these past few years.
Frankly i enjoyed the discussions about how bad 7th was because there wasn't this push for people to like the edition. We played the game but we all saw how bad GW was at rules writing (people liking or dislike different aspects of the game) and that was ok. With 8th/9th if you don't think it's the best game ever then you get pushed out of the "group" because somehow being critical of a company like GW seems to hurt people's self worth because they like something that somebody else dislikes.
While I agree with the point of not making assumptions about what new things will look like, there are two important caveats:
1. We are in a constant state of 'wait and see', because the game is constantly in flux. When people are dissatisfied with the current state, 'wait and see' is a common but (IMO) wholly unreasonable response.
2. There have, in the past, been things that were recognized as issues in advance (Iron Hands and Eradicators come to mind), but 'wait and see' was used dismissively because we didn't have all the information... just enough to make a reasonable assessment.
I think you have a very reasonable point- that we can't make judgments on things that have woefully incomplete information (like, say, declaring that Necrons will be OP due to new Reanimation Protocols changes, without knowing whether or not everything still resurrects on the same die value)- but have attached it to a phrase that is most commonly used to downplay legitimate criticism.
Based purely on the postings on Dakka, my impression is that most people like the new focus on objectives.
Do you have data to back up your claim? Any poll or something?
People like the focus on objectives, but that's about it. The secondaries aren't very good (unless you play marines and then they're too good), and the scoring structure gives too much advantage to the person who goes first. That statement tends to bring people out of the woodwork saying it's not true and change your tactics and whatever, but it's blatantly obvious for anyone to see in just reading the mission rules that this is so. As more and more tournaments happen, that "player who went first won" stat seems to be pretty steadily creeping more and more towards player 1 having a large advantage. %60 I think at the last check?
As for the rest of it - yeah, I think it's fair to say wait for the codexes. October will be the first real test. If they "pass" that test and those books are good and work well with 9th, the next test will be seeing if they stay with the design philosophy after that. People keep saying "8th and 9th are cross compatible" but I would say that's only true in the most general sense. My group has been lucky enough to play A LOT of games and there's a lot of little problems that keep popping up. They are mostly tied to the 8th ed codexes though, so we're hoping the actual 9th ed books sort that.
As somebody who bought Tyranids at the start of 8th, I don't think I've ever had a worse case of buyers remose, ever. GW pretty much showed me they don't care about Xenos customers with their release schedule. I don't need to support a company that doesn't care about it's customers.
I'll definitely be "waiting and seeing" because I won't be spending another dime on GW products until things change dramatically.
That includes waiting a few months after the codex is released. This way, when GW makes a few units in that codex better than others so they can sell off excess inventory, you won't get stuck with the nerfed units.
It's sad that this has been GW's best year financially, because it's been the worst year in pretty much every other way.
Based purely on the postings on Dakka, my impression is that most people like the new focus on objectives.
Do you have data to back up your claim? Any poll or something?
People like the focus on objectives, but that's about it. The secondaries aren't very good (unless you play marines and then they're too good), and the scoring structure gives too much advantage to the person who goes first. That statement tends to bring people out of the woodwork saying it's not true and change your tactics and whatever, but it's blatantly obvious for anyone to see in just reading the mission rules that this is so. As more and more tournaments happen, that "player who went first won" stat seems to be pretty steadily creeping more and more towards player 1 having a large advantage. %60 I think at the last check?
As for the rest of it - yeah, I think it's fair to say wait for the codexes. October will be the first real test. If they "pass" that test and those books are good and work well with 9th, the next test will be seeing if they stay with the design philosophy after that. People keep saying "8th and 9th are cross compatible" but I would say that's only true in the most general sense. My group has been lucky enough to play A LOT of games and there's a lot of little problems that keep popping up. They are mostly tied to the 8th ed codexes though, so we're hoping the actual 9th ed books sort that.
The secdonaries could use some improvement for sure. That being said I have found that I really enjoy the focus on the primaries a lot more so far. I've had much closer games in a lot of cases and have found it to be really fun.
Nurglitch wrote: Seems odd for GW to do what their less-successful competitors are doing, rather than following their own recipe for success.
Because obviously the only reason GW is a market leader is that they charge hundreds of dollars for poorly-edited rules that they dribble out slowly over a period of years.
We knowGW is the market leader, but "GW is the market leader, therefore everything they do is perfect and couldn't possibly be improved if it resembles something another company is doing" is a silly argument.
Vankraken wrote:Heard this song and dance in 8th. It was supposedly the "best edition ever" and yet it had the depth of a kiddy pool and about as fun as taking laps in one as well.
Guess I should go swimming in kiddy pools more often, as I really liked 8th!
People have every right to like or dislike whatever they want as it's all subjective but pressure to have a hive minded or groupthink opinion about Warhammer has just been horrible these past few years.
Oh, absolutely wrong to have a hive minded opinion - so why on this forum is there such a pushback when people say they like things?
Frankly i enjoyed the discussions about how bad 7th was because there wasn't this push for people to like the edition.
Alternatively, it's less "hey, like this!" and more "hey, let *me* like this and leave some room for people to enjoy it without clogging everything with negativity".
We played the game but we all saw how bad GW was at rules writing (people liking or dislike different aspects of the game) and that was ok. With 8th/9th if you don't think it's the best game ever then you get pushed out of the "group" because somehow being critical of a company like GW seems to hurt people's self worth because they like something that somebody else dislikes.
Or, how I'm perceiving it, if you don't think 8th was lame, shallow, with "all the depth of a kiddie pool and about as fun", you also feel ostracised because you like the thing that everyone's hating on. Which also seems to come with the added bonus of certain users claiming that my play experience isn't valid, is stupid, that I'm somehow less intelligent for it, and that I'm 'white-knighting'.
All because I like something that someone else dislikes. You see - it swings both ways.
Seriously though, I like a lot of what is happening lately.
For instance, the new 'core' designation is useful.
It seems that there was a certain momentum that has been redirected by current leadership at GW.
If trends in this direction continue, we might expect a return to a more stable normal.
As players clamor for the further commodification and institutionalization of the hobby/game, e.g. e-sport platforms and commission painters, a stable rules set is something that people will eventually settle on for themselves if GW doesn't take the initiative to control this space.
We might be seeing this in the new game-size designations, for instance.
No matter what they do, I will never own a floating tank, and some of the tacticool and cartoonish restartes designs have diminished my already foundering faith in the emporer.
I was not going to burn anything, but GW seems to have regained its dignitity just in time.
The secdonaries could use some improvement for sure. That being said I have found that I really enjoy the focus on the primaries a lot more so far. I've had much closer games in a lot of cases and have found it to be really fun.
It's a living ruleset. More secondaries will evolve. Hopefully the codex secondaries aren't ridiculous.
I could see people with codexes having a secondary advantage which would be massively unfortunate.
tneva82 wrote: Ah yes. Another "let's wait' claim. Never mind in 20 years those claims have always been incorrect.
Never get bored of being wrong eh
Ah, actually, I am not bored of being wrong because I just started. I'm new here. Maybe in a few weeks I'll get bored with being wrong and decide to be right.
I think what everyone's missing is that when I say "wait and see" I don't mean it in an entirely positive sense. When I see people get extremely excited about the changes in this edition, it gives me the same feeling as the negative comments. I personally prefer to remain optimistic, but at the same time my original intent was that we shouldn't make premature judgment in general.
Thank you for replies, everyone!
All these people complaining about the rules and not being able to wait a few months for the nerfs we know are coming and I have not had a chance to even get a game in because of moving and covid.
Where are people getting all of this in game experience to be able to say that something is one way or the other. From what I have seen of the GT results marines usually aren’t winning them.
There's definitely differences in exactly how far "wait and see" should be applied. Right now? We have very little information on how the new Codexes will play out, so it's a fair thing to say.
On the other hand, saying "wait and see" to a Squat diehard will likely (perhaps rightly?) see you get a metaphorical forum-based beatdown.
Ah yes. Another "let's wait' claim. Never mind in 20 years those claims have always been incorrect.
Never get bored of being wrong eh
Why yes, it IS almost as tiresome as repeated posts from people who have been following the hobby for "20 years" and are so unhappy with the supposed repeated let-downs that they are still here. You should try some positivity once in a while - you might just like it.
I don't understand people that say "GW should just release ALL the rules, not piece-meal!" as if:
- GW has everything already written up for every faction until 10th edition, and they're just sitting on it.
- releasing all the rules for free will mean that GW can function as a business.
- releasing all the rules at once, and then nothing for 2 years, would be interesting and would make people more interested in the game instead of growing bored with a stale environment.
tneva82 wrote: Ah yes. Another "let's wait' claim. Never mind in 20 years those claims have always been incorrect.
Never get bored of being wrong eh
except in this point the wait and see people have indeed been vindicated, because for all the panic.. it would seem that.. there are indeed nerfs in the upcoming marines codex.
I like some of the changes I've seen with 9th, however. I do have a problem with being drip fed information about the armies that I play. I understand that things will change in this game but If I really think they should have updated all the current armies/models with the new rules via Chapter Approved like they did at the beginning of 8th, but for free until they get around to producing the Codex's. As it stands, I refuse to purchase things until I see what I can make an army out of and honestly, if the game is in constant flux. I cant be bothered to put the effort, time and money into something I know will be obscelete within 2 years because I probably won't even get around to painting it by that point.
Bottom line is, GW needs to slow the feth down with their release schedule and at least bring all current armies/models up to speed when they release a new edition until the codexes come out.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
If we have all the rules, then what are we waiting for?
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
If we have all the rules, then what are we waiting for?
in this case the codices. 99% of the complaining has been about marines, when there's a new marine codex coming up in likely less then a month (I suspect the codex will be first week of October) waiting until we have a bit more info for that does seem wise. but too many people are assuming it'll be a straight buff of the last codex.
Yarium wrote: - GW has everything already written up for every faction until 10th edition, and they're just sitting on it.
Playtesters were supposedly working with 9th Ed codices before the launch of 9th. The lead time on print products is very long, and the rules could feasibly be complete long before the full typesetting is, let alone before it goes to print.
I guarantee that even if the rules weren't all written in advance, the rules for all the codices releasing through at least June of next year (9 mos) have already been written.
Yarium wrote: - releasing all the rules for free will mean that GW can function as a business.
How much do you suppose GW is actually earning on books? With their constant business focus on being a models company first and foremost, I can't see codex sales being crucial to their business model. That's not even taking into account the reduced barrier to entry when an army's rules can be previewed before buying in, or the fact that I'm sure plenty of fans would buy a hard copy even if the rules were available for free online; not to mention the players who want new codices for the lore.
Other companies with a lot less financial security than GW make it work; I see no reason GW can't.
Yarium wrote: - releasing all the rules at once, and then nothing for 2 years, would be interesting and would make people more interested in the game instead of growing bored with a stale environment.
Giving GW two whole years to iteratively balance the game through FAQs and points adjustments- rather than constantly playing catch-up to an ever-evolving meta- might mean we'd actually get a consistently good play experience out of it and a tight ruleset by the end.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
If we have all the rules, then what are we waiting for?
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
If we have all the rules, then what are we waiting for?
in this case the codices. 99% of the complaining has been about marines, when there's a new marine codex coming up in likely less then a month (I suspect the codex will be first week of October) waiting until we have a bit more info for that does seem wise. but too many people are assuming it'll be a straight buff of the last codex.
Oh! So if we have the codecies, and we see previews that look out of balance with other codecies (like 2w marines) can we complain about the disparity between the previewed marines and the other codexes that we're currently playing with? There might be some nerfs to marines in the marine codex, but we're plainly getting 2w marines and at the same time using 1w orks, aspect warriors and genestealers. Because we have all the rules, right?
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
If we have all the rules, then what are we waiting for?
in this case the codices. 99% of the complaining has been about marines, when there's a new marine codex coming up in likely less then a month (I suspect the codex will be first week of October) waiting until we have a bit more info for that does seem wise. but too many people are assuming it'll be a straight buff of the last codex.
Oh! So if we have the codecies, and we see previews that look out of balance with other codecies (like 2w marines) can we complain about the disparity between the previewed marines and the other codexes that we're currently playing with? There might be some nerfs to marines in the marine codex, but we're plainly getting 2w marines and at the same time using 1w orks, aspect warriors and genestealers. Because we have all the rules, right?
We have enough rules to play. And certainly enough to play an engaging game versus most opponents. For some reason the more tournaments feature the fewer marines we see. Right now in the upside-down of Australia a podcaster is taking Nid hordes to a tournament. He beat 9 Eradicator Salamanders 83 to 58. Clearly a skew, but then if 9 Eradicators can't handle a simple skew and the horde can still place top tables then maybe the game doesn't work as the forum dictates. Maybe it is that he got first turn. We literally don't know.
So, why should you wait to draw conclusions? Because it isn't the same god damn dog and pony show.
When is the last time GW screwed something up with an FAQ and fixed it the same day?
When is the last time GW published a tournament-level mission set and didn't have competing mission sets like like Eternal & Maelstrom?
When is the last time you saw a fundamental rule dynamic like CORE that wasn't in the BRB? Even stratagems were there.
We don't know what will happen with the new book. We don't know how they'll handle new secondaries. Normally we'd have the first codexes out by now, but we don't. There are literally fundamental changes in those codexes.
You and I know nothing, but pretending to know something without all the information is just god damn intellectually dishonest now, isn't it? People that piss all over people who say, "just wait until we have all the info" just makes them donkey-caves.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
If we have all the rules, then what are we waiting for?
in this case the codices. 99% of the complaining has been about marines, when there's a new marine codex coming up in likely less then a month (I suspect the codex will be first week of October) waiting until we have a bit more info for that does seem wise. but too many people are assuming it'll be a straight buff of the last codex.
Oh! So if we have the codecies, and we see previews that look out of balance with other codecies (like 2w marines) can we complain about the disparity between the previewed marines and the other codexes that we're currently playing with? There might be some nerfs to marines in the marine codex, but we're plainly getting 2w marines and at the same time using 1w orks, aspect warriors and genestealers. Because we have all the rules, right?
We have enough rules to play. And certainly enough to play an engaging game versus most opponents. For some reason the more tournaments feature the fewer marines we see. Right now in the upside-down of Australia a podcaster is taking Nid hordes to a tournament. He beat 9 Eradicator Salamanders 83 to 58. Clearly a skew, but then if 9 Eradicators can't handle a simple skew and the horde can still place top tables then maybe the game doesn't work as the forum dictates. Maybe it is that he got first turn. We literally don't know.
So, why should you wait to draw conclusions? Because it isn't the same god damn dog and pony show.
When is the last time GW screwed something up with an FAQ and fixed it the same day?
When is the last time GW published a tournament-level mission set and didn't have competing mission sets like like Eternal & Maelstrom?
When is the last time you saw a fundamental rule dynamic like CORE that wasn't in the BRB? Even stratagems were there.
We don't know what will happen with the new book. We don't know how they'll handle new secondaries. Normally we'd have the first codexes out by now, but we don't. There are literally fundamental changes in those codexes.
You and I know nothing, but pretending to know something without all the information is just god damn intellectually dishonest now, isn't it? People that piss all over people who say, "just wait until we have all the info" just makes them donkey-caves.
We have enough info about the habits of GW themselves, so that's strike one for you.
Yarium wrote: I don't understand people that say "GW should just release ALL the rules, not piece-meal!" as if:
- GW has everything already written up for every faction until 10th edition, and they're just sitting on it.
If they don't already, and I agree they probably don't they should have before they released the 9e BRB. If the old book is going to stick around fine, no need to rerelease a new one, but any faction getting a new codex should get a new codex on the same day.
- releasing all the rules for free will mean that GW can function as a business.
- releasing all the rules at once, and then nothing for 2 years, would be interesting and would make people more interested in the game instead of growing bored with a stale environment.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
If we have all the rules, then what are we waiting for?
in this case the codices. 99% of the complaining has been about marines, when there's a new marine codex coming up in likely less then a month (I suspect the codex will be first week of October) waiting until we have a bit more info for that does seem wise. but too many people are assuming it'll be a straight buff of the last codex.
Oh! So if we have the codecies, and we see previews that look out of balance with other codecies (like 2w marines) can we complain about the disparity between the previewed marines and the other codexes that we're currently playing with? There might be some nerfs to marines in the marine codex, but we're plainly getting 2w marines and at the same time using 1w orks, aspect warriors and genestealers. Because we have all the rules, right?
We have enough rules to play. And certainly enough to play an engaging game versus most opponents. For some reason the more tournaments feature the fewer marines we see. Right now in the upside-down of Australia a podcaster is taking Nid hordes to a tournament. He beat 9 Eradicator Salamanders 83 to 58. Clearly a skew, but then if 9 Eradicators can't handle a simple skew and the horde can still place top tables then maybe the game doesn't work as the forum dictates. Maybe it is that he got first turn. We literally don't know.
So, why should you wait to draw conclusions? Because it isn't the same god damn dog and pony show.
When is the last time GW screwed something up with an FAQ and fixed it the same day?
When is the last time GW published a tournament-level mission set and didn't have competing mission sets like like Eternal & Maelstrom?
When is the last time you saw a fundamental rule dynamic like CORE that wasn't in the BRB? Even stratagems were there.
We don't know what will happen with the new book. We don't know how they'll handle new secondaries. Normally we'd have the first codexes out by now, but we don't. There are literally fundamental changes in those codexes.
You and I know nothing, but pretending to know something without all the information is just god damn intellectually dishonest now, isn't it? People that piss all over people who say, "just wait until we have all the info" just makes them donkey-caves.
OOOOHHHHhh. So we HAVE rules, but we also have an incomplete set of NEW rules.
But we can neither display irritation with the rules we have, nor voice irritation at not having the complete new set of rules, either. Is that it?
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.
Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?
Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.
Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).
I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.
I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.
It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.
"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.
Well, GW left us in a two-month vacuum state.
The rule set is fully released while the codices conform with the 8th edition.
It would have been better to give us indices not just for playing SM and Necrons in the next months but also for playing factions up to date until codex release.
People have been saying "Wait and see!" since the first 9th preview. Eventually you have to go "We waited. We saw.". Eventually you're going to have to acknowledge that there's always something new coming out, so a wait-and-see approach runs out of steam.
You will run out of field if you keep moving those goalposts back...
wuestenfux wrote: Well, GW left us in a two-month vacuum state.
The rule set is fully released while the codices conform with the 8th edition.
It would have been better to give us indices not just for playing SM and Necrons in the next months but also for playing factions up to date until codex release.
It would have been better to actually release all the 9th Edition books at the beginning of 9th Edition. That'd put an end to Codex Creep, and quit sticking it to the people who are last in line and get a 6 month long codex.
tneva82 wrote: Ah yes. Another "let's wait' claim. Never mind in 20 years those claims have always been incorrect.
Never get bored of being wrong eh
Ah, actually, I am not bored of being wrong because I just started. I'm new here. Maybe in a few weeks I'll get bored with being wrong and decide to be right.
I think what everyone's missing is that when I say "wait and see" I don't mean it in an entirely positive sense. When I see people get extremely excited about the changes in this edition, it gives me the same feeling as the negative comments. I personally prefer to remain optimistic, but at the same time my original intent was that we shouldn't make premature judgment in general.
Thank you for replies, everyone!
Being new you probably don't realize this, but.... The people you're giving this advice to? For a good many here that seems to be about 1/2 of their hobby. You're literally telling them not to participate in their hobby.
Yarium wrote: I don't understand people that say "GW should just release ALL the rules, not piece-meal!" as if:
- GW has everything already written up for every faction until 10th edition, and they're just sitting on it.
If they don't already, and I agree they probably don't they should have before they released the 9e BRB. If the old book is going to stick around fine, no need to rerelease a new one, but any faction getting a new codex should get a new codex on the same day.
- releasing all the rules for free will mean that GW can function as a business.
- releasing all the rules at once, and then nothing for 2 years, would be interesting and would make people more interested in the game instead of growing bored with a stale environment.
But neither has happened, nor will happen, so it’s just shouting into the void with all this “GW SHOULD”. They won’t, so don’t stress yourself over it. And given how the meta kept shifting in 8th, tell me more about this supposed ‘stale environment’?
In our current age of PDFs and digital copies the idea of forcing players to buy a hard copy is something akin to record companies refusing to embrace digital media in the 1990s
Many other companies have had a history of free releases of the core rules and even army builders. Infinity is a prime example. if you really want the lore and the art you can buy the books otherwise everything has always been free for download along with the free army builder on their website.
What this does is help build community and promote the game. it also lets the players know the company values them by not treating them like GAK.
DUST 1947 also has the same approach to resources with all the rules and unit stats free to download (there is no army build restriction other than using units within your faction or specific TO&E themed lists)
Of course since they don't have to deal with the number of factions (DUST has 4 or 5 if you count mercs, infinity has 10 compared to 36 or so for GW) or the specialized gear/rules between them it is far easier for both companies to released pretty much everything at the same time.
P.S.
Keep in mind that GW wants to string all you fanboys along by dragging out the releases and constantly changing the meta, never intent to make a prefected version of the game since it drives sales. as long as they can keep you spending money they won't change the format.
CommanderWalrus wrote: I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, I'm saying we shouldn't despair when we haven't even touched the books yet.
We have the books. Every army has a codex compatible with the current edition.
Frankly my biggest issue at the moment is that we also supposedly have the rulebook and points book for this edition, but you wouldn't know it with all the changes GW have been releasing of late. It's starting to feel like one of those early access games where you pay on the promise that the developer will finish writing it at some point.
tneva82 wrote: Ah yes. Another "let's wait' claim. Never mind in 20 years those claims have always been incorrect.
Never get bored of being wrong eh
except in this point the wait and see people have indeed been vindicated, because for all the panic.. it would seem that.. there are indeed nerfs in the upcoming marines codex.
I think it is more the how long one has to wait to see an actual change. Of course marines as the only faction with 9th ed rules would be a powerful faction, specialy comparing to ones writen by a different design team for 8th ed. What, I think, some people worried is that maybe they are going to be forced to wait and see for 2-3 years, and a lot of people aren't going to be playing so far in the future.
guys let's stop pretending the arguements are about 9th edition, 99% of the bitching here and certainly ALL the doom and gloom ahs been people saying hwo aweful space marines etc etc and their new codex isn't out yet.
So in short if you're complaining about space marines specificly,no you don't have all the fething info and if you claim to the contrary you eaither A: work for GW and are breaking your NDA. or B: Are lying.
BrianDavion wrote: guys let's stop pretending the arguements are about 9th edition, 99% of the bitching here and certainly ALL the doom and gloom ahs been people saying hwo aweful space marines etc etc and their new codex isn't out yet.
So in short if you're complaining about space marines specificly,no you don't have all the fething info and if you claim to the contrary you eaither A: work for GW and are breaking your NDA. or B: Are lying.
So now it's not wait and see it's you can't complain about a faction until you have it's new 9th edition codex in your hands.
So eradicators rules in indomitous being broken. Nope not allowed to say that as no 9th edition codex out yet.
Saying that T5 3W troops rendering the common D2 weapons no no longer working against marines efficently, nope can't say that either
The new weapon stats which in increasing the damage output or a number of weapons will make vehicals weaker, oh wait I need to wait for the codex silly me.
Or you could maybe except that some things are so blindingly obvious and obnoxious to play against currently it's fair for people to complain.
BrianDavion wrote: guys let's stop pretending the arguements are about 9th edition, 99% of the bitching here and certainly ALL the doom and gloom ahs been people saying hwo aweful space marines etc etc and their new codex isn't out yet.
So in short if you're complaining about space marines specificly,no you don't have all the fething info and if you claim to the contrary you eaither A: work for GW and are breaking your NDA. or B: Are lying.
So now it's not wait and see it's you can't complain about a faction until you have it's new 9th edition codex in your hands.
So eradicators rules in indomitous being broken. Nope not allowed to say that as no 9th edition codex out yet.
You're cool to say they're broken *right now*. But there's a lot of assumption flying around about what the new Codex and meta will be. And so many of those assumptions are simply based on unstable evidence.
So, unless you're explicitly talking about right here and now, complaints simply don't have direct evidence.
Saying that T5 3W troops rendering the common D2 weapons no no longer working against marines efficently, nope can't say that either
Where do you know for certain they're troops again? Is it likely? Yes. But you don't know that yet, if I'm not mistaken. Do you know how much they cost? Do you know if D2 weapons will go down in price or D3 becoming more common in the future?
The new weapon stats which in increasing the damage output or a number of weapons will make vehicals weaker, oh wait I need to wait for the codex silly me.
Hang on, you were just complaining about Damage not being high enough to deal with those T5 3W "Troops", but now you're saying damage output is higher! Which is it?
Or you could maybe except that some things are so blindingly obvious and obnoxious to play against currently it's fair for people to complain.
Blindingly obvious NOW, yes, but how long will "now" be?
wuestenfux wrote: Well, GW left us in a two-month vacuum state.
The rule set is fully released while the codices conform with the 8th edition.
It would have been better to give us indices not just for playing SM and Necrons in the next months but also for playing factions up to date until codex release.
It would have been better to actually release all the 9th Edition books at the beginning of 9th Edition. That'd put an end to Codex Creep, and quit sticking it to the people who are last in line and get a 6 month long codex.
This would be the ideal situation.
But its wishful thinking.
I guess the last 9th edition codex will be released by the end of 2021 and in between we will eventually see another SM codex update.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, GW left us in a two-month vacuum state.
The rule set is fully released while the codices conform with the 8th edition.
It would have been better to give us indices not just for playing SM and Necrons in the next months but also for playing factions up to date until codex release.
It would have been better to actually release all the 9th Edition books at the beginning of 9th Edition. That'd put an end to Codex Creep, and quit sticking it to the people who are last in line and get a 6 month long codex.
This would be the ideal situation.
But its wishful thinking.
I guess the last 9th edition codex will be released by the end of 2021 and in between we will eventually see another SM codex update.
So long the beancounters alone have so much influence so long they will spread in order to make all the quartals look nice.
BrianDavion wrote: guys let's stop pretending the arguements are about 9th edition, 99% of the bitching here and certainly ALL the doom and gloom ahs been people saying hwo aweful space marines etc etc and their new codex isn't out yet.
So in short if you're complaining about space marines specificly,no you don't have all the fething info and if you claim to the contrary you eaither A: work for GW and are breaking your NDA. or B: Are lying.
So now it's not wait and see it's you can't complain about a faction until you have it's new 9th edition codex in your hands.
So eradicators rules in indomitous being broken. Nope not allowed to say that as no 9th edition codex out yet.
You're cool to say they're broken *right now*. But there's a lot of assumption flying around about what the new Codex and meta will be. And so many of those assumptions are simply based on unstable evidence.
So, unless you're explicitly talking about right here and now, complaints simply don't have direct evidence.
Saying that T5 3W troops rendering the common D2 weapons no no longer working against marines efficently, nope can't say that either
Where do you know for certain they're troops again? Is it likely? Yes. But you don't know that yet, if I'm not mistaken. Do you know how much they cost? Do you know if D2 weapons will go down in price or D3 becoming more common in the future?
The new weapon stats which in increasing the damage output or a number of weapons will make vehicals weaker, oh wait I need to wait for the codex silly me.
Hang on, you were just complaining about Damage not being high enough to deal with those T5 3W "Troops", but now you're saying damage output is higher! Which is it?
Or you could maybe except that some things are so blindingly obvious and obnoxious to play against currently it's fair for people to complain.
Blindingly obvious NOW, yes, but how long will "now" be?
Rest of his salt aside, we do know Heavy Intercessors will be troops as we were expressly told on the announcement stream/WHC.
Where do you know for certain they're troops again? Is it likely? Yes. But you don't know that yet, if I'm not mistaken. Do you know how much they cost? Do you know if D2 weapons will go down in price or D3 becoming more common in the future?
the index page of the codex was leaked, they are between other options which are troops. GW have a specific way of listing their options, the only way for them to not be troops, is if there was a gigantic miss print durning the making of the codex. Possible with GW in charge, but that is like saying 2021 tournament seson is going to be fixed by a metor strike.
Nurglitch wrote: Seems odd for GW to do what their less-successful competitors are doing, rather than following their own recipe for success.
You describe GW as successful compared to Privateer Press, Corvus Belli, Cool mini or Not as an indication GW is doing something right without acknowledging that GW has been making warhammer since the 80's most other companies have not that kind of history. You also seem to believe that just because Games Workshop is the market leader they can't improve? That competitors can't be doing something better than GW?
I mean the reason I tried Infinity and Warmachine was because I was fed up with GW at the time.
By your logic no market leader should ever take inspiration from less successful competitors.. *looks at ios 14 finally adding home screen widgets after android has been doing it for decades
So bear with me I have not played a game in years, I enjoy the hobby. Although I could try and play a mach using 5th edition rules with some folks. or try for 8th ed. As I have a copy of both and codex for them orks. In sight try an follow the golden rule. Have fun
So now it's not wait and see it's you can't complain about a faction until you have it's new 9th edition codex in your hands.
So eradicators rules in indomitous being broken. Nope not allowed to say that as no 9th edition codex out yet.
Saying that T5 3W troops rendering the common D2 weapons no no longer working against marines efficently, nope can't say that either
The new weapon stats which in increasing the damage output or a number of weapons will make vehicals weaker, oh wait I need to wait for the codex silly me.
Or you could maybe except that some things are so blindingly obvious and obnoxious to play against currently it's fair for people to complain.
Here's the thing.... You are again making assumptions without complete information and without having played against these units. Yes, HI make D2 less reliable. Does it break the game? That's an assumption. Yes, vehicles could take more damage. Does it mean there are no mitigating factors? That's an assumption. Yes, Eradicators can be obnoxious. Does that mean marines are unstoppable? That's an assumption.
I'm trying very much to make this not sound insulting, but I will end up using strong language. It isn't that I dislike anyone here. I'm just pretty much over the posts insulting the intelligence of others by pretending goal posts are getting moved when they don't want to appreciate the methodology of working with all the facts.
The Nids I mentioned (supposedly the worst army in the game) --
Went second versus Salamanders. Won 83 to 58.
Went second versus Necrons. Won 78 to 47.
Went second versus Iron Hands. Won 87 to 52.
So maybe he's just running down the clock. Maybe he's just lucky. Maybe there's only one list Nids can play. According to Dakka it is the worst mission pack and going first has huge advantages.
Let's look at the leaderboard:
Spoiler:
#1 - GUO, Slimux, LoC, Bloodletters, BoN, Nurglings, Flamers
#2 - IF - 6 Eradicators, TFC, Stormtalon, Invictors, Impulsors, Grav pod
#3 - AM - Breachers, Disintegrators, Serverys Raiders, Steryilyzors
#4 - Nid horde
#5 - GK - GMDKs, Terminators, Strikes, Ven Dreads
#6 - SW #7 - Magnus
#8 - BA #9 - DA & SW #10 - AM
Just look at that marine dominance, right? The mission pack does not deviate one bit from the standard rules.
Round 3 highest scores --
Spoiler:
100 - Space Wolves with 3 Eradicators (models not units)
100 - Magnus & Daemon soup
98 - Harlies & CW
95 - DA & SW 95 - AM 92 - All Tzeentch Daemons
92 - GK - went second
90 - Triple disco lords, Noise Marines, Oblits, Heldrakes
Everyone above went first except GK. This was mission #13, which according to Goonhammer only has a 53% advantage for going first (based on limited data).
It just seems a lot of people sit here like spinsters having never played games, but content to gossip and clutch pearls - and I apologize for the sexist imagery there. It is likely 90% of you haven't even had a chance to use your PA books.
Are marines going to tend to win more than other armies? Yes. Did marines get a ton of stuff? Sure. But if this CORE thing is rolling out and it affects marines most doesn't it make sense to tag all the marine books now?
Could the marine book be a mess? Absolutely. I have no idea if Aggressors will be CORE. Or if that bunker will be nuts. Or if the turrets will be too cheap. And i'll be right here saying if its a mess - AFTER I play against it, because I want a more balanced game. And i'll accept information from people who disagree with me. I was the one who called for a boycott over GSC. I was wrong. Other people talked me out of it.
Problem is the common anti-marine / anti-GW celebrities won't be talked out of anything. Sure, Eradicators are rough. But the CORE change is a step in the right direction. Both things can be true without needing to post how awful you think GW is, or claiming they can't do basic math, or that Matt Ward and Gav Thorpe personally robbed you, or any other inane posts people make. Posts that more and more seem to be not based on experience.
And ultimately, I think, people do it not because they want a better game, but because they feel best when tearing down something that doesn't get to fight back. We're not at opposite ends through disagreement about marines. We're at opposite ends through disagreement about life.
bfdhud wrote: You describe GW as successful compared to Privateer Press, Corvus Belli, Cool mini or Not as an indication GW is doing something right without acknowledging that GW has been making warhammer since the 80's most other companies have not that kind of history. You also seem to believe that just because Games Workshop is the market leader they can't improve? That competitors can't be doing something better than GW?
I mean the reason I tried Infinity and Warmachine was because I was fed up with GW at the time.
By your logic no market leader should ever take inspiration from less successful competitors.. *looks at ios 14 finally adding home screen widgets after android has been doing it for decades
I fully agree with your point - GW can always do better. Most companies can.
I want to point out, though, there are very few companies out there that you can accurately compare GW to, because there are very few that have been in the hobby business for as long as they have.
And when you look at their practices compared to the one other comparable company I can think of - Wizards of the Coast, who purposely play balance games to encourage the rise and fall of printed pieces of fancy card gaining or losing value in the hundreds of dollars - GW don't come out looking too bad.
The only other examples I could possibly think of went bust years ago - for example, TSR.
GW has improved. It's been basically all uphill since they turfed Kirby; they produce more games, better products, have more community engagement, etc. I mean, much of that is learning from their own mistakes. But the fact is that they have been in business for a surprisingly long time. Maybe they're doing a few things right too, and they don't have much incentive to pay attention to less successful companies.
So now it's not wait and see it's you can't complain about a faction until you have it's new 9th edition codex in your hands.
So eradicators rules in indomitous being broken. Nope not allowed to say that as no 9th edition codex out yet.
Saying that T5 3W troops rendering the common D2 weapons no no longer working against marines efficently, nope can't say that either
The new weapon stats which in increasing the damage output or a number of weapons will make vehicals weaker, oh wait I need to wait for the codex silly me.
Or you could maybe except that some things are so blindingly obvious and obnoxious to play against currently it's fair for people to complain.
Here's the thing.... You are again making assumptions without complete information and without having played against these units. Yes, HI make D2 less reliable. Does it break the game? That's an assumption. Yes, vehicles could take more damage. Does it mean there are no mitigating factors? That's an assumption. Yes, Eradicators can be obnoxious. Does that mean marines are unstoppable? That's an assumption.
I'm trying very much to make this not sound insulting, but I will end up using strong language. It isn't that I dislike anyone here. I'm just pretty much over the posts insulting the intelligence of others by pretending goal posts are getting moved when they don't want to appreciate the methodology of working with all the facts.
The Nids I mentioned (supposedly the worst army in the game) --
Went second versus Salamanders. Won 83 to 58.
Went second versus Necrons. Won 78 to 47.
Went second versus Iron Hands. Won 87 to 52.
So maybe he's just running down the clock. Maybe he's just lucky. Maybe there's only one list Nids can play. According to Dakka it is the worst mission pack and going first has huge advantages.
Let's look at the leaderboard:
Spoiler:
#1 - GUO, Slimux, LoC, Bloodletters, BoN, Nurglings, Flamers
#2 - IF - 6 Eradicators, TFC, Stormtalon, Invictors, Impulsors, Grav pod
#3 - AM - Breachers, Disintegrators, Serverys Raiders, Steryilyzors
#4 - Nid horde
#5 - GK - GMDKs, Terminators, Strikes, Ven Dreads
#6 - SW #7 - Magnus
#8 - BA #9 - DA & SW #10 - AM
Just look at that marine dominance, right? The mission pack does not deviate one bit from the standard rules.
Round 3 highest scores --
Spoiler:
100 - Space Wolves with 3 Eradicators (models not units)
100 - Magnus & Daemon soup
98 - Harlies & CW
95 - DA & SW 95 - AM 92 - All Tzeentch Daemons
92 - GK - went second
90 - Triple disco lords, Noise Marines, Oblits, Heldrakes
Everyone above went first except GK. This was mission #13, which according to Goonhammer only has a 53% advantage for going first (based on limited data).
It just seems a lot of people sit here like spinsters having never played games, but content to gossip and clutch pearls - and I apologize for the sexist imagery there. It is likely 90% of you haven't even had a chance to use your PA books.
Are marines going to tend to win more than other armies? Yes. Did marines get a ton of stuff? Sure. But if this CORE thing is rolling out and it affects marines most doesn't it make sense to tag all the marine books now?
Could the marine book be a mess? Absolutely. I have no idea if Aggressors will be CORE. Or if that bunker will be nuts. Or if the turrets will be too cheap. And i'll be right here saying if its a mess - AFTER I play against it, because I want a more balanced game. And i'll accept information from people who disagree with me. I was the one who called for a boycott over GSC. I was wrong. Other people talked me out of it.
Problem is the common anti-marine / anti-GW celebrities won't be talked out of anything. Sure, Eradicators are rough. But the CORE change is a step in the right direction. Both things can be true without needing to post how awful you think GW is, or claiming they can't do basic math, or that Matt Ward and Gav Thorpe personally robbed you, or any other inane posts people make. Posts that more and more seem to be not based on experience.
And ultimately, I think, people do it not because they want a better game, but because they feel best when tearing down something that doesn't get to fight back. We're not at opposite ends through disagreement about marines. We're at opposite ends through disagreement about life.
I think the problem is using the phrase you need to wait and see became a kind of hijacked phrase during Marine 2.0 and supliment spam season towarss the end of 8th by a few posters who used it dishonestly as a response to any criticism of the game balance of codex 2.0.
Also yeah it probably does suck when it's your factions that's being hype marketed by GW and you want to discuss how excited you are about the new cool toy, but hype Marketing is trying to balance the backlash vrs the benifit of people posting about it for the company. GW dont care if your getting called a WAAC.
But Hype marketing is generally not the best idea for a community based activity, would their be way less salt if GW woukd be more honest or less inflammatory in the hype posts probably, but they're doing it deliberately.
Also while it sucks to be on the receiving end of internet hate, go play Tau or Knights for a few years and some posters will act like your a murderer.
And when you look at their practices compared to the one other comparable company I can think of - Wizards of the Coast, who purposely play balance games to encourage the rise and fall of printed pieces of fancy card gaining or losing value in the hundreds of dollars - GW don't come out looking too bad.
Not sure that's an exactly fair comparison either because we don't know how WotC would be fairing without having been bought out by the third largest toy company in the world. Their markets styles are also very different.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: A thread telling people to calm down will inevitably do the opposite and likely end up getting locked down
Which is weird because a thread inviting people to turn it into a cesspit of whining and complaining about stuff almost seems encouraged/appreciated by comparison.
OP, I have no reason to think that you won't take the "wait and see" strategy at every point in 9e's lifetime, since GW releases rules piecemeal over time. It's a bad argument.
Remember when we couldn't judge 8th edition because we had to wait and see, and it would totally be fine and all the obvious problems would go away if we just waited long enough?
Remember when we couldn't judge 7th edition because we had to wait and see, and it would totally be fine and all the obvious problems would go away if we just waited long enough?
Remember when we couldn't judge 6th edition because we had to wait and see, and it would totally be fine and all the obvious problems would go away if we just waited long enough?
BrianDavion wrote: guys let's stop pretending the arguements are about 9th edition, 99% of the bitching here and certainly ALL the doom and gloom ahs been people saying hwo aweful space marines etc etc and their new codex isn't out yet.
So in short if you're complaining about space marines specificly,no you don't have all the fething info and if you claim to the contrary you eaither A: work for GW and are breaking your NDA. or B: Are lying.
So now it's not wait and see it's you can't complain about a faction until you have it's new 9th edition codex in your hands.
So eradicators rules in indomitous being broken. Nope not allowed to say that as no 9th edition codex out yet.
You're cool to say they're broken *right now*. But there's a lot of assumption flying around about what the new Codex and meta will be. And so many of those assumptions are simply based on unstable evidence.
So, unless you're explicitly talking about right here and now, complaints simply don't have direct evidence.
Saying that T5 3W troops rendering the common D2 weapons no no longer working against marines efficently, nope can't say that either
Where do you know for certain they're troops again? Is it likely? Yes. But you don't know that yet, if I'm not mistaken. Do you know how much they cost? Do you know if D2 weapons will go down in price or D3 becoming more common in the future?
The new weapon stats which in increasing the damage output or a number of weapons will make vehicals weaker, oh wait I need to wait for the codex silly me.
Hang on, you were just complaining about Damage not being high enough to deal with those T5 3W "Troops", but now you're saying damage output is higher! Which is it?
Or you could maybe except that some things are so blindingly obvious and obnoxious to play against currently it's fair for people to complain.
Blindingly obvious NOW, yes, but how long will "now" be?
Rest of his salt aside, we do know Heavy Intercessors will be troops as we were expressly told on the announcement stream/WHC.
maybe but we don't know the points cost. right now the heavy intercessor complaint basicly amounts to "Marines have a unit I can't effortlessly kill" marine players have done the math around the predicted price point and the over all consensus is that "they're useful but won't be replacing intercessors"
thing is we know some nerfs are coming to marines. notable nerfs coming up that we KNOW OF.
1: tweeks to chapter tactics (we know sallies are getting nerfed)
2: Limits on the number of captains per detachment
3: the "core" rule reducing the power of re-rolls.
these are all fairly big changes when taken together
Lord Damocles wrote: Remember when we couldn't judge 8th edition because we had to wait and see, and it would totally be fine and all the obvious problems would go away if we just waited long enough?
6th and 7th aren't even in the same ball field (or CEO). People can try to hand wave it as "good PR", but that's a garbage dodge not based on an assessment of the actual actions taken.
Remember when people disagreed about what made Castellans strong, but we got progressive nerfs for all angles?
Remember when marines 2.0 was too strong and they got nerfed at the very next big FAQ (that no one got to play)?
Remember when people said soup needs a penalty and then it got one?
Remember when people said marine rerolls were a problem and then a potential fix was revealed?
Remember people complaining about combo wombo and then we find out spells and strats are getting restricted , too?
I see a couple patterns. Ranging from willful ignorance and malcontents.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hecaton wrote: OP, I have no reason to think that you won't take the "wait and see" strategy at every point in 9e's lifetime, since GW releases rules piecemeal over time. It's a bad argument.
There's a distinct difference between the start of an edition where a global keyword can make all the difference - and the middle of an edition when we're waiting for more codexes, but the design space is known.
maybe but we don't know the points cost. right now the heavy intercessor complaint basicly amounts to "Marines have a unit I can't effortlessly kill" marine players have done the math around the predicted price point and the over all consensus is that "they're useful but won't be replacing intercessors"
thing is we know some nerfs are coming to marines. notable nerfs coming up that we KNOW OF.
1: tweeks to chapter tactics (we know sallies are getting nerfed)
2: Limits on the number of captains per detachment
3: the "core" rule reducing the power of re-rolls.
these are all fairly big changes when taken together
Oh joy if you compair them to intercessors they are fine, funny how those same marine players ignore any comparisons to Kabalites, Guardians, Firewarriors.
It's not I can't effortlessly kill it's they are rediculously points inefficient as a target. Aka the best option would be to not shoot them appart from them being troops and hence obsec so you don't have that option.
Thats 21 S4 or less Ap0 D1 hits, unfortunately what most none marine troops are stuck with.
Yes that May change at some TBD time in the future, but right now this is what a lot of non marine player's have to look forward to enjoying as a game unyill next yea.
1 it's a start but seriously the free AP was the more egregious issue especially stacked with additional AP on weapons
2 seriously out side of Imperial soup lists with the tripple BA slamquiniiuses how many Captains is in a normal marine list even in 8th it wasn't multiples
3 That's true just hopefully the current/new OP units don't end up with the core keyword.
Hecaton wrote: OP, I have no reason to think that you won't take the "wait and see" strategy at every point in 9e's lifetime, since GW releases rules piecemeal over time. It's a bad argument.
You're right, and you don't have a reason. I guess all I can do is assure you that I will try to pass honest judgment when the first couple of codexes come out, when we no longer need to "wait and see", but i understand your point.
Thank you for everyone replying, it has been a great introduction to the forums and I'm glad to see everyone is very invested. Just please remember to be polite despite your investment, there are real people at the other side of those accounts. Thank you.
I don't like the wait and see mentality in part because not everyone has to wait. If GW released rules updates across all factions at the same time it could result in easier digestion of concepts and everyone playing the same game. It would not help the sheer number of books for a player (assuming you don't buy rules you don't personally use) but there are ways around that like binders and book sharing groups or digital.
Currently, I can only know what other players are capable of by spending hundreds of dollars on multiple books for their faction. Or by getting the rules through unofficial means (which gw will ignore as a possibility, short of cease notices) or memorizing by experience. I can only play on even footing with the select armies that are in the same codex run as myself, if the codices are balanced which isn't the norm here.
Now we have a new game wide points system all at once. That's great! There are whispers of that being a game of darts but I'll take it for now. We have new terrain rules for everyone, that's fantastic! We have a all faction list of blast weapon updates, hoorah! And new army composition and gameplay requirement only for marines and necrons play by for now and probably others over the course of two years. Massive changes to game style in the form of weapon buffs for the favored few.
What I wanted to see is what we got in 9th, plus the "core" units list just like blast. For the codices to be about where they are now with the subscription showing all rules but without having to buy each factions datasheets/specials.
Oh joy if you compair them to intercessors they are fine, funny how those same marine players ignore any comparisons to Kabalites, Guardians, Firewarriors.
.
that's because marine players can't take kabalites guardians and firewarriors.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
H.B.M.C. wrote: I can't wait for the Marine Codex to drop and the same crowd to go:
"Well, we haven't got the other 9th Codices yet, so we'll have to wait and see how good this new book really is!".
I think when the Marine codex comes out we'll be in a better place to judge. that said if the necron codex also has a power increase and a weapons rebalance that is about on par with the marine dex's (BTW thats going to be the big argument once the Marine codex comes out "well it wasn't nearly as good as the marines buffs got because death mark guns aren't on par with eliminator sniper rifles' 'well thats because GW intrends them to be more on par with scout sniper rifles" etc) then I do think we'll see some xenos players complaining and other people telling them to chill and wait for their codex. which TBH I hope arrives fast. the CSM, SOB and Guard codices can honestly wait for a bit as the main changes will likely be FAQ'd but eldar, dark eldar, orks etc will need their weapons updates pronto.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I can't wait for the Marine Codex to drop and the same crowd to go:
"Well, we haven't got the other 9th Codices yet, so we'll have to wait and see how good this new book really is!".
What are the scenarios?
A) Marines are still strong.
B) The changes nerf marines so much, because other books retain their per-nerf strats and auras.
How is it exactly that we assess if A is true? We glance at the codex and say, yep, terrible. Or do we allow it to process for a while? In that Brisbane GT the only people 4-0 are GK, AdMech, and Daemons. The top 10 has two codex marine (Nids are #5) lists and round 5 is currently going. If the marine book is considered over powered right now, but people are consistently winning against them then how are you squaring those two things?
And how do we determine if B is true?
Personally, if the rumors are true, I imagine the old codexes are going to over power the new ones, because combo wombo will reign supreme. By how much I don't know. So I'll play games and find out instead of making assertions based on conjecture.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Shas'O'Ceris wrote: I don't like the wait and see mentality in part because not everyone has to wait. If GW released rules updates across all factions at the same time it could result in easier digestion of concepts and everyone playing the same game. It would not help the sheer number of books for a player (assuming you don't buy rules you don't personally use) but there are ways around that like binders and book sharing groups or digital.
Currently, I can only know what other players are capable of by spending hundreds of dollars on multiple books for their faction. Or by getting the rules through unofficial means (which gw will ignore as a possibility, short of cease notices) or memorizing by experience. I can only play on even footing with the select armies that are in the same codex run as myself, if the codices are balanced which isn't the norm here.
Now we have a new game wide points system all at once. That's great! There are whispers of that being a game of darts but I'll take it for now. We have new terrain rules for everyone, that's fantastic! We have a all faction list of blast weapon updates, hoorah! And new army composition and gameplay requirement only for marines and necrons play by for now and probably others over the course of two years. Massive changes to game style in the form of weapon buffs for the favored few.
What I wanted to see is what we got in 9th, plus the "core" units list just like blast. For the codices to be about where they are now with the subscription showing all rules but without having to buy each factions datasheets/specials.
Few people are spending hundreds of dollars on books for their army.
I do find it lacking that PA for DG "just" came out and their new codex will kick it to the curb. People barely got to use it. Partly to blame COVID. Most blame goes to GW for a terrible choice of timeline. Marines got to use their book for 6 months out of 12 due to COVID, but its still a too short timeline.
Would I like free rules? You bet. I never imagined they'd actually give free digital rules (and neither did anyone else). It isn't perfect, but it is a step in the right direction. The app should help move them along, too.
It becomes seemingly more apparent that the points were to prop up the old versus the new. Whether or not they got it in the ballpark remains to be seen.
Would I like free rules? You bet. I never imagined they'd actually give free digital rules (and neither did anyone else). It isn't perfect, but it is a step in the right direction. The app should help move them along, too.
It becomes seemingly more apparent that the points were to prop up the old versus the new. Whether or not they got it in the ballpark remains to be seen.
What I mean is it would have been nice if 8th was released as sets. We got the index phase and that was good. Then it could have been an expansion where one book had fluff battles for a bunch of factions, and WLT/Relics/objectives, 6 for each faction and 1 for each subfaction. Just like with the codices but one book has all factions, no surprises, no 2yr wait. The next book would be more fluff and all the first wave stratagems for faction and 1/sub. The third book would be all the sub-faction stuff and PA fluff. They could even try to keep selling CA for missions and balancing. Cap it with a fresh 9th codex for 1 army peeps.
It's too late for that now, but going forward they are continuing to give game changing features to us one army at a time (two for release) in very specific army books. What I want asap at minimum is for each faction to get a codex that has all the existing material in one place and with the updates applied to keep everyone on the same footing until the next thing comes. IDK what the next thing will be, stratagems feel bloated to me already.
Oh joy if you compair them to intercessors they are fine, funny how those same marine players ignore any comparisons to Kabalites, Guardians, Firewarriors.
that's because marine players can't take kabalites guardians and firewarriors.
So how else do you compair inter codex balance then?
Oh joy if you compair them to intercessors they are fine, funny how those same marine players ignore any comparisons to Kabalites, Guardians, Firewarriors.
that's because marine players can't take kabalites guardians and firewarriors.
So how else do you compair inter codex balance then?
numerous factors. a codex is more then just one unit (especially in this era of auras etc) as has been noted elsewhere. plenty of armies other then marines are winning this way because the scoring system values the ability to put boots on the ground. remember the CHEAPEST troop in the marine codex is going to be 18 PPM.
How long will GK players have to wait and see?
While their brethren will get a codex in Oct and old-school Marines will get 2W, the GKSS will be upgraded (hopefully) someday next year.
Until then GK is more or less dead.
wuestenfux wrote: How long will GK players have to wait and see?
While their brethren will get a codex in Oct and old-school Marines will get 2W, the GKSS will be upgraded (hopefully) someday next year.
Until then GK is more or less dead.
Not really?
If you're arguing they're less effective against marines? Maybe. If you think they'll be any worse against every faction that's not marines? No.
There's a distinct difference between the start of an edition where a global keyword can make all the difference - and the middle of an edition when we're waiting for more codexes, but the design space is known.
I don't know about 6th or 7th ed, but for me the 8th the wait and see, ment I had to wait till the very end of 8th ed, and then stores closed. now 9th is fun for me right now, but if it wasn't and someone told me that I have to wait and see again, I don't think the end vs mid edition argument would work on me.
wuestenfux wrote: How long will GK players have to wait and see?
While their brethren will get a codex in Oct and old-school Marines will get 2W, the GKSS will be upgraded (hopefully) someday next year.
Until then GK is more or less dead.
Not really?
If you're arguing they're less effective against marines? Maybe. If you think they'll be any worse against every faction that's not marines? No.
if the codex after codex marines are going to assume that a meq has 2W, then any army which 1W is going to be at a huge disadventage. It isn't just a special GK thing. If somehow csm units were to stay at 1W, they would be in the same position. And yes I know that they are getting buffed to 2W, question is, if their cost is being buffed to being 2W too.
wuestenfux wrote: How long will GK players have to wait and see?
While their brethren will get a codex in Oct and old-school Marines will get 2W, the GKSS will be upgraded (hopefully) someday next year.
Until then GK is more or less dead.
Not really?
If you're arguing they're less effective against marines? Maybe. If you think they'll be any worse against every faction that's not marines? No.
if the codex after codex marines are going to assume that a meq has 2W, then any army which 1W is going to be at a huge disadventage. It isn't just a special GK thing. If somehow csm units were to stay at 1W, they would be in the same position. And yes I know that they are getting buffed to 2W, question is, if their cost is being buffed to being 2W too.
My example refers only to my beloved GK.
But its also valid for all other armies which get a ''wound boost''.
What would you do with such an army? Shelving?
There's a distinct difference between the start of an edition where a global keyword can make all the difference - and the middle of an edition when we're waiting for more codexes, but the design space is known.
I don't know about 6th or 7th ed, but for me the 8th the wait and see, ment I had to wait till the very end of 8th ed, and then stores closed. now 9th is fun for me right now, but if it wasn't and someone told me that I have to wait and see again, I don't think the end vs mid edition argument would work on me.
wuestenfux wrote: How long will GK players have to wait and see?
While their brethren will get a codex in Oct and old-school Marines will get 2W, the GKSS will be upgraded (hopefully) someday next year.
Until then GK is more or less dead.
Not really?
If you're arguing they're less effective against marines? Maybe. If you think they'll be any worse against every faction that's not marines? No.
if the codex after codex marines are going to assume that a meq has 2W, then any army which 1W is going to be at a huge disadventage. It isn't just a special GK thing. If somehow csm units were to stay at 1W, they would be in the same position. And yes I know that they are getting buffed to 2W, question is, if their cost is being buffed to being 2W too.
How is it a disadvantage? Theyre cheaper and the d2 weapons spammed against marines will be wasted. If you follow that logic every codex who doesn't have their base troops 2w is now at a disadvantage.
How is it a disadvantage? Theyre cheaper and the d2 weapons spammed against marines will be wasted. If you follow that logic every codex who doesn't have their base troops 2w is now at a disadvantage.
CSM or GK? Because in case of CSM they would be just a sub par version of normal marines. In case of GK they wouldn't be cheaper, there would be a chance they would actualy go up in price if GW decides to put the point hikes in to gear cost, stuff like terminators which are troops would still suffer in a 2W meta.
It is not just 2W, but number of wounds to the points a unit costs. And stuff like csm or GK does coralate with marine points costs a lot more, then lets say orcs or eldar. To use another faction example, if d eldar troops got 2W for being on drugs 24/7 and normal eldar stayed at 1W, and both eldar had the same basic stat line and point cost, then one would be worse then the other.
And if agressors or heavy intercesors suddenly would end up costing 70pts each, they would be very bad too, even with 3W each and a t5.
How is it a disadvantage? Theyre cheaper and the d2 weapons spammed against marines will be wasted. If you follow that logic every codex who doesn't have their base troops 2w is now at a disadvantage.
CSM or GK? Because in case of CSM they would be just a sub par version of normal marines. In case of GK they wouldn't be cheaper, there would be a chance they would actualy go up in price if GW decides to put the point hikes in to gear cost, stuff like terminators which are troops would still suffer in a 2W meta.
It is not just 2W, but number of wounds to the points a unit costs. And stuff like csm or GK does coralate with marine points costs a lot more, then lets say orcs or eldar. To use another faction example, if d eldar troops got 2W for being on drugs 24/7 and normal eldar stayed at 1W, and both eldar had the same basic stat line and point cost, then one would be worse then the other.
And if agressors or heavy intercesors suddenly would end up costing 70pts each, they would be very bad too, even with 3W each and a t5.
But tactical marines get a points raise when they go to 2 wounds. If strike squads don't get a points hike and they're priced appropriately for their 1 wound, how is it a nerf?
Will you lose more to orks suddenly with grey knights because a tactical marines is 2 wounds?
If chaos marines didn't go to 2 wounds, which is a pointless thought experiment admittedly, they'd be less resilient than tactical marines but equal points of them would equate to more guns,or more units.
Long and short of it is another book being adjusted doesn't affect your units. If they're a good price now, that doesn't change.
Until their Codex comes out... well... we'd also have to know how they fare against Chaos Daemons. So then they'd have to wait and see until that books out. Of course, they fight Chaos as well, so they might also have to wait and see until the Chaos Space Marine book comes out. And even then, by then it might be time for a new Marine Codex, which could involve some changes that Grey Knights would also benefit from, so they might need to wait and see with that book. But, thinking about, by then a new edition will probably come around, so Grey Knight players will likely be better served by waiting and seeing until 10th Ed.
Oh joy if you compair them to intercessors they are fine, funny how those same marine players ignore any comparisons to Kabalites, Guardians, Firewarriors.
that's because marine players can't take kabalites guardians and firewarriors.
So how else do you compair inter codex balance then?
You know, it's funny, because Firewarriors have the exact same gun Heavy Intercessor has. Only they cost 1/5 of what HI do. And I am strangely sure that if situation was reversed, and HI were Tau unit, while FW were SM one, people currently screeching MUHREENZ OPPP!!1! would be right now howling how OP Firewarriors are and how GW hates xenos because such good unit can't be so cheap
Irbis wrote: ...You know, it's funny, because Firewarriors have the exact same gun Heavy Intercessor has...
Minus six inches of range and a point of AP. And a point of BS, and wildly different durability stats, and a huge number of free buffs and aura buffs the Heavy Intercessor gets for being a Space Marine.
It isn't the same gun at all. It isn't even close to the same gun. If you're going to start accusing people of bad faith you might as well do it based on real facts, not fake ones.
yukishiro1 wrote: It isn't the same gun at all. It isn't even close to the same gun. If you're going to start accusing people of bad faith you might as well do it based on real facts, not fake ones.
It be how it feels tho, firewarrior's special shtick is to have troops with S5 weaponry. Guess what, marines now have troops with S5 weaponry.
And that's how it feels for everything new that gets released
yukishiro1 wrote: Never. That's the beauty of it. "Wait and see" always works because there's always something coming. Tomorrow is always tomorrow, it's never today.
And if you demand tomorrow today, there is no tomorrow.
So yeah, you're not wrong. It really is something beautiful.
Wayniac wrote: When does "wait and see" not become an excuse?
As mentioned already, we'll have to wait and see.
Honestly "wait and see" is a bit like your typical conspiracy theorist.
"There's no evidence." "Because they covered it up! It's just proof of the conspiracy." "But how come no one else is talking about it." "Because they silenced everyone! It's just more proof of the conspiracy!"
Wayniac wrote: When does "wait and see" not become an excuse?
As mentioned already, we'll have to wait and see.
Honestly "wait and see" is a bit like your typical conspiracy theorist.
"There's no evidence."
"Because they covered it up! It's just proof of the conspiracy."
"But how come no one else is talking about it."
"Because they silenced everyone! It's just more proof of the conspiracy!"
Fun fact, conspiracy was a term pushed to discredit ( at the time ) correct theories.
How is it a disadvantage? Theyre cheaper and the d2 weapons spammed against marines will be wasted. If you follow that logic every codex who doesn't have their base troops 2w is now at a disadvantage.
CSM or GK? Because in case of CSM they would be just a sub par version of normal marines. In case of GK they wouldn't be cheaper, there would be a chance they would actualy go up in price if GW decides to put the point hikes in to gear cost, stuff like terminators which are troops would still suffer in a 2W meta.
It is not just 2W, but number of wounds to the points a unit costs. And stuff like csm or GK does coralate with marine points costs a lot more, then lets say orcs or eldar. To use another faction example, if d eldar troops got 2W for being on drugs 24/7 and normal eldar stayed at 1W, and both eldar had the same basic stat line and point cost, then one would be worse then the other.
And if agressors or heavy intercesors suddenly would end up costing 70pts each, they would be very bad too, even with 3W each and a t5.
But tactical marines get a points raise when they go to 2 wounds. If strike squads don't get a points hike and they're priced appropriately for their 1 wound, how is it a nerf?
Will you lose more to orks suddenly with grey knights because a tactical marines is 2 wounds?
If chaos marines didn't go to 2 wounds, which is a pointless thought experiment admittedly, they'd be less resilient than tactical marines but equal points of them would equate to more guns,or more units.
Long and short of it is another book being adjusted doesn't affect your units. If they're a good price now, that doesn't change.
Disagree, troops of the most ubiquitous faction being buffed REDUCES the power of EVERY other faction's troops.
Law of averages my dude, the Primaris Gakkinator with his Heavy Auto Stalker Bolt Carbine Hellincinerator pattern Heavy Auto Bolt rifle will be far better than < prebuffed > troops of < insert faction here >
yukishiro1 wrote: It isn't the same gun at all. It isn't even close to the same gun. If you're going to start accusing people of bad faith you might as well do it based on real facts, not fake ones.
It be how it feels tho, firewarrior's special shtick is to have troops with S5 weaponry. Guess what, marines now have troops with S5 weaponry.
And that's how it feels for everything new that gets released
That's not the shtick for Tau though, and many of you have lost that plot.
yukishiro1 wrote: It isn't the same gun at all. It isn't even close to the same gun. If you're going to start accusing people of bad faith you might as well do it based on real facts, not fake ones.
It be how it feels tho, firewarrior's special shtick is to have troops with S5 weaponry. Guess what, marines now have troops with S5 weaponry.
And that's how it feels for everything new that gets released
That's not the shtick for Tau though, and many of you have lost that plot.
What is Tau's shtick then? 3w t5 models with heavy weapons? Surely marines don't have those either...
yukishiro1 wrote: It isn't the same gun at all. It isn't even close to the same gun. If you're going to start accusing people of bad faith you might as well do it based on real facts, not fake ones.
It be how it feels tho, firewarrior's special shtick is to have troops with S5 weaponry. Guess what, marines now have troops with S5 weaponry.
And that's how it feels for everything new that gets released
That's not the shtick for Tau though, and many of you have lost that plot.
I thought their schtick was coming as close as legally possiable to having gundamns for minis
CommanderWalrus wrote: so I see a lot of people on the forums right now in various states of either distress or excitement about the current state of warhammer. And i think it's really important right now to simply calm down and be patient for a lot of reasons.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things. I mean, we all remember how bad things were in the 8th edition index era, right? I've seen people talking, sometimes rather heatedly, about how "x faction is going to be underpowered, y option is going to be completely broken" and I would just like to say that while discussion is well and good(not to mention the point of the forums), it's too early in the game to be freaking out right now. We don't know when the next xenos release is going to be, we don't know if said releases are going to be big and awesome and exciting or disappointing, we don't know if Necrons/Marines will be broken one way or the other, we don't know if it's going to be just marines forever and ever with no end in sight (but to be fair that is looking pretty likely at this point). For all we know they could drop an equally big release for, say, Eldar next month. Not likely, but the point is that we should wait and see at this point.
I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, I'm saying we shouldn't despair when we haven't even touched the books yet. I, for one, choose to remain optimistic. It might be blasphemy for me to say this, but GW has proven they can listen to fans, and they have proven they can make sound decisions. Whether or not they do is up in the air, but we shouldn't dismiss it as a possibility.
Sorry about the wall of text. Please be good to each other on here and everywhere else, and remember to follow the forum rules!
How long have you been playing 40k for?
How many times do you want to see GW be total feth ups before you realize it doesn't matter what GW does they are going to feth it up?
Somebody is going to be brokenly over powered. Somebody is going to get the short end of the stick. Everyone is going to get a book and then a faq 2 weeks later that fixes all the broken ass gak they didn't proof read or test before they put out the books. And now that we are in the era of codex supplements it means the book/FAQ bloat is going to hit the ground running.
News flash: No mater what they do it's going to be bad.
ahh yes the "wait and see" strategem.. You can never win against it. Because as long as time exists you can "wait and see" more
@ OP I applaud you optimisim sir. Despite all the gak Im actualy fairly optimistic. No joke..
Im optimistic that AT SOME POINT in the lifespan of 9th edition the chips will FINALLY fall and we will have some sort "fair and balanced" starting point for MOST (sadly not ALL because GW is GW) armies.
This will be a "calm" like in FFX after Sin dies.. and if youre not aware of what I mean you have lost out bruh.. you have lost out.. SO this calm will only last a max of 6 months before some new broken BS is introduced or some major nerf where everything goes out of whack again and we go back to square one..
Argive wrote: ahh yes the "wait and see" strategem.. You can never win against it. Because as long as time exists you can "wait and see" more
@ OP I applaud you optimisim sir. Despite all the gak Im actualy fairly optimistic. No joke..
Im optimistic that AT SOME POINT in the lifespan of 9th edition the chips will FINALLY fall and we will have some sort "fair and balanced" starting point for MOST (sadly not ALL because GW is GW) armies.
This will be a "calm" like in FFX after Sin dies.. and if youre not aware of what I mean you have lost out bruh.. you have lost out.. SO this calm will only last a max of 6 months before some new broken BS is introduced or some major nerf where everything goes out of whack again and we go back to square one..
Honestly 8e indexes was the healthiest the game had ever been
So yeah - for my group, 9th is kind of hinging on those first two codexes. For us, that's about as far as we're willing to go with "wait and see", but I feel like that's pretty fair.
CommanderWalrus wrote: so I see a lot of people on the forums right now in various states of either distress or excitement about the current state of warhammer. And i think it's really important right now to simply calm down and be patient for a lot of reasons.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things. I mean, we all remember how bad things were in the 8th edition index era, right? I've seen people talking, sometimes rather heatedly, about how "x faction is going to be underpowered, y option is going to be completely broken" and I would just like to say that while discussion is well and good(not to mention the point of the forums), it's too early in the game to be freaking out right now. We don't know when the next xenos release is going to be, we don't know if said releases are going to be big and awesome and exciting or disappointing, we don't know if Necrons/Marines will be broken one way or the other, we don't know if it's going to be just marines forever and ever with no end in sight (but to be fair that is looking pretty likely at this point). For all we know they could drop an equally big release for, say, Eldar next month. Not likely, but the point is that we should wait and see at this point.
I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, I'm saying we shouldn't despair when we haven't even touched the books yet. I, for one, choose to remain optimistic. It might be blasphemy for me to say this, but GW has proven they can listen to fans, and they have proven they can make sound decisions. Whether or not they do is up in the air, but we shouldn't dismiss it as a possibility.
Sorry about the wall of text. Please be good to each other on here and everywhere else, and remember to follow the forum rules!
How long have you been playing 40k for?
How many times do you want to see GW be total feth ups before you realize it doesn't matter what GW does they are going to feth it up?
Somebody is going to be brokenly over powered. Somebody is going to get the short end of the stick. Everyone is going to get a book and then a faq 2 weeks later that fixes all the broken ass gak they didn't proof read or test before they put out the books. And now that we are in the era of codex supplements it means the book/FAQ bloat is going to hit the ground running.
News flash: No mater what they do it's going to be bad.
To answer your question, probably not nearly as long as most people on these forums, so pardon my ignorance. I'm not just new to the forums, I'm relatively new to the game.
I'm very sorry if this makes some people mad, but I actually quite enjoyed playing 8th edition. It was greatly enjoyable, and I genuinely look forward to seeing what happens next, good and bad. So I guess the wait and see mentality works for me because I genuinely have never really used it before. But as I said, this is probably just that I'm new, and haven't had my optimism crushed by the weight of experience yet, so I'm deeply sorry if this comes across as ignorant. The fact that 'wait and see' doesn't really work for everyone else makes me feel kind of bad. I simply wanted to reassure people.
Also please remember everyone to follow the forum rules, thank you!
CommanderWalrus wrote: so I see a lot of people on the forums right now in various states of either distress or excitement about the current state of warhammer. And i think it's really important right now to simply calm down and be patient for a lot of reasons.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things. I mean, we all remember how bad things were in the 8th edition index era, right? I've seen people talking, sometimes rather heatedly, about how "x faction is going to be underpowered, y option is going to be completely broken" and I would just like to say that while discussion is well and good(not to mention the point of the forums), it's too early in the game to be freaking out right now. We don't know when the next xenos release is going to be, we don't know if said releases are going to be big and awesome and exciting or disappointing, we don't know if Necrons/Marines will be broken one way or the other, we don't know if it's going to be just marines forever and ever with no end in sight (but to be fair that is looking pretty likely at this point). For all we know they could drop an equally big release for, say, Eldar next month. Not likely, but the point is that we should wait and see at this point.
I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, I'm saying we shouldn't despair when we haven't even touched the books yet. I, for one, choose to remain optimistic. It might be blasphemy for me to say this, but GW has proven they can listen to fans, and they have proven they can make sound decisions. Whether or not they do is up in the air, but we shouldn't dismiss it as a possibility.
Sorry about the wall of text. Please be good to each other on here and everywhere else, and remember to follow the forum rules!
How long have you been playing 40k for?
How many times do you want to see GW be total feth ups before you realize it doesn't matter what GW does they are going to feth it up?
Somebody is going to be brokenly over powered. Somebody is going to get the short end of the stick. Everyone is going to get a book and then a faq 2 weeks later that fixes all the broken ass gak they didn't proof read or test before they put out the books. And now that we are in the era of codex supplements it means the book/FAQ bloat is going to hit the ground running.
News flash: No mater what they do it's going to be bad.
To answer your question, probably not nearly as long as most people on these forums, so pardon my ignorance. I'm not just new to the forums, I'm relatively new to the game.
I'm very sorry if this makes some people mad, but I actually quite enjoyed playing 8th edition. It was greatly enjoyable, and I genuinely look forward to seeing what happens next, good and bad. So I guess the wait and see mentality works for me because I genuinely have never really used it before. But as I said, this is probably just that I'm new, and haven't had my optimism crushed by the weight of experience yet, so I'm deeply sorry if this comes across as ignorant. The fact that 'wait and see' doesn't really work for everyone else makes me feel kind of bad. I simply wanted to reassure people.
Also please remember everyone to follow the forum rules, thank you!
I wasn't asking you that to be insulting. I asked it because your post read like someone who was relatively new and I didn't want to assume.
Allow me to educate you. One of 40ks biggest issues is whats called first turn advantage. This isn't an issue with one army or another. It isn't an issue with individual unit rules. It's an issue at the very core of how the game plays. Here is how it works. Lets pretend that all things being equal 2 armies with 2000 points of models are capable of killing 400 points of models in a single turn. I go first. You have 1600 points of models left before you make your first move. In return you kill 320 (you have less so you kill less). Now my 1680 kill 336. Your 1264 kills 253 (rounded up). And so on... The gap between what our armies are even capable of will grow exponentially.
You see, an issue at the very core of 40k is that GW is using a turn structure that is over 30 years out of date by design standards and as a result the game degrades into 2 players taking turns swinging the club that is their army at each other. Like in MtG where if you can attack safely and you don't you are an idiot who is wasting an opportunity, in 40k every model you leave on the table is a gun that will be removing your models next turn. And the less models you have the less capable you will be at scoring objectives and removing their models in return. Because you act with your entire army all at once you can focus fire and destroy whatever choice targets you want to remove that you can get to turn 1.
For every step forward GW makes (And believe me 8th was a million times better than 7th) they take 2 steps backwards or refuse to budge on some of the games biggest issues. Just because 40k gets better doesn't yet make 40k good. The shiniest turd still goes in the toilet. And it's only a mater of time before you realize GW is infuriatingly incompetent. Just wait and see.
Lance845 wrote: For every step forward GW makes (And believe me 8th was a million times better than 7th) they take 2 steps backwards or refuse to budge on some of the games biggest issues. Just because 40k gets better doesn't yet make 40k good. The shiniest turd still goes in the toilet. And it's only a mater of time before you realize GW is infuriatingly incompetent. Just wait and see.
Exactly. I have been in the hobby since 1996. And there has always been power creep and bloat. It's gotten worse over the years after most of the good designers left. GW by it's nature cannot balance and has no real desire to balance since they still consider the game secondary to the models rather than being intertwined.
There will always be rules that people immediately break upon seeing and need FAQs to fix while you scratch your head thinking how "professional" game designers missed seeing it. There will always be neglected factions since models come first so unless someone decides it's worthwhile to make the needed models you won't get them.
The sad reality is that "wait and see" usually means "what will they feth up this time" rather than the more positive approach that's desired.
So now it's not wait and see it's you can't complain about a faction until you have it's new 9th edition codex in your hands.
So eradicators rules in indomitous being broken. Nope not allowed to say that as no 9th edition codex out yet.
Saying that T5 3W troops rendering the common D2 weapons no no longer working against marines efficently, nope can't say that either
The new weapon stats which in increasing the damage output or a number of weapons will make vehicals weaker, oh wait I need to wait for the codex silly me.
Or you could maybe except that some things are so blindingly obvious and obnoxious to play against currently it's fair for people to complain.
Here's the thing.... You are again making assumptions without complete information and without having played against these units. Yes, HI make D2 less reliable. Does it break the game? That's an assumption. Yes, vehicles could take more damage. Does it mean there are no mitigating factors? That's an assumption. Yes, Eradicators can be obnoxious. Does that mean marines are unstoppable? That's an assumption.
I love here that in your initial statement you repeat exactly what the poster you responded to said (Eradicators are obnoxious), which shows that you did read it, presumably, but then you go ahead and strawman him anyway for fun (Marines are unstoppable). Also hmm I wonder if being able to take W3 models as troops could possibly provide some definitive mechanical advantage going into a meta prepared to face W2 troops with D2 weaponry, it's a real mystery whether that could be the case. I wonder if we could find some existing faction that HAS W3 troops and maybe infer based on their performance whether W3 could be a big game changer.....NAH that'd be silly.
It is not an assumption that there will be no mitigating factors to things like the melta damage increase/general anti-vehicle damage increases. We've seen the statline of almost every marine and necron vehicle, very few are changing to become more durable, and lets just say I consider it a pretty safe assumption that I don't think GW's going to pull some kind of day 1 FAQ handing more durability to non-marine codex units while they wait out 2020.
I'm trying very much to make this not sound insulting, but I will end up using strong language. It isn't that I dislike anyone here. I'm just pretty much over the posts insulting the intelligence of others by pretending goal posts are getting moved when they don't want to appreciate the methodology of working with all the facts.
The Nids I mentioned (supposedly the worst army in the game) --
Went second versus Salamanders. Won 83 to 58.
Went second versus Necrons. Won 78 to 47.
Went second versus Iron Hands. Won 87 to 52.
So maybe he's just running down the clock. Maybe he's just lucky. Maybe there's only one list Nids can play. According to Dakka it is the worst mission pack and going first has huge advantages.
Look, statisticis professor, I'm just saying we need to wait for all the facts. You've given us this program that supposedly only gives Result A 30% of the time, but I did just hit the random button 3 times in a row and got "A" all three times - I find that suspicious personally!
Let's look at the leaderboard:
Spoiler:
#1 - GUO, Slimux, LoC, Bloodletters, BoN, Nurglings, Flamers
#2 - IF - 6 Eradicators, TFC, Stormtalon, Invictors, Impulsors, Grav pod
#3 - AM - Breachers, Disintegrators, Serverys Raiders, Steryilyzors
#4 - Nid horde
#5 - GK - GMDKs, Terminators, Strikes, Ven Dreads
#6 - SW #7 - Magnus
#8 - BA #9 - DA & SW #10 - AM
Just look at that marine dominance, right? The mission pack does not deviate one bit from the standard rules.
4/10 armies in the top ten being armies coming from the upcoming marine core book and 6/10 being some form of marine equivalent I don't think is the epic dunk you maybe believe it to be?
Round 3 highest scores --
Spoiler:
100 - Space Wolves with 3 Eradicators (models not units)
100 - Magnus & Daemon soup
98 - Harlies & CW
95 - DA & SW 95 - AM 92 - All Tzeentch Daemons
92 - GK - went second
90 - Triple disco lords, Noise Marines, Oblits, Heldrakes
Everyone above went first except GK. This was mission #13, which according to Goonhammer only has a 53% advantage for going first (based on limited data).
And I'm also not really certain what you think you're proving here? That going first doesn't seem to have a huge impact? That it does?
There are very few people, at least that I've seen, making any variation of the claims that you seem to be listing here. One or two folks saying you can't bring any vehicle more expensive than an ork buggy into a meta so dominated by eradicators (which I would presume are either referring to or playing in a tournament-style meta, where marines almost always with eradicators are approximately 40% of the field currently, in which case they are right).
Marines fielding primarily W2 troops are currently the meta list setup to beat. If you gear your list to take on low-T High-Sv heavy infantry in general, you have about a 70% chance to be tailoring correctly, which makes it very possible for someone to take a countermeta list with huge holes in it vs other types of matchups and win three in a row by, say, taking a nid list that does nothing but score with tons and tons and tons of morale-immune bodies counting on facing opponents that you believe won't have significant antihorde capabilities. Like for the sake of argument you could maybe take about 200 hormagant/termagant bodies, several tiny units for even more scoring capabilities, and one unit of deep striking genestealer cultists to take out your opponent's one unit of aggressors or one punisher tank or whatever the biggest single anti-horde threat is.
You seem to like using actual data and backing up your statements, which is honestly why I respond to you and don't just put you on ignore like folks who clearly just say stuff and have nothing to back it up. But it seems like when you get frustrated you start engaging with things in bad faith to the point where it's honestly kind of jarring having seen you discuss tactics, or discuss tournament data aggregations dispassionately. Not everyone disagreeing with you is making wild, crazy claims here.
Oh joy if you compair them to intercessors they are fine, funny how those same marine players ignore any comparisons to Kabalites, Guardians, Firewarriors.
that's because marine players can't take kabalites guardians and firewarriors.
So how else do you compair inter codex balance then?
You know, it's funny, because Firewarriors have the exact same gun Heavy Intercessor has. Only they cost 1/5 of what HI do. And I am strangely sure that if situation was reversed, and HI were Tau unit, while FW were SM one, people currently screeching MUHREENZ OPPP!!1! would be right now howling how OP Firewarriors are and how GW hates xenos because such good unit can't be so cheap
Yeah, the exact same gun...if you ignore the fact that the fire warriors' firepower is halved at 16"-30" range, it has an extra point of AP, and an extra 6" of range.
But hey, for a shooting faction you don't care if your guys need to be 15" away or 36" away, right? it's basically the same.
Argive wrote: ahh yes the "wait and see" strategem.. You can never win against it. Because as long as time exists you can "wait and see" more
@ OP I applaud you optimisim sir. Despite all the gak Im actualy fairly optimistic. No joke..
Im optimistic that AT SOME POINT in the lifespan of 9th edition the chips will FINALLY fall and we will have some sort "fair and balanced" starting point for MOST (sadly not ALL because GW is GW) armies.
This will be a "calm" like in FFX after Sin dies.. and if youre not aware of what I mean you have lost out bruh.. you have lost out.. SO this calm will only last a max of 6 months before some new broken BS is introduced or some major nerf where everything goes out of whack again and we go back to square one..
Honestly 8e indexes was the healthiest the game had ever been
There's an argument to be made that 3rd ed pre-codex BBB lists era was even more so.
Argive wrote: ahh yes the "wait and see" strategem.. You can never win against it. Because as long as time exists you can "wait and see" more
@ OP I applaud you optimisim sir. Despite all the gak Im actualy fairly optimistic. No joke..
Im optimistic that AT SOME POINT in the lifespan of 9th edition the chips will FINALLY fall and we will have some sort "fair and balanced" starting point for MOST (sadly not ALL because GW is GW) armies.
This will be a "calm" like in FFX after Sin dies.. and if youre not aware of what I mean you have lost out bruh.. you have lost out.. SO this calm will only last a max of 6 months before some new broken BS is introduced or some major nerf where everything goes out of whack again and we go back to square one..
Honestly 8e indexes was the healthiest the game had ever been
It was also really dull and lacked any character imo.
Argive wrote: ahh yes the "wait and see" strategem.. You can never win against it. Because as long as time exists you can "wait and see" more
@ OP I applaud you optimisim sir. Despite all the gak Im actualy fairly optimistic. No joke..
Im optimistic that AT SOME POINT in the lifespan of 9th edition the chips will FINALLY fall and we will have some sort "fair and balanced" starting point for MOST (sadly not ALL because GW is GW) armies.
This will be a "calm" like in FFX after Sin dies.. and if youre not aware of what I mean you have lost out bruh.. you have lost out.. SO this calm will only last a max of 6 months before some new broken BS is introduced or some major nerf where everything goes out of whack again and we go back to square one..
Honestly 8e indexes was the healthiest the game had ever been
It was also really dull and lacked any character imo.
INdex era also was stuck with the worst iteration of the core rules for factions and the game, considering that battleforged and other alliy limits were serverly needed.
Argive wrote: ahh yes the "wait and see" strategem.. You can never win against it. Because as long as time exists you can "wait and see" more
@ OP I applaud you optimisim sir. Despite all the gak Im actualy fairly optimistic. No joke..
Im optimistic that AT SOME POINT in the lifespan of 9th edition the chips will FINALLY fall and we will have some sort "fair and balanced" starting point for MOST (sadly not ALL because GW is GW) armies.
This will be a "calm" like in FFX after Sin dies.. and if youre not aware of what I mean you have lost out bruh.. you have lost out.. SO this calm will only last a max of 6 months before some new broken BS is introduced or some major nerf where everything goes out of whack again and we go back to square one..
Honestly 8e indexes was the healthiest the game had ever been
It was also really dull and lacked any character imo.
I kind of agree, I just wish "adding character" was not "completely and utterly disregarding any need for balance."
GW didn't try to balance anything that came out with the codexes with options present in the indexes. "reroll 1 die", "Interrupt combat" and "autopass morale" were not taken as the baseline value of CPs that should be used for stratagems, they just dropped a ton of strats willy nilly that had wildly varying power levels.
"6++ FNP" and "+1A on the charge" were not taken as the baseline value for warlord traits, they just gave obviously massively superior warlord traits straight out of the gate like "+1A +1S all the time babyyyyyyy!"
That's always been a thing that frustrated me with GW's rules writing. Sometimes, they just decide "Eh, feth it! We're gonna make this new book a good solid 30% more powerful than the last book, and we'll update everyone else....eventually! Maybe never tbh!"
Every time I play against one of the older codexes that I haven't for a while I'm always just shocked at how blatantly terrible some of the stuff in it is. I had a game against necrons where some little stupid character of mine like a weirdboy got into a slapfight with the rough Necron equivalent a cryptek. And it was like "Ok, cryptek swings. He's got ONE MELEE ATTACK."
and it was just like, oh. Oh, they just never bothered to fix those rules for nearly 4 years. The cryptek is a like 90-point model that just...gets only one melee attack. less than stupid 20 point platoon commanders.
Argive wrote: ahh yes the "wait and see" strategem.. You can never win against it. Because as long as time exists you can "wait and see" more
@ OP I applaud you optimisim sir. Despite all the gak Im actualy fairly optimistic. No joke..
Im optimistic that AT SOME POINT in the lifespan of 9th edition the chips will FINALLY fall and we will have some sort "fair and balanced" starting point for MOST (sadly not ALL because GW is GW) armies.
This will be a "calm" like in FFX after Sin dies.. and if youre not aware of what I mean you have lost out bruh.. you have lost out.. SO this calm will only last a max of 6 months before some new broken BS is introduced or some major nerf where everything goes out of whack again and we go back to square one..
Honestly 8e indexes was the healthiest the game had ever been
It was also really dull and lacked any character imo.
Yeah, it might have been more balanced but the lack of any warlord traits or relics (on the back of swathes of wargear being removed wholesale) made for a very dull experience.
To my mind, it's perhaps an indicator that the game has been relying on those things rather too heavily. Not that I object to them (though if I got my way, Stratagems are definitely going in the incinerator), but I think some races could do with more non-relic wargear.
Yeah, it might have been more balanced but the lack of any warlord traits or relics (on the back of swathes of wargear being removed wholesale) made for a very dull experience.
To my mind, it's perhaps an indicator that the game has been relying on those things rather too heavily. Not that I object to them (though if I got my way, Stratagems are definitely going in the incinerator), but I think some races could do with more non-relic wargear.
I think its more an indication of why Warhammer is popular. The IP is evocative and people like to make pew pew noises in their head.
Yeah, it might have been more balanced but the lack of any warlord traits or relics (on the back of swathes of wargear being removed wholesale) made for a very dull experience.
To my mind, it's perhaps an indicator that the game has been relying on those things rather too heavily. Not that I object to them (though if I got my way, Stratagems are definitely going in the incinerator), but I think some races could do with more non-relic wargear.
I think its more an indication of why Warhammer is popular. The IP is evocative and people like to make pew pew noises in their head.
CommanderWalrus wrote: so I see a lot of people on the forums right now in various states of either distress or excitement about the current state of warhammer. And i think it's really important right now to simply calm down and be patient for a lot of reasons.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things. I mean, we all remember how bad things were in the 8th edition index era, right? I've seen people talking, sometimes rather heatedly, about how "x faction is going to be underpowered, y option is going to be completely broken" and I would just like to say that while discussion is well and good(not to mention the point of the forums), it's too early in the game to be freaking out right now. We don't know when the next xenos release is going to be, we don't know if said releases are going to be big and awesome and exciting or disappointing, we don't know if Necrons/Marines will be broken one way or the other, we don't know if it's going to be just marines forever and ever with no end in sight (but to be fair that is looking pretty likely at this point). For all we know they could drop an equally big release for, say, Eldar next month. Not likely, but the point is that we should wait and see at this point.
I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, I'm saying we shouldn't despair when we haven't even touched the books yet. I, for one, choose to remain optimistic. It might be blasphemy for me to say this, but GW has proven they can listen to fans, and they have proven they can make sound decisions. Whether or not they do is up in the air, but we shouldn't dismiss it as a possibility.
Sorry about the wall of text. Please be good to each other on here and everywhere else, and remember to follow the forum rules!
Since we are both new here, of my very limited interraction with this forum, I will offer this:
Dakka is only useful if you follow a few people and love the painting stuff. If you like learning from some of the players and blogs that they post about, its a good site. If you came here with the intent to say, or do anything remotely positive reflecting on good old evil incarnate themselves, GW, then you are in the wrong place.
One of my locals said it best. He stated that your local game store is where people go to enjoy their hobby. Dakka, Reddit and Facebook are where people go to hate it. This forum, by and large, is filled with people who hate the hobby, don't play, or just play troll for the sake of trolling. As I said, a good place to keep up with some of the blog posts and see what a few people think about particular subjects, like developing news, but if you are looking for anything close to a reasonable conversation about 40k, this site will disappoint every time.
CommanderWalrus wrote: so I see a lot of people on the forums right now in various states of either distress or excitement about the current state of warhammer. And i think it's really important right now to simply calm down and be patient for a lot of reasons.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things. I mean, we all remember how bad things were in the 8th edition index era, right? I've seen people talking, sometimes rather heatedly, about how "x faction is going to be underpowered, y option is going to be completely broken" and I would just like to say that while discussion is well and good(not to mention the point of the forums), it's too early in the game to be freaking out right now. We don't know when the next xenos release is going to be, we don't know if said releases are going to be big and awesome and exciting or disappointing, we don't know if Necrons/Marines will be broken one way or the other, we don't know if it's going to be just marines forever and ever with no end in sight (but to be fair that is looking pretty likely at this point). For all we know they could drop an equally big release for, say, Eldar next month. Not likely, but the point is that we should wait and see at this point.
I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, I'm saying we shouldn't despair when we haven't even touched the books yet. I, for one, choose to remain optimistic. It might be blasphemy for me to say this, but GW has proven they can listen to fans, and they have proven they can make sound decisions. Whether or not they do is up in the air, but we shouldn't dismiss it as a possibility.
Sorry about the wall of text. Please be good to each other on here and everywhere else, and remember to follow the forum rules!
Since we are both new here, of my very limited interraction with this forum, I will offer this:
Dakka is only useful if you follow a few people and love the painting stuff. If you like learning from some of the players and blogs that they post about, its a good site. If you came here with the intent to say, or do anything remotely positive reflecting on good old evil incarnate themselves, GW, then you are in the wrong place.
One of my locals said it best. He stated that your local game store is where people go to enjoy their hobby. Dakka, Reddit and Facebook are where people go to hate it. This forum, by and large, is filled with people who hate the hobby, don't play, or just play troll for the sake of trolling. As I said, a good place to keep up with some of the blog posts and see what a few people think about particular subjects, like developing news, but if you are looking for anything close to a reasonable conversation about 40k, this site will disappoint every time.
I disagree. I think Dakka has it's fair share of very reasonable conversation. But reasonable conversations comes with reasonable assessment of the facts coupled with the bandying about of opinions. Do you want a bunch of sunshine and rainbows about GWs history? Well there are a couple people on this forum who will defend GW to their deaths. And while there are also the opposite haters who gunna hate, I think there are more people then both those camps combined who just see the facts and make their opinions known.
Reasonable conversation. If you, or anyone else, has any actual pertinent data to present I would love to see and assess that data. But if you only have handfuls of hopes... well then I have a history of data to present.
Reasonable conversation doesn't come from a echo chamber where everyone is just happy to be there. Reasonable conversation comes from people willing to exchange ideas and debate their merits. I am ready for reasonable conversation whenever you are.
I think you can just look through the comments and see the number of personal attacks, and the lack of data represented and put forth from both sides and reasonably conclude that there is nothing reasonable about the conversation here, for the vast majority of responses.
This forum holds little value other than to engage in small conversations like this while reading other threads from people who are presenting useful material, save the painting, lore and a few other subs.
On the other hand I think this is one of the few forums where you can call a spade a spade rather than just gush about how amazing GW is. Many of the negative comments come from people who expect better than the gak we often get and have no qualms about calling GW out for their often ridiculous design and rules.
Wayniac wrote: On the other hand I think this is one of the few forums where you can call a spade a spade rather than just gush about how amazing GW is. Many of the negative comments come from people who expect better than the gak we often get and have no qualms about calling GW out for their often ridiculous design and rules.
one of the few?
you're, you're not serious, are you?
For the places I go, beating up on GW, and more appropriately, refusing to see anything they do as good or positive, is a common position. I'm a member of a lot of FB groups, Reddit subs, Here, and Discord channels. So far the discord channels seem to be ok, YMMV. The rest are dumpster fires.
Wanna hate your hobby? discuss it online. Wanna enjoy your hobby? play it.
special exception for a lot of the Youtube personalities. Tabletop Tactics, Tabletop Titans, Winters SEO, Leutin09, Wolf Lord Rho, Baldermort, this list goes on, but those dudes are absolutely top-notch. Even when they have a criticism, it is framed in a reasonable manner. They are often a wonderful example of how you can disagree with something that Beelzebub does, I mean, GW does, and still find enjoyment in the hobby.
Yeah the assertion that Dakka is a cesspit of negativity does not line up with my experience and I've been on this site for over 10 years. I'd say the forum probably has a relatively equal distribution of GW critics and defenders and frankly I really dig that, it offers a balanced perspective and I think that's why I've kept coming back for so many years. If you feel the site is too negative, be the change you want to see.
It's not a binary situation. You can be in and a part of the hobby, enjoy parts of it, and hate other parts of it.
Recognizing GW for what it is not mutually exclusive from enjoying building and painting. Recognizing incredible flaws in their game and product doesn't mean you hate miniature war gaming. It's REASONABLE to point out the flaw that is the turn structure. It's reasonable to correctly assess it's impact on the game and GWs refusal to get better. It's reasonable to point out all the faqs and erratas and the sheer volume of documents needed to play a up to date game of 40k.
You don't need to compliment sandwich GW to levy good criticisms.
creeping-deth87 wrote: Yeah the assertion that Dakka is a cesspit of negativity does not line up with my experience and I've been on this site for over 10 years. I'd say the forum probably has a relatively equal distribution of GW critics and defenders and frankly I really dig that, it offers a balanced perspective and I think that's why I've kept coming back for so many years. If you feel the site is too negative, be the change you want to see.
Being the change you want to see in this world works really well in face to face interactions. On the internet, I do have concerns. I am also not saying the forum is not without merit. I do come back because I follow people who posit both often positive and often negative views of GW and their efforts. However, the vast majority of this is or are just insults and adhominem attacks thrown around or complaining about GW, many times with little merit or information, other than to look at them and say "see, 15 years ago, when they did this, they screwed it up, so they will just screw up again". The same also remains true about some of the white knights (which, I guess includes me at this point) who will not accept fault with GW.
I understand the importance of looking at past behavior to help determine reasonable assessment of future behaviors, but the past can be a trap. I understand the dangers of being optimistic about the future with unrealistic expectations.
The vast majority of interactions in these threads seems locked, quite bitterly i might add, in one or the other. (Myself included. I will freely admit I am more willing to give GW the benefit of the doubt after 8th edition, they have earned back some of my customer good will. recent decisions in their marketing have also done the same.)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lance845 wrote: It's not a binary situation. You can be in and a part of the hobby, enjoy parts of it, and hate other parts of it.
Recognizing GW for what it is not mutually exclusive from enjoying building and painting. Recognizing incredible flaws in their game and product doesn't mean you hate miniature war gaming. It's REASONABLE to point out the flaw that is the turn structure. It's reasonable to correctly assess it's impact on the game and GWs refusal to get better. It's reasonable to point out all the faqs and erratas and the sheer volume of documents needed to play a up to date game of 40k.
You don't need to compliment sandwich GW to levy good criticisms.
Your position in that statement is really telling. "GW's refusal to get better" is extremely descriptive of how one could view your stance. No, a "complaint sandwich" is not necessary, however, if all that populated this, and many other threads like it was based on the construct of discussing the game instead of beating down GW (and there very much is a difference) i think the impression, at least from my perspective, would change. As it is, that is not what I see here. Thats not what I have ever seen here. (Though i will freely admit that while I have lurked a long time, I have not been an active participant for very long). Thankfully, my perspective, and my impression of this site, like any other opinion, is just mine. My perspective isn't required or needed. However, when I read the OP, like everyone else here, I wanted to chime in.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Anyone saying the Index era was healthy and balanced might as well just be called a liar because it literally could not be further from the truth.
How so? It's far better than the gak we had at any lifecycle of 8e and 9e (outside of index).
Yeah sure, it was bland. But that was what it was supposed to be, here's the template for *everyone* to start playing 8e right out the gate.
Wayniac wrote: On the other hand I think this is one of the few forums where you can call a spade a spade rather than just gush about how amazing GW is. Many of the negative comments come from people who expect better than the gak we often get and have no qualms about calling GW out for their often ridiculous design and rules.
one of the few?
you're, you're not serious, are you?
For the places I go, beating up on GW, and more appropriately, refusing to see anything they do as good or positive, is a common position. I'm a member of a lot of FB groups, Reddit subs, Here, and Discord channels. So far the discord channels seem to be ok, YMMV. The rest are dumpster fires.
Wanna hate your hobby? discuss it online. Wanna enjoy your hobby? play it.
special exception for a lot of the Youtube personalities. Tabletop Tactics, Tabletop Titans, Winters SEO, Leutin09, Wolf Lord Rho, Baldermort, this list goes on, but those dudes are absolutely top-notch. Even when they have a criticism, it is framed in a reasonable manner. They are often a wonderful example of how you can disagree with something that Beelzebub does, I mean, GW does, and still find enjoyment in the hobby.
Sure, but we don't have 20+ minutes of podcast to talk about our positions on things. There, one has the time to be far more nuanced. If one was to write word for word what they say, it'd be blown off as a wall of text and never read.
I am one of those horrid dreadknights, a herald of ruin, a despoiler of fun and an Abaddon of marines. And yet I'm happy to point out that the models are good in one thread, and in another I'd blow steam at GW for releasing yet again more of the same thing. If you go into threads that are like "marines bad" expect to see the topic around "marines bad", same thing with "model looks sick".
How so? It's far better than the gak we had at any lifecycle of 8e and 9e (outside of index).
Yeah sure, it was bland. But that was what it was supposed to be, here's the template for *everyone* to start playing 8e right out the gate.
The codex made my dudes worse, specialy if compared to other codex faction, so if we assume that GW writes their books the way they want, without someone forcing them to write the rules in specific ways, then durning the Index times my dudes were too good. So that is already one imbalanc found.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Anyone saying the Index era was healthy and balanced might as well just be called a liar because it literally could not be further from the truth.
At the time though no one knew any better, as there had not yet been enough waiting for any real seeing to begin.
Well, I feel like being in a vacuum until the codices for my armies (such as GK) arrive somewhere in the future.
I guess CSM will feel the same.
Releasing indices at the start of the 8th ed was a much better solution for players to get into the new edition.
Releasing Indices at the start of 8th was an imperative given that there were no other valid rules for all those armies (7th Ed wasn't compatible with 8th). 8th Codices are still compatible with 9th.
I don't see what the big deal is. This is the 5th time we've been through this situation. Why is everyone acting like it's so unique.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Releasing Indices at the start of 8th was an imperative given that there were no other valid rules for all those armies (7th Ed wasn't compatible with 8th). 8th Codices are still compatible with 9th.
I don't see what the big deal is. This is the 5th time we've been through this situation. Why is everyone acting like it's so unique.
We're all sick of getting endlessly steamrolled by Space Marines and were hoping for a reset. The five previous resets never came at a time when the game was so wildly out of whack in favour of one book.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Releasing Indices at the start of 8th was an imperative given that there were no other valid rules for all those armies (7th Ed wasn't compatible with 8th). 8th Codices are still compatible with 9th.
I don't see what the big deal is. This is the 5th time we've been through this situation. Why is everyone acting like it's so unique.
We're all sick of getting endlessly steamrolled by Space Marines and were hoping for a reset. The five previous resets never came at a time when the game was so wildly out of whack in favour of one book.
i mean,i think that partially the reason why people are so upset with GWatm, is that GW managed over the life cycle of 8th managed to get pretty close to a decently enough balanced game, then throwing it all out with marines 2.0.
Then gw managed to piss off even those that don't really care about balance, by releasing more or less nothing without more marines.
Meanwhile GW also thinks that removing 2 armies, whilest perfectly ignoring those with finecrap, or drinking age units, in favour of seemingly more marines is probably just the nail for alot of people.
That's not to say 9th doesn't improve, atleast baseline, in regards to terrain, but has still maintained the wierd view rules and made at the same time a rather comical mess out of it.
I'm fully aware that the current balance issues aren't anything particularly special, and we've had single-army dominance before the way we have Space Marine dominance now, but in the past rulebook changes have shaken up the game and significantly altered the balance of the backwards-compatible rulebooks. Think Hull Points in 6e presenting an immediate nerf to the Rhino parking lots of late 5e, or the Jink nerf presented immediately in the rulebook in 7e. Prior rulebooks have disrupted the game and left people scrambling to figure out what's going to be good next across the board even with fully backwards-compatible Codexes by changing core rules, the 8e-9e change is a maintenance release that hasn't really impacted balance much. With few exceptions things that were dominant late 8e are still dominant now.
I think it stems from the removal of USRs; because every rule is on the datasheet now it's much harder to fiddle with the balance of the game from the rulebook and we actually have to wait for the army books to show up for anything to happen.
AnomanderRake wrote: We're all sick of getting endlessly steamrolled by Space Marines and were hoping for a reset. The five previous resets never came at a time when the game was so wildly out of whack in favour of one book.
- 3rd: Chaos Space Marines
- 4th: Eldar
- 5th: Grey Knights
- 6th/7th: Didn't play enough, though I remember Skyhammer Assault formations or free Rhinos / Razorbacks being the rage
Those I mentioned were just the most powerful books (in my opinion) for that edition. Doesn't mean that it was more fun to play against Starcannon spam in 3rd or Lash Chaos in 4th or Leafblower in 5th.
Every edition has its problematic units. If anything, getting an unbalanced book at the end of an edition is preferable to having it at the beginning or inbetween.
AnomanderRake wrote: I'm fully aware that the current balance issues aren't anything particularly special, and we've had single-army dominance before the way we have Space Marine dominance now, but in the past rulebook changes have shaken up the game and significantly altered the balance of the backwards-compatible rulebooks. Think Hull Points in 6e presenting an immediate nerf to the Rhino parking lots of late 5e, or the Jink nerf presented immediately in the rulebook in 7e. Prior rulebooks have disrupted the game and left people scrambling to figure out what's going to be good next across the board even with fully backwards-compatible Codexes by changing core rules, the 8e-9e change is a maintenance release that hasn't really impacted balance much. With few exceptions things that were dominant late 8e are still dominant now.
I think it stems from the removal of USRs; because every rule is on the datasheet now it's much harder to fiddle with the balance of the game from the rulebook and we actually have to wait for the army books to show up for anything to happen.
Looking at the regular tournament posts on Goonhammer and from personal experience, I have to disagree. The new edition did shake things up for enough lists to be viable against Marines in a competitive setting.
AnomanderRake wrote: We're all sick of getting endlessly steamrolled by Space Marines and were hoping for a reset. The five previous resets never came at a time when the game was so wildly out of whack in favour of one book.
- 3rd: Chaos Space Marines
- 4th: Eldar
- 5th: Grey Knights
- 6th/7th: Didn't play enough, though I remember Skyhammer Assault formations or free Rhinos / Razorbacks being the rage
Those I mentioned were just the most powerful books (in my opinion) for that edition. Doesn't mean that it was more fun to play against Starcannon spam in 3rd or Lash Chaos in 4th or Leafblower in 5th.
Every edition has its problematic units. If anything, getting an unbalanced book at the end of an edition is preferable to having it at the beginning or inbetween...
Again. Yes. Single-army dominance is a problem. Prior editions were able to nerf the single dominant army in the core rules. I can't speak to 3e->4e but 5e, 6e, and 7e all rewrote the vehicle rules in significant ways that neutered some of the most powerful builds the single dominant army had (loss of the skimmer save in 5e, loss of charge-from-stationary-Rhino and addition of hull points in 6e, rewritten Jink in 7e...). 9e couldn't do that.
Not Online!!! wrote: Meanwhile GW also thinks that removing 2 armies, whilest perfectly ignoring those with finecrap, or drinking age units, in favour of seemingly more marines is probably just the nail for alot of people.
Removing two armies? I presume you mean R&H and... Corsairs... or Elysians? ( )
Yeah, I don't think GW ever even thought of those two as armies, as in, to (mis)quote M. Bison:
"The day GW removed R&H from 40k was the most important day in your life. For GW, it was Tuesday."
GW removing (or, more likely, just either forgetting or not even considering) a FW army shouldn't be a surprise sadly, especially when the minis aren't even for sale. The only reason Krieg are in the new book is 'cause FW still sell them.
I think we all need to accept that when that Compendium drops there's going to be a longer list of what we've lost compared to what we've gained. Just wait and, and you'll see ( ).
Not Online!!! wrote: Meanwhile GW also thinks that removing 2 armies, whilest perfectly ignoring those with finecrap, or drinking age units, in favour of seemingly more marines is probably just the nail for alot of people.
Removing two armies? I presume you mean R&H and... Corsairs... or Elysians? ( )
Yeah, I don't think GW ever even thought of those two as armies, as in, to (mis)quote M. Bison:
"The day GW removed R&H from 40k was the most important day in your life. For GW, it was Tuesday."
GW removing (or, more likely, just either forgetting or not even considering) a FW army shouldn't be a surprise sadly, especially when the minis aren't even for sale. The only reason Krieg are in the new book is 'cause FW still sell them.
I think we all need to accept that when that Compendium drops there's going to be a longer list of what we've lost compared to what we've gained. Just wait and, and you'll see ( ).
Doesn't change the fact, that the community will regard it , in general, as negligence of anything but the cashcow, whilest the cahscow get's milked to death.
in the long term, their "tuesday" decision will hurt them.
And for the others, the finecrap units left and those units which just needed and deserved a more pressing update getting ignored time and time again, has an impact on their sales figures.
If they go and release Heretic Militarum (or whatever dumb name they decide on for Traitor Guard) tomorrow with a full plastic range, modelled on the examples we saw in BSF, with Beastmen included as a unit type, and all sorts of other things (tainted Commissars, Ogryn, etc.), will anyone really care that the FW list for R&H is defunct?
If they go and release Heretic Militarum (or whatever dumb name they decide on for Traitor Guard) tomorrow with a full plastic range, modelled on the examples we saw in BSF, with Beastmen included as a unit type, and all sorts of other things (tainted Commissars, Ogryn, etc.), will anyone really care that the FW list for R&H is defunct?
No , but ,that is only one half of the coin, the more pressing matter is for those factions that are Stuck in the desinvestment cycle Like dark eldar or craftworlders. These won't sell really anymore.
If they go and release Heretic Militarum (or whatever dumb name they decide on for Traitor Guard) tomorrow with a full plastic range, modelled on the examples we saw in BSF, with Beastmen included as a unit type, and all sorts of other things (tainted Commissars, Ogryn, etc.), will anyone really care that the FW list for R&H is defunct?
Even if they don't. The amount of R&H and Elysian players is completely insignificant and the 'community' will express sympathy when you complain about it on the internet but no one really cares enough about it to effect GW's bottom line.
If they go and release Heretic Militarum (or whatever dumb name they decide on for Traitor Guard) tomorrow with a full plastic range, modelled on the examples we saw in BSF, with Beastmen included as a unit type, and all sorts of other things (tainted Commissars, Ogryn, etc.), will anyone really care that the FW list for R&H is defunct?
No , but ,that is only one half of the coin, the more pressing matter is for those factions that are Stuck in the desinvestment cycle Like dark eldar or craftworlders. These won't sell really anymore.
dark eldar and craftworlds are quite differant from R&H, let's try not to equate the two.
If they go and release Heretic Militarum (or whatever dumb name they decide on for Traitor Guard) tomorrow with a full plastic range, modelled on the examples we saw in BSF, with Beastmen included as a unit type, and all sorts of other things (tainted Commissars, Ogryn, etc.), will anyone really care that the FW list for R&H is defunct?
No , but ,that is only one half of the coin, the more pressing matter is for those factions that are Stuck in the desinvestment cycle Like dark eldar or craftworlders. These won't sell really anymore.
dark eldar and craftworlds are quite differant from R&H, let's try not to equate the two.
Same difference, less sales --> deinvestment--> further less sales--> etc.
You wanting to not look at the writing at the wall doesn't change the fact that players have conglomerated population wise in "secure" factions like CSM, SM, AM, or new released factions etc. Which then get's interpreted by the beancounters as these factions beeing even more popular then they would be.
It's a selfperpetuating cycle.
The only qualitative difference is, that FW and GW design seemed to have ALSO issue in internal politicking.
Which may very well have contributed to the outright squating of R&H , elysians, corsairs whilest something that drastic would never happen to DE or craftworlders, however let's also not forget that both factions are no stranger to beeing ignored and in stagnation ruleswise ( DE) or modelwise (eldar) and that that HAS an impact on the respective playerbase.
no they're not. the eldar armies are GW produced armies, and are long time staples (dark eldar are fairly plasticized too, they could use new stuff but they're no where near as bad off as CWE)
forge world stuff is differant. they're a set of rules produced by another studio, that GW never really factored into their decision making. forge world is also moving away from making botique 40k stuff and is being more where specialsit games are produced. when's the last unit FOR 40k that FW has released? I'm not talking about "horus heresy units that we got 40k rules for" I'm talking 40k specificly. because as far as I can tell.. they put out a single primaris super heavy tank at the dawn of 8th edition and haven't done anything since
BrianDavion wrote: no they're not. the eldar armies are GW produced armies, and are long time staples (dark eldar are fairly plasticized too, they could use new stuff but they're no where near as bad off as CWE)
forge world stuff is differant. they're a set of rules produced by another studio, that GWnever really factored into their decision making. forge world is also moving away from making botique 40k stuff and is being more where specialsit games are produced. when's the last unit FOR 40k that FW has released? I'm not talking about "horus heresy units that we got 40k rules for" I'm talking 40k specificly. because as far as I can tell.. they put out a single primaris super heavy tank at the dawn of 8th edition and haven't done anything since
underlined part is wrong since first CA.
Nothing you stated changes the fact, that the conglomeration of the playerbase happened.
Nothing you stated changes the fact, that it is these factions get preferential treatment over peripheral, see DE and Aeldari f.e.
That's because of GW's stupid approach where they see something isn't selling and instead of trying to figure out why and fix it like every other company in the world they say oh this isn't popular let's ignore it further and make more space marines since those sell.
Not really. In fact, this alone is why R&H and Elysians don't factor in. They're not on the same level as the various flavours of Eldar. They weren't made by GW Proper, so they might as well not exist, especially with no miniature support.
Put simply, from GW's perspective, they don't matter, and that's assuming they even remember they exist to begin with. You cannot equate two exceptionally niche FW army lists with frickin' Craftworld Eldar, a staple of 40k since the days of RT.
Not really. In fact, this alone is why R&H and Elysians don't factor in. They're not on the same level as the various flavours of Eldar. They weren't made by GW Proper, so they might as well not exist, especially with no miniature support.
Put simply, from GW's perspective, they don't matter, and that's assuming they even remember they exist to begin with. You cannot equate two exceptionally niche FW army lists with frickin' Craftworld Eldar, a staple of 40k since the days of RT.
I can , i did , and i made a propper argument, a better case study is SoB.
It's the same principle with the only difference beeing the internal politicking made it possible to eliminate FW factions, whilest "unpopular" GW factions just stagnate into , nigh, nothingness.
Both situations lead however to lower player populations of these factions.
How many people played SoB, before the update? Alot less.
How many want to start eldar? not alot, infact it is according to my shop over here one of the factions that nigh never get's picked up for a faction.
It's the same effect that then by GW's beancounters leads to further marginalisation.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Anyone saying the Index era was healthy and balanced might as well just be called a liar because it literally could not be further from the truth.
How so? It's far better than the gak we had at any lifecycle of 8e and 9e (outside of index).
Yeah sure, it was bland. But that was what it was supposed to be, here's the template for *everyone* to start playing 8e right out the gate.
Well yes, but actually no.
The index era had some pretty miserable to play with rules for several of my favorite factions in the game that really only got fixed when the codex came out. Genestealer Cults were horrendously "random = fun" where you got to deep strike all your stuff turn 1 but had to roll on a table - it might get to move an extra d6" towards the enemy making the charge all but guaranteed! It might show up on your board edge - whoopsiedoodles, guess you lost that game!
And for good measure GSC stayed in that state for A YEAR AND A FREAKING HALF while eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeverybody else got their codexes. And then got immediately nerfed right afterwards because people got salty about an assassin character being able to assassinate a target with reasonable rolls.
And pretty much any faction that relied on psychic powers had to deal with 8th ed's psyker rules combined with a grand total of count 'em three powers. Enjoy playing your Tzeentch daemon, thousand sons, or grey knight army with 3 psychic powers to choose from and only being able to attempt to cast each one one time. There were several characters who were able to take every psychic power that a faction had all at once.
Let's also not forget that it had such fun elements as turn 1 deep strike for everyone, scoring flyers, no rule of three, mixed IMPERIUM/CHAOS detachments, Malefic Lords, old Ynnari doubleshooting with everything while nobody else had chapter tactics....
This is just the nostalgia cycle. People are always the most nostaglic for those periods of the game where people were playing with a variety of stuff and trying things out because the game wasn't "solved." the balance of 9th is painfully easy to figure out because spoiler alert the army what was good is still good they didnt change that much, so we didn't REALLY get to experience that again with 9th.
Index 8th wasn't balanced, it was just new and people hadn't had time to get their miserable spam lists together yet.
BrianDavion wrote: when's the last unit FOR 40k that FW has released? I'm not talking about "horus heresy units that we got 40k rules for" I'm talking 40k specificly. because as far as I can tell.. they put out a single primaris super heavy tank at the dawn of 8th edition and haven't done anything since
BrianDavion wrote: when's the last unit FOR 40k that FW has released? I'm not talking about "horus heresy units that we got 40k rules for" I'm talking 40k specificly. because as far as I can tell.. they put out a single primaris super heavy tank at the dawn of 8th edition and haven't done anything since
They've released the Necron Seraptek since then.
Also I'd call the various knights primarily 40k models.
...At least, based on the amount of hatred I generally get if I bring a knight detachment along with my mechanicum army when people want to play 30k games. The superheavy rules do not seem to be highly regarded in the hyperelitist 30k community.
BrianDavion wrote: when's the last unit FOR 40k that FW has released? I'm not talking about "horus heresy units that we got 40k rules for" I'm talking 40k specificly. because as far as I can tell.. they put out a single primaris super heavy tank at the dawn of 8th edition and haven't done anything since
They've released the Necron Seraptek since then.
Also I'd call the various knights primarily 40k models.
...At least, based on the amount of hatred I generally get if I bring a knight detachment along with my mechanicum army when people want to play 30k games. The superheavy rules do not seem to be highly regarded in the hyperelitist 30k community.
Considering the amount of 40K players who think Knights and other Super Heavies shouldn't exist/be playable in "regular" 40K(despite Super Heavy rules having been in "regular" 40K longer than Apocalypse has existed), the Super Heavy rules don't seem to be highly regarded anywhere.
BrianDavion wrote: when's the last unit FOR 40k that FW has released? I'm not talking about "horus heresy units that we got 40k rules for" I'm talking 40k specificly. because as far as I can tell.. they put out a single primaris super heavy tank at the dawn of 8th edition and haven't done anything since
They've released the Necron Seraptek since then.
Also I'd call the various knights primarily 40k models.
...At least, based on the amount of hatred I generally get if I bring a knight detachment along with my mechanicum army when people want to play 30k games. The superheavy rules do not seem to be highly regarded in the hyperelitist 30k community.
Considering the amount of 40K players who think Knights and other Super Heavies shouldn't exist/be playable in "regular" 40K(despite Super Heavy rules having been in "regular" 40K longer than Apocalypse has existed), the Super Heavy rules don't seem to be highly regarded anywhere.
true, though given that 30k games tend to be about 3,000 points, one single superheavy would not seem entirely unreasonable in that instance, particularly because you're aaaaaaaaaalways playing against a primarch on the other side in games of 30k.
Wayniac wrote: That's because of GW's stupid approach where they see something isn't selling and instead of trying to figure out why and fix it like every other company in the world they say oh this isn't popular let's ignore it further and make more space marines since those sell.
Indeed, this seems to be GW's policy.
SM sell like hell. I'm not buying them as I found them always boring.
Let's see how high the proportion of Xenos armies at events will be next time.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Anyone saying the Index era was healthy and balanced might as well just be called a liar because it literally could not be further from the truth.
How so? It's far better than the gak we had at any lifecycle of 8e and 9e (outside of index).
Yeah sure, it was bland. But that was what it was supposed to be, here's the template for *everyone* to start playing 8e right out the gate.
Well yes, but actually no.
The index era had some pretty miserable to play with rules for several of my favorite factions in the game that really only got fixed when the codex came out. Genestealer Cults were horrendously "random = fun" where you got to deep strike all your stuff turn 1 but had to roll on a table - it might get to move an extra d6" towards the enemy making the charge all but guaranteed! It might show up on your board edge - whoopsiedoodles, guess you lost that game!
And for good measure GSC stayed in that state for A YEAR AND A FREAKING HALF while eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeverybody else got their codexes. And then got immediately nerfed right afterwards because people got salty about an assassin character being able to assassinate a target with reasonable rolls.
And pretty much any faction that relied on psychic powers had to deal with 8th ed's psyker rules combined with a grand total of count 'em three powers. Enjoy playing your Tzeentch daemon, thousand sons, or grey knight army with 3 psychic powers to choose from and only being able to attempt to cast each one one time. There were several characters who were able to take every psychic power that a faction had all at once.
Let's also not forget that it had such fun elements as turn 1 deep strike for everyone, scoring flyers, no rule of three, mixed IMPERIUM/CHAOS detachments, Malefic Lords, old Ynnari doubleshooting with everything while nobody else had chapter tactics....
This is just the nostalgia cycle. People are always the most nostaglic for those periods of the game where people were playing with a variety of stuff and trying things out because the game wasn't "solved." the balance of 9th is painfully easy to figure out because spoiler alert the army what was good is still good they didnt change that much, so we didn't REALLY get to experience that again with 9th.
Index 8th wasn't balanced, it was just new and people hadn't had time to get their miserable spam lists together yet.
This is all true. The index era had a lot less wombo-combo type stuff, but it definitely wasn't balanced.
However, I think it really served to highlighted just how shallow the actual core rules were for 8th edition. The codices tried to disguise this with stratagems and auras and special rules (about 90% of which seem to involve rerolling 1s for something or other), but even most of those rules didn't add any meaningful decisions. I think 8th (and by extension 9th) really suffer from being stuffed to the gills with uninteractive rules.
Auras are the obvious one - there's no cost to activate them, no choices to be made with regard to which unit you buff, and generally no way for an opponent to stop the aura short of killing the character generating it.
But the psychic phase is almost as bad. Pick a power and play a mini-game of Yahtzee to see if it works. If your opponent has a psyker, then they can attempt to stop it with their own Yahtzee mini-game. That's it. There's generally no resource-management involved, nor any way to improve your odds of casting a power at greater risk (something that seems like it should be mandatory for magic based around harnessing the warp).
It just seems that there are currently very few meaningful choices to be made. And many of the ones that do exist are either false choices (do I take the good special weapon or the crap one? Do I pay a lot of points to give a melee weapon to a sergeant who sucks in melee regardless?), or ones that tend to be very obvious.
vipoid wrote: This is all true. The index era had a lot less wombo-combo type stuff, but it definitely wasn't balanced.
I think when people mean it was balanced, they mean that the power curve wasn't ludicrous if two players threw together an un-skewed normal sort of army.
There was a sort of halcyon age of exploration - maybe this unit is okay now, maybe I can build that way etc.
Obviously it died in the face of Guilliman castles, massed blobs of chaff, smite spam from 30~ point psykers etc etc - but I don't think those appeared on casual tables on day one, and so for a brief moment the feeling was freedom from the tyranny of 7th.
In time factions were obviously *solved* for want of a better word, and the fact they were then allowed to linger in this state for months and months was bad.
Sadly with 9th there hasn't even been that moment of innocence - for the most part if you were screwed 9~ months ago, you're still screwed now - even if the objectives have changed things up somewhat and its unclear when the "unscrewing" will occur. Although admittedly with the global situation, that's perhaps not as negative as it would normally be.
Necrons have to be the canary. We shall see in a matter of weeks.
vipoid wrote: This is all true. The index era had a lot less wombo-combo type stuff, but it definitely wasn't balanced.
I think when people mean it was balanced, they mean that the power curve wasn't ludicrous if two players threw together an un-skewed normal sort of army.
There was a sort of halcyon age of exploration - maybe this unit is okay now, maybe I can build that way etc.
Obviously it died in the face of Guilliman castles, massed blobs of chaff, smite spam from 30~ point psykers etc etc - but I don't think those appeared on casual tables on day one, and so for a brief moment the feeling was freedom from the tyranny of 7th.
In time factions were obviously *solved* for want of a better word, and the fact they were then allowed to linger in this state for months and months was bad.
Sadly with 9th there hasn't even been that moment of innocence - for the most part if you were screwed 9~ months ago, you're still screwed now - even if the objectives have changed things up somewhat and its unclear when the "unscrewing" will occur. Although admittedly with the global situation, that's perhaps not as negative as it would normally be.
Necrons have to be the canary. We shall see in a matter of weeks.
Eh, my first game of index 8th saw a bunch of wyches charge in to a leman russ and myself and my opponent realized that there was absolutely nothing it could do for the remainder of the game besides make 6+ to hit overwatch attacks.
It was a pretty short window of innocent "wowee maybe everything is good and balanced".
the_scotsman wrote: Eh, my first game of index 8th saw a bunch of wyches charge in to a leman russ and myself and my opponent realized that there was absolutely nothing it could do for the remainder of the game besides make 6+ to hit overwatch attacks.
It was a pretty short window of innocent "wowee maybe everything is good and balanced".
Clearly GW were watching...
Although I sort of feel the response is "that seems fair enough for the Wyches to me, screen harder".
I bet you have way more upsetting experiences than that
I find all this salt over "wait and see" to be rather funny considering the steady drip of buffs and nerfs we have been seeing are coming for Codex Space Marines:
* First Born are getting more wounds, albeit it with an increase in cost
* Weapons are being updated for everyone, often to do more damage
* Chapter Tactics are being revised, mostly in the downward direction
* Shiny new models with bonkers rules
* The new Core keyword will limit the targets of aura and abilities
But there are still all the things we don't know that can make the difference between a revised OP codex and a move towards balance:
* Will the revised weapons have revised points cost?
* Will unit cost be revised outside of the First Born?
* Will any of the unit rules change from the old codex or the Indomitus release?
* Will the rules for Angels of Death be revised?
I mean, Angels of Death has three opportunities alone to make an impact.
* Will Shock Assault stay the same?
* Will they finally get around to fixing ATSKNF to make sense?
* Will they nerf Doctrines by making them something less abusive than -1 AP for 2 weapon types for a few turns?
We just don't know. I guess we will have to wait and see.
This is all true. The index era had a lot less wombo-combo type stuff, but it definitely wasn't balanced.
It's funny. I often wonder if 8th in general, and index 40k in particular would have been so well received had they not been preceded by 7th. Seventh edition being the most generally reviled of all 40k editions, and the one that "we" as a player bas seem to be able to universally agree was the worst one. For example, if 8th had followed 5th instead, I don't think I'd have taken to it quite the same ...
dark eldar and craftworlds are quite differant from R&H, let's try not to equate the two.
They are different in this case, and I agree they shouldn't be compared, but DE in particular illustrate the issue quite well. Most of our DE players have quit the game. It was one thing to go 5-10 years without an update back in the days when GW might only release 2 or 3 codexes over the course of an edition, but to get only one major update ("major" in this case meaning rules AND models like in 5th) over the lifespan of an army that's been in the game since 3rd ed, and to have multiple books come out since that update that do nothing but eliminate units and make your army more fragmented ... that's a hard pill to swallow. Now, to watch Marines get constant releases over the course of a two year period ... that's driven a lot of players from the game here.
It's a shame too because it's a fun army to play against and so unique, but I can't blame them. "Wait and See" hasn't worked out for them. I have every confidence that CWE will eventually be fine, but IDK about DE.
This is all true. The index era had a lot less wombo-combo type stuff, but it definitely wasn't balanced.
It's funny. I often wonder if 8th in general, and index 40k in particular would have been so well received had they not been preceded by 7th. Seventh edition being the most generally reviled of all 40k editions, and the one that "we" as a player bas seem to be able to universally agree was the worst one. For example, if 8th had followed 5th instead, I don't think I'd have taken to it quite the same ...
I think the mere fact that 8th wasn't 7th made people willing to overlook a *lot* of its flaws.
To my mind, this is rather unfortunate, as IMO a lot of reasonable stuff was thrown out as well, and 9th doesn't seem to have fixed a great deal that was wrong with 8th.
dark eldar and craftworlds are quite differant from R&H, let's try not to equate the two.
They are different in this case, and I agree they shouldn't be compared, but DE in particular illustrate the issue quite well. Most of our DE players have quit the game. It was one thing to go 5-10 years without an update back in the days when GW might only release 2 or 3 codexes over the course of an edition, but to get only one major update ("major" in this case meaning rules AND models like in 5th) over the lifespan of an army that's been in the game since 3rd ed, and to have multiple books come out since that update that do nothing but eliminate units and make your army more fragmented ... that's a hard pill to swallow. Now, to watch Marines get constant releases over the course of a two year period ... that's driven a lot of players from the game here.
It's a shame too because it's a fun army to play against and so unique, but I can't blame them. "Wait and See" hasn't worked out for them. I have every confidence that CWE will eventually be fine, but IDK about DE.
As a DE player, I think the most galling thing is the sheer lack of thought and effort put into our army.
I mean, if we're going to be stuck with just 3 generic characters for years, the least they could do is make them actually interesting. Instead, most of the wargear options have been stripped away, and their only abilities are dull, predictable aura bonuses with zero thought for how the army is supposed to function (e.g. Archons not being able to buff Kabalites even when they're riding in the same transport ).
But perhaps the best example of this would be PA: Phoenix Rising. Most other armies were treated to a wealth of new options and features for their army. As an example, Harlequins, while still having just 4 characters, were given options for each of them that they could take in place of their standard auras/abilities. This was a great idea and allowed said characters to perform significantly different roles. A Troupe Master could sacrifice his aura to instead wound on 2s or deal extra Mortal Wounds (turning him from buff character into a lone assassin). A Shadowseer had an aura that rewarded him (and the units he was buffing) for staying far away, and another that rewarded him for getting right in the enemy's face. All great stuff. And of course, this was in addition to extra relics, stratagems etc.
Then you've stuff like Chaos getting a host of new options for their chapters, you've got SMs getting stratagems to promote characters at the start of the game (I believe Orks got something similar as well).
So what did DE get? Custom faction traits, most of which were entirely worthless (oh good, melee abilities for the shooty subfaction), and all of which were inferior to the Marine ones (not least because, unlike for Marines, taking them locks you out of any Kabal-/Cult-/Coven-specific relics, warlord traits and stratagems). And that was it. That was the only new thing DE got in Phoenix Rising.
I think this is the sort of thing that really gets to people. I mean, is it really too much to ask that DE get the same level of effort as Harlequins?
Then you've stuff like Chaos getting a host of new options for their chapters, you've got SMs getting stratagems to promote characters at the start of the game (I believe Orks got something similar as well).
You know you're hurting when CSM are doing better! But yeah, I really feel for DE players in all of this. It's one of the most characterful armies we have, and has so much potential and it's just ... rotting. Really hoping they get a refresh on the scale of the Necrons in this edition!
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Plus why would you ever do a custom Kabal when Flayed Skull exists as is? Sure you don’t get Vect but that's already a 4CP Strat to begin with.
Yeah the custom kabals are a joke. The custom covens have the obvious crazy OP combo and the custom wyches have a combo that you'd at least CONSIDER vs some of the other wych cults.
So just a question...should we wait and see what every codex gets before we make any judgements? How long will that take? 2-3 years?
The game will always be like this as long as the rules come in piecemeal. You gotta believe at this point that it is intentional. It keeps models moving off the shelves at a steady rate...looks great for investors.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Plus why would you ever do a custom Kabal when Flayed Skull exists as is? Sure you don’t get Vect but that's already a 4CP Strat to begin with.
Yeah the custom kabals are a joke. The custom covens have the obvious crazy OP combo and the custom wyches have a combo that you'd at least CONSIDER vs some of the other wych cults.
I mean, all the Kabals are just worse than Flayed Skull because you get all the main benefits you want. You get better shooting, rerolls for a lot of the riding weapons, AND better movement as icing on the cake. For the games I proxied I'd never even take Black Heart for Vect. Flayed Skull was just THAT good especially with me wanting to do Raiders.
So just a question...should we wait and see what every codex gets before we make any judgements? How long will that take? 2-3 years?
That becomes the problem with "wait and see". Each group has to decide what it means to them. For my group, we've decided it's the first two codexes. If they come out good, we're willing to give benefit of the doubt moving forward, but even that's a potential trap - how many times have they released a codex only to shift the design philosophy on the next one. So it kind of becomes what you personally are willing to deal with ...
Xenomancers wrote: So just a question...should we wait and see what every codex gets before we make any judgements? How long will that take? 2-3 years?
The game will always be like this as long as the rules come in piecemeal. You gotta believe at this point that it is intentional. It keeps models moving off the shelves at a steady rate...looks great for investors.
Yes. Absolutely. And the gulf between factions that have codexes and don't have codexes is also very much on purpose. Common sense fixes are very much held off on on purpose in order for there to be a bit of excitement when a new codex drops, encouraging people who don't have that army to jump in, and those who do have that army to buy new stuff for it to take advantage of new rules.
The concept of "manufactured discontent" is very real. You are supposed to be dissatisfied with your army while you wait for a codex, and excited when a new codex drops for the possibilities unlocked by its rules.
Why do you think every single edition since 6th each new codex contained some new "gimmick" that was very loosely connected to fluff that GW used to make the new codexes stronger, that then caused the people to get them to tell others to 'just wait until you get your thing!' and accept the imbalanced games?
6th: flyers were dominant, new codexes contained your faction's flyer
7th: Formations/decurions were in codexes
8th: Subfaction bonuses, stratagems, traits were in codexes (and for a whole edition the playerbase was laughably OK with forcing their opponents to get aaaaaaaaabsolutely nothing in exchange for those free benefits!!!)
9th: "Army Purity Bonuses" AKA Doctrine-style rules will be in each codex.
There is a very good reason why marines were let out of the gate early with their crazy doctrines nobody had an answer to. It was SUPPOSED to make you pissed off. You're supposed to be excited when your codex eventually drops with your free third and fourth layers of free army-wide blanket rule bonuses so you can finally compete with marines. You're also supposed to be OK with playing those against your opponents because "hey, I've had to compete with marines using this stuff for a year plus now! you'll get yours soon! Look - it's balanced because you can have allies!"
Xenomancers wrote: So just a question...should we wait and see what every codex gets before we make any judgements? How long will that take? 2-3 years?
The game will always be like this as long as the rules come in piecemeal. You gotta believe at this point that it is intentional. It keeps models moving off the shelves at a steady rate...looks great for investors.
You should wait and see for each product until you see that product in full. You can judge the base rules now. You can judge Codex Space Marines when it comes out. The same for Codex Necrons.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Plus why would you ever do a custom Kabal when Flayed Skull exists as is? Sure you don’t get Vect but that's already a 4CP Strat to begin with.
Yeah the custom kabals are a joke. The custom covens have the obvious crazy OP combo and the custom wyches have a combo that you'd at least CONSIDER vs some of the other wych cults.
I mean, all the Kabals are just worse than Flayed Skull because you get all the main benefits you want. You get better shooting, rerolls for a lot of the riding weapons, AND better movement as icing on the cake. For the games I proxied I'd never even take Black Heart for Vect. Flayed Skull was just THAT good especially with me wanting to do Raiders.
Flayed Skull is very good, are what Kabal IMO should be, and it's what I played. That said, (for what it's worth) competitive players still erred toward Black Heart.
I don't think it was too much for Drukhari players to expect that PA would give them genuine alternative options. GW demostrated with Harlequins that they can write good rules if they want to, but with the Drukhari they seemingly could not be bothered.
I think I am starting to get the hobby thing. Today I talked to a guy who plays DA succesors. Rules wise, makes no sense. It is better to play regular DA, and he told me that he is waiting for new rules. Couldn't get it till I saw his army.
The whole thing was converted. no big marine shoulder pads, but Yamon era shoulder guards. All helmets sculpted by head, dedicted by unit to different animals. Back banners with hand painted art, no decals. His tanks were not tanks, but lizardman and self sculpted stuff all with Yamon, Mongolian and north Chinese esthetics. I was baffled and asked him how long he has been building his army. And he said 17 years. And with that and seeing his work, I think I start to understand why the wait and see thing maybe work for some people. Never knew w40k armies can look so beautiful.
Kithail wrote: There is something I am not entirely sure about. In which edition were the corsairs and the R&H codexes included?
"Renegades and Heretics" were printed in Codex: Eye of Terror by GW in 3rd edition, and received updated lists in Imperial Armour (Forge World) books in 5e, 6e, and 7e. Eldar Corsairs are a lore concept going back to the very beginning of the game but their army list as something distinct from Craftworlds/DE was printed in Imperial Armour in 5e and 7e.
Kithail wrote: There is something I am not entirely sure about. In which edition were the corsairs and the R&H codexes included?
"Renegades and Heretics" were printed in Codex: Eye of Terror by GW in 3rd edition, and received updated lists in Imperial Armour (Forge World) books in 5e, 6e, and 7e. Eldar Corsairs are a lore concept going back to the very beginning of the game but their army list as something distinct from Craftworlds/DE was printed in Imperial Armour in 5e and 7e.
Well the eye of terror was a campaign book. A campaign that ended. And indeed R&H there was more of a supplement to Imperial Guard than a codex on itself. The rest was also FW supplements of sorts. For me it is like complaining about BFG not being reedited anymore.
In short. R&H codex and Corsairs never had a codex, right?
Kithail wrote: There is something I am not entirely sure about. In which edition were the corsairs and the R&H codexes included?
"Renegades and Heretics" were printed in Codex: Eye of Terror by GW in 3rd edition, and received updated lists in Imperial Armour (Forge World) books in 5e, 6e, and 7e. Eldar Corsairs are a lore concept going back to the very beginning of the game but their army list as something distinct from Craftworlds/DE was printed in Imperial Armour in 5e and 7e.
Well the eye of terror was a campaign book. A campaign that ended. And indeed R&H there was more of a supplement to Imperial Guard than a codex on itself. The rest was also FW supplements of sorts. For me it is like complaining about BFG not being reedited anymore.
In short. R&H codex and Corsairs never had a codex, right?
Nothing not printed by Forge World, no. Though I don't think saying "well, your army was never a real army anyways" is going to calm down the people who bought, built, and painted R&H/Corsair armies and are pissed that their rules are no longer being updated.
Kithail wrote: There is something I am not entirely sure about. In which edition were the corsairs and the R&H codexes included?
"Renegades and Heretics" were printed in Codex: Eye of Terror by GW in 3rd edition, and received updated lists in Imperial Armour (Forge World) books in 5e, 6e, and 7e. Eldar Corsairs are a lore concept going back to the very beginning of the game but their army list as something distinct from Craftworlds/DE was printed in Imperial Armour in 5e and 7e.
Well the eye of terror was a campaign book. A campaign that ended. And indeed R&H there was more of a supplement to Imperial Guard than a codex on itself. The rest was also FW supplements of sorts. For me it is like complaining about BFG not being reedited anymore.
In short. R&H codex and Corsairs never had a codex, right?
Nothing not printed by Forge World, no. Though I don't think saying "well, your army was never a real army anyways" is going to calm down the people who bought, built, and painted R&H/Corsair armies and are pissed that their rules are no longer being updated.
No, it won't. And I'd like to point out that the rules for R&H in the "not a codex" IA 13 were far better written than any 7th, or 8th, edition codexes. The only codex I'd put on the same level is csm 3.5. In fact the two are both so well regarded that we recently had an entire thread devoted to them right here on dakka.
That's not the shtick for Tau though, and many of you have lost that plot.
What is the Tau design philosophy if not above average strength shooting (S5+)?
Literally the only ranged weapons in the Tau codex with a strength of less than 5 are flamers, AFP and kroot rifles.
So unless you are going to say that crisis suits equipped with Flamers and AFP alongside Kroot Mercenaries are the basis of the standard Tau army, I think you are talking a load of bollocks on this point.
Kithail wrote: There is something I am not entirely sure about. In which edition were the corsairs and the R&H codexes included?
"Renegades and Heretics" were printed in Codex: Eye of Terror by GW in 3rd edition, and received updated lists in Imperial Armour (Forge World) books in 5e, 6e, and 7e. Eldar Corsairs are a lore concept going back to the very beginning of the game but their army list as something distinct from Craftworlds/DE was printed in Imperial Armour in 5e and 7e.
The Eye of Terror army was called Lost and the Damned, thank you very much. It was also a very different beast from R&H in terms of list and playstyle options.
Kithail wrote: There is something I am not entirely sure about. In which edition were the corsairs and the R&H codexes included?
"Renegades and Heretics" were printed in Codex: Eye of Terror by GW in 3rd edition, and received updated lists in Imperial Armour (Forge World) books in 5e, 6e, and 7e. Eldar Corsairs are a lore concept going back to the very beginning of the game but their army list as something distinct from Craftworlds/DE was printed in Imperial Armour in 5e and 7e.
The Eye of Terror army was called Lost and the Damned, thank you very much. It was also a very different beast from R&H in terms of list and playstyle options.
Yeah, Lost And The Damned was a 3rd Ed supplement that was a nicely generic catch-all list. It could represent anything from a populist uprising, to a Chaos cult, to a zombie horde, to wasteland scavengers, to whatever else you could cook up. Renegades & Heretics, on the other hand, was a 4th Ed variant Imperial Guard list with minimal access to vehicles but a very heavy emphasis on emplaced defenses, artillery support, mines, and other trench warfare accoutrements.
I understand that the R&H list eventually came to be a catch-all like Lost and the Damned was, but it didn't start out that way.
I don't think anyone called index era ACTUALLY balanced. They called it "the most balanced". As close to balanced as it has been. Things were FAR better then they were in 7th and it went down hill after 8th codexes started coming out.
Lance845 wrote: I don't think anyone called index era ACTUALLY balanced. They called it "the most balanced". As close to balanced as it has been. Things were FAR better then they were in 7th and it went down hill after 8th codexes started coming out.
This is exactly what I mean.
The time where *everyone* was trying new things at the exact same time was amazing.
And yeah, it goes to show just how bland and uninteresting 8e rules were, and to almost the same extend 9e.
I really do wish they stepped away from stratagems and instead baked abilities into each unit's kit.
That's not the shtick for Tau though, and many of you have lost that plot.
What is the Tau design philosophy if not above average strength shooting (S5+)?
Literally the only ranged weapons in the Tau codex with a strength of less than 5 are flamers, AFP and kroot rifles.
So unless you are going to say that crisis suits equipped with Flamers and AFP alongside Kroot Mercenaries are the basis of the standard Tau army, I think you are talking a load of bollocks on this point.
Tau are only allowed to identify as gundams thank you very much
Honestly they need to stop doing this staggered release bs.
A new edition should come with a release of the full suite of new edition datasheets (index style) followed by the full suite of codexes. Followed by supplement books that give things to everyone, not 1 or 2 armies at a time.
Lance845 wrote: Honestly they need to stop doing this staggered release bs.
A new edition should come with a release of the full suite of new edition datasheets (index style) followed by the full suite of codexes. Followed by supplement books that give things to everyone, not 1 or 2 armies at a time.
Could you imagine if other competitive games released a patch to a single faction / hero / class and left them overpowered for a year? With every other patch never addressing the problem.
That be the death of the game competitively
Lance845 wrote: Honestly they need to stop doing this staggered release bs.
A new edition should come with a release of the full suite of new edition datasheets (index style) followed by the full suite of codexes. Followed by supplement books that give things to everyone, not 1 or 2 armies at a time.
Could you imagine if other competitive games released a patch to a single faction / hero / class and left them overpowered for a year? With every other patch never addressing the problem.
That be the death of the game competitively
I COULD imagine. But only because I have suffered under GW.
The "hobby" is like a frog slowly being boiled in water. Except it's been being boiled for like... over 40 years now. People are so used to being treated like crap that they actually thank GW for doing it. It's crazy.
Karol wrote: I think I am starting to get the hobby thing. Today I talked to a guy who plays DA succesors. Rules wise, makes no sense. It is better to play regular DA, and he told me that he is waiting for new rules. Couldn't get it till I saw his army.
The whole thing was converted. no big marine shoulder pads, but Yamon era shoulder guards. All helmets sculpted by head, dedicted by unit to different animals. Back banners with hand painted art, no decals. His tanks were not tanks, but lizardman and self sculpted stuff all with Yamon, Mongolian and north Chinese esthetics. I was baffled and asked him how long he has been building his army. And he said 17 years. And with that and seeing his work, I think I start to understand why the wait and see thing maybe work for some people. Never knew w40k armies can look so beautiful.
Good stuff! Some armies indeed become an expression for the player that transcends tabletop performance. A fully realized army,y that has personal touches and a semester of player loyalty is a thing of beauty.
Lance845 wrote: Honestly they need to stop doing this staggered release bs.
A new edition should come with a release of the full suite of new edition datasheets (index style) followed by the full suite of codexes. Followed by supplement books that give things to everyone, not 1 or 2 armies at a time.
Could you imagine if other competitive games released a patch to a single faction / hero / class and left them overpowered for a year? With every other patch never addressing the problem. That be the death of the game competitively
Thats what quick points adjustments in CA are for. You dont need a new whole codex to balance an army
Lance845 wrote: Honestly they need to stop doing this staggered release bs.
A new edition should come with a release of the full suite of new edition datasheets (index style) followed by the full suite of codexes. Followed by supplement books that give things to everyone, not 1 or 2 armies at a time.
Could you imagine if other competitive games released a patch to a single faction / hero / class and left them overpowered for a year? With every other patch never addressing the problem.
That be the death of the game competitively
Thats what quick points adjustments in CA are for. You dont need a new whole codex to balance an army
But you can Nerf.. I mean Balance an army in the CA 2020 and then balance them again invalidating those points when you release the codex.. How good is that! That's two balance patches for the price of two..
Lance845 wrote: Honestly they need to stop doing this staggered release bs.
A new edition should come with a release of the full suite of new edition datasheets (index style) followed by the full suite of codexes. Followed by supplement books that give things to everyone, not 1 or 2 armies at a time.
Could you imagine if other competitive games released a patch to a single faction / hero / class and left them overpowered for a year? With every other patch never addressing the problem.
That be the death of the game competitively
Thats what quick points adjustments in CA are for. You dont need a new whole codex to balance an army
There is a massive difference between a codex release and a CA point adjustment.
The point that was being made is all codexes should be released at the same time. No staggered releases. No waiting 2 or 3 years to get your new edition treatment.
Lance845 wrote: Honestly they need to stop doing this staggered release bs.
A new edition should come with a release of the full suite of new edition datasheets (index style) followed by the full suite of codexes. Followed by supplement books that give things to everyone, not 1 or 2 armies at a time.
Could you imagine if other competitive games released a patch to a single faction / hero / class and left them overpowered for a year? With every other patch never addressing the problem. That be the death of the game competitively
Thats what quick points adjustments in CA are for. You dont need a new whole codex to balance an army
There is a massive difference between a codex release and a CA point adjustment.
The point that was being made is all codexes should be released at the same time. No staggered releases. No waiting 2 or 3 years to get your new edition treatment.
And I agree with that. I was just saying that if one of the codexs is stupidly broken, you dont need to wait years for the next big round of codexs to fix it, it can be done via CA
Lance845 wrote: Honestly they need to stop doing this staggered release bs.
A new edition should come with a release of the full suite of new edition datasheets (index style) followed by the full suite of codexes. Followed by supplement books that give things to everyone, not 1 or 2 armies at a time.
Could you imagine if other competitive games released a patch to a single faction / hero / class and left them overpowered for a year? With every other patch never addressing the problem. That be the death of the game competitively
Thats what quick points adjustments in CA are for. You dont need a new whole codex to balance an army
There is a massive difference between a codex release and a CA point adjustment.
The point that was being made is all codexes should be released at the same time. No staggered releases. No waiting 2 or 3 years to get your new edition treatment.
And I agree with that. I was just saying that if one of the codexs is stupidly broken, you dont need to wait years for the next big round of codexs to fix it, it can be done via CA
Maybe?
Look at what space marines had at the end of 8th. Super doctrines and build your own chapter tactics. Compare that to Tau. No amount of CA was going to balance those armies. It's going to take the 2-3 year wait for codexes to fix that.
Sorry, let me correct that. It's going to take 2-3 years for a codex release to leave it broken in a different way.
Lance845 wrote: The point that was being made is all codexes should be released at the same time. No staggered releases. No waiting 2 or 3 years to get your new edition treatment.
I certainly agree that while GW has become better at releasing codices at a somewhat faster rate, the idea that a faction has to wait in area of 24 months isn't particularity good. Doubly so when edition turn around is looking to be about 3 years. I mean 2/3 of the edition is already gone by for some factions to be in basically a crippled state. I really think GW should attempt to get all codices out within a year with a large chunk of them released within the first 6 months of dropping an edition as a rule-of-thumb. If GW can't really accomplish that, maybe they don't need to push out the latest edition.
Do I think GW will ever accomplish that? No, I don't really think they will. There really isn't anything for them to gain doing so for the extra effort or pressure to try and meet that deadline. The best I can to as a player is try to figure out a comp if I am one of the haves, or if I am one the have-nots do as best as I can under the situation. Part of the reason I think my Primaris are so scary is I started playing them before C:SM 2.0 so when I got those rules they acted as particularity powerful force multiplier to what had been kinda struggling army list. Now with really good rules and me previously struggling with them as led me to playing space marines above my usual level.
Lance845 wrote: The point that was being made is all codexes should be released at the same time. No staggered releases. No waiting 2 or 3 years to get your new edition treatment.
I certainly agree that while GW has become better at releasing codices at a somewhat faster rate, the idea that a faction has to wait in area of 24 months isn't particularity good. Doubly so when edition turn around is looking to be about 3 years. I mean 2/3 of the edition is already gone by for some factions to be in basically a crippled state. I really think GW should attempt to get all codices out within a year with a large chunk of them released within the first 6 months of dropping an edition as a rule-of-thumb. If GW can't really accomplish that, maybe they don't need to push out the latest edition.
Do I think GW will ever accomplish that? No, I don't really think they will. There really isn't anything for them to gain doing so for the extra effort or pressure to try and meet that deadline. The best I can to as a player is try to figure out a comp if I am one of the haves, or if I am one the have-nots do as best as I can under the situation. Part of the reason I think my Primaris are so scary is I started playing them before C:SM 2.0 so when I got those rules they acted as particularity powerful force multiplier to what had been kinda struggling army list. Now with really good rules and me previously struggling with them as led me to playing space marines above my usual level.
No. The best you can do is stop paying GW for treating the player base like this.
When X-Wing releases a new wave of ships they release a set of ships for every faction. When they introduce a new kind of ship they release a new kind for ship for every faction. When they updated to version 2.0 of the rules they released a update to every ship released all at the same time.
When Descent: Journeys in the Dark released a 2nd edition not only did it come with new characters and monsters they put out a upgrade box that gave all the new edition rules for all the 1rst edition content.
If every other god damn company can release their product in waves that support the entire player base then why the hell is anyone happy about GW stringing their players along for literal YEARS? Codex Creep exists because their design goals change by the time they get half way through the codexes and then change again by the time they get to the end. If they just released all the codexes at once then when they decided they wanted to change things later they can release a set of supplement... ALL AT ONCE... that updates everyone to the new design paradigm.
Lance845 wrote: The point that was being made is all codexes should be released at the same time. No staggered releases. No waiting 2 or 3 years to get your new edition treatment.
I certainly agree that while GW has become better at releasing codices at a somewhat faster rate, the idea that a faction has to wait in area of 24 months isn't particularity good. Doubly so when edition turn around is looking to be about 3 years. I mean 2/3 of the edition is already gone by for some factions to be in basically a crippled state. I really think GW should attempt to get all codices out within a year with a large chunk of them released within the first 6 months of dropping an edition as a rule-of-thumb. If GW can't really accomplish that, maybe they don't need to push out the latest edition.
Do I think GW will ever accomplish that? No, I don't really think they will. There really isn't anything for them to gain doing so for the extra effort or pressure to try and meet that deadline. The best I can to as a player is try to figure out a comp if I am one of the haves, or if I am one the have-nots do as best as I can under the situation. Part of the reason I think my Primaris are so scary is I started playing them before C:SM 2.0 so when I got those rules they acted as particularity powerful force multiplier to what had been kinda struggling army list. Now with really good rules and me previously struggling with them as led me to playing space marines above my usual level.
No. The best you can do is stop paying GW for treating the player base like this.
When X-Wing releases a new wave of ships they release a set of ships for every faction. When they introduce a new kind of ship they release a new kind for ship for every faction. When they updated to version 2.0 of the rules they released a update to every ship released all at the same time.
When Descent: Journeys in the Dark released a 2nd edition not only did it come with new characters and monsters they put out a upgrade box that gave all the new edition rules for all the 1rst edition content.
If every other god damn company can release their product in waves that support the entire player base then why the hell is anyone happy about GW stringing their players along for literal YEARS? Codex Creep exists because their design goals change by the time they get half way through the codexes and then change again by the time they get to the end. If they just released all the codexes at once then when they decided they wanted to change things later they can release a set of supplement... ALL AT ONCE... that updates everyone to the new design paradigm.
then go play X-wing.
seriously, if you think you've "suffered under GW" then I dunno... stop giving them money?
I don't give them money. I buy second hand, 3d print, or other sources any models I want and rules are easy to find. When I play I mostly play Apoc or home brew. Both are better games. GW hasn't made a single red cent off me in roughly 2 years.
Look at what space marines had at the end of 8th. Super doctrines and build your own chapter tactics. Compare that to Tau. No amount of CA was going to balance those armies. It's going to take the 2-3 year wait for codexes to fix that.
Sorry, let me correct that. It's going to take 2-3 years for a codex release to leave it broken in a different way.
"Due to balance changes, Specialist detachments Doctrines are no longer tournament legal."
EDIT: Wouldn't solve everything, to be clear, but it's the kind of sweeping change you can clearly make in a rules update without a full codex.
FAQs have many times brought into the game huge balance changes.
Examples:
Rule of 3 Boots on the ground Tactical reserves (twice) Anti soup Look out Sir changes Detachment CP redesign Smite limit CP reroll nerf Prepared positions Fly charge changes Shock assault Bolter Discipline SM doctrine Nerf
And the list isn't considering all the faction specific buffs and nerfs.
If there is one thing that 8th edition didn't lack was rule maintenance. We got so many balance patches that we had multiple threads complaining about the excessive frequency of them.
Well then, there you go. Point being it doesn't need to wait for the full codex.
I suppose there's not much point in doing this to the Marine codex given the rewrite that's happening in a few weeks, but yeah, major stuff does happen outside codexiae.
Doesn't change the fact, that the community will regard it , in general, as negligence of anything but the cashcow, whilest the cahscow get's milked to death.
in the long term, their "tuesday" decision will hurt them.
And for the others, the finecrap units left and those units which just needed and deserved a more pressing update getting ignored time and time again, has an impact on their sales figures.
Buddy, the community at large does not give a single gak that R&H are squatted, lol.
"Due to balance changes, Specialist detachments Doctrines are no longer tournament legal."
EDIT: Wouldn't solve everything, to be clear, but it's the kind of sweeping change you can clearly make in a rules update without a full codex.
If somehow that got passed it would be so funny for 2-3 days, because our doctrine rules aren't called doctrine rules, so we would keep them, and GW often forget about clone rules GK have. Like our interceptors having sudo fly working like the old fly, after GW changed how fly works for a long time.
Doesn't change the fact, that the community will regard it , in general, as negligence of anything but the cashcow, whilest the cahscow get's milked to death.
in the long term, their "tuesday" decision will hurt them.
And for the others, the finecrap units left and those units which just needed and deserved a more pressing update getting ignored time and time again, has an impact on their sales figures.
Buddy, the community at large does not give a single gak that R&H are squatted, lol.
I would also point to a thread either here or elsewhere about people who had played Nids/eldar heck even choas since 2nd/3rd/4th&5th edition saying they have either started Marines or started playing the choas as loyalists becuase the rules inbalance is too great for the game to be an enjoyable experience.
Neglecting everything that's not got the damn Primaracrap keyword is killing the lore=game Experiance and 40k is not a good enough game to live on it's game play alone.
So when you loose all the as marine players call them NPC factions the game system will be a shadow of it's self.
It could be what it is always suppose to have been Horus Heresy that never ended, with wierdos playing non marine factions, and historical players doing an IG army.
Doesn't change the fact, that the community will regard it , in general, as negligence of anything but the cashcow, whilest the cahscow get's milked to death.
in the long term, their "tuesday" decision will hurt them.
And for the others, the finecrap units left and those units which just needed and deserved a more pressing update getting ignored time and time again, has an impact on their sales figures.
Buddy, the community at large does not give a single gak that R&H are squatted, lol.
I would also point to a thread either here or elsewhere about people who had played Nids/eldar heck even choas since 2nd/3rd/4th&5th edition saying they have either started Marines or started playing the choas as loyalists becuase the rules inbalance is too great for the game to be an enjoyable experience.
Neglecting everything that's not got the damn Primaracrap keyword is killing the lore=game Experiance and 40k is not a good enough game to live on it's game play alone.
So when you loose all the as marine players call them NPC factions the game system will be a shadow of it's self.
Marine players aren't the ones calling everyone else NPC factions. it's mostly the people who like those factions using that term. If you think that Marine players are dismissive of other factions and want them squatted you're clueless.
Now Marine players have noted the economics of why Marine releases happen so often, but they're not being dismissive they're just pointing out the realistic facts
Doesn't change the fact, that the community will regard it , in general, as negligence of anything but the cashcow, whilest the cahscow get's milked to death.
in the long term, their "tuesday" decision will hurt them.
And for the others, the finecrap units left and those units which just needed and deserved a more pressing update getting ignored time and time again, has an impact on their sales figures.
Buddy, the community at large does not give a single gak that R&H are squatted, lol.
I would also point to a thread either here or elsewhere about people who had played Nids/eldar heck even choas since 2nd/3rd/4th&5th edition saying they have either started Marines or started playing the choas as loyalists becuase the rules inbalance is too great for the game to be an enjoyable experience.
Neglecting everything that's not got the damn Primaracrap keyword is killing the lore=game Experiance and 40k is not a good enough game to live on it's game play alone.
So when you loose all the as marine players call them NPC factions the game system will be a shadow of it's self.
Marine players aren't the ones calling everyone else NPC factions. it's mostly the people who like those factions using that term. If you think that Marine players are dismissive of other factions and want them squatted you're clueless.
Now Marine players have noted the economics of why Marine releases happen so often, but they're not being dismissive they're just pointing out the realistic facts
It's happend in multiple threads, but at this point I am not wasting the energy on what was NOT the main point, if GW doesnt release something else that doesnt get it's once in a generation faction release hijacked my Primaracrap, they might have great short term profits but they will have no long term sustainability of profit.
Sadly it seems to be a middle managment culture that came about under the last nugget that hasn't been corrected or the quilty parties ejected from their positions.
Aren't marines the best seller for GW for multiple editions though, because it seems like focusing on marines and more marines models, and marine buyers works just fine for the company.
Karol wrote: Aren't marines the best seller for GW for multiple editions though, because it seems like focusing on marines and more marines models, and marine buyers works just fine for the company.
Actually their financial results were in the toilet under the previous CEO untill he was replaced GW was looking likt it was going to be bought up by another conpany as he'd trashed the value of the company.
Heck the company was only viable due to non main studio projects not the mention the money wasted on idiotic situations like AOS doesnt need points, decurions locked behind paywalls etc.
Doesn't change the fact, that the community will regard it , in general, as negligence of anything but the cashcow, whilest the cahscow get's milked to death.
in the long term, their "tuesday" decision will hurt them.
And for the others, the finecrap units left and those units which just needed and deserved a more pressing update getting ignored time and time again, has an impact on their sales figures.
Buddy, the community at large does not give a single gak that R&H are squatted, lol.
i like how you completely disregard the bigger conclusion of the argument and like others only partially quote what was stated, well done. How about you come back when your reading comprehension has improved to an adequate level, but here is one exemple of the effect i am attempting to describe:
I can , i did , and i made a propper argument, a better case study is SoB.
It's the same principle with the only difference beeing the internal politicking made it possible to eliminate FW factions, whilest "unpopular" GW factions just stagnate into , nigh, nothingness.
Both situations lead however to lower player populations of these factions.
How many people played SoB, before the update? Alot less.
How many want to start eldar? not alot, infact it is according to my shop over here one of the factions that nigh never get's picked up for a faction.
It's the same effect that then by GW's beancounters leads to further marginalisation.
Jidmah wrote: My favorite Kirby move in 7th was selling a model which required you to pay another $10 for a single-page epub to get its rules.
That's still arguably not as bad as Forgeworld, where if I buy a Drukhari Reaper from them, I have to buy a book (99% of the datasheets of which are useless to me) to get it's rules.
"Due to balance changes, Specialist detachments Doctrines are no longer tournament legal."
EDIT: Wouldn't solve everything, to be clear, but it's the kind of sweeping change you can clearly make in a rules update without a full codex.
If somehow that got passed it would be so funny for 2-3 days, because our doctrine rules aren't called doctrine rules, so we would keep them, and GW often forget about clone rules GK have. Like our interceptors having sudo fly working like the old fly, after GW changed how fly works for a long time.
I'd actually giggle to see them do that explicitly as a troll to start rules arguments that'd last, like, a week before the codex drops and introduces a whole new set of rules arguments.
Karol wrote: Aren't marines the best seller for GW for multiple editions though, because it seems like focusing on marines and more marines models, and marine buyers works just fine for the company.
Actually their financial results were in the toilet under the previous CEO untill he was replaced GW was looking likt it was going to be bought up by another conpany as he'd trashed the value of the company.
Heck the company was only viable due to non main studio projects not the mention the money wasted on idiotic situations like AOS doesnt need points, decurions locked behind paywalls etc.
Could be, but from what I have been told GW best seller has always been marines. If your company is doing bad, you are willing to try out something crazy with stuff that is generating loses anyway, you ain't going to risk the thing that brings in the majority of the money.
And GW doesn't seem to have stoped puting rules behind paywalls. Making an sm codex for all marine subfaction, only to follow it with a codex BA, SW and DW is just that.
"Due to balance changes, Specialist detachments Doctrines are no longer tournament legal."
EDIT: Wouldn't solve everything, to be clear, but it's the kind of sweeping change you can clearly make in a rules update without a full codex.
If somehow that got passed it would be so funny for 2-3 days, because our doctrine rules aren't called doctrine rules, so we would keep them, and GW often forget about clone rules GK have. Like our interceptors having sudo fly working like the old fly, after GW changed how fly works for a long time.
I'd actually giggle to see them do that explicitly as a troll to start rules arguments that'd last, like, a week before the codex drops and introduces a whole new set of rules arguments.
Trolling does assume an intention. I somehow doubt GW's capability to do so successfully considering the , i guess "lackluster", skills involved in GW technical writing.
Karol wrote: Aren't marines the best seller for GW for multiple editions though, because it seems like focusing on marines and more marines models, and marine buyers works just fine for the company.
Actually their financial results were in the toilet under the previous CEO untill he was replaced GW was looking likt it was going to be bought up by another conpany as he'd trashed the value of the company.
Heck the company was only viable due to non main studio projects not the mention the money wasted on idiotic situations like AOS doesnt need points, decurions locked behind paywalls etc.
Could be, but from what I have been told GW best seller has always been marines. If your company is doing bad, you are willing to try out something crazy with stuff that is generating loses anyway, you ain't going to risk the thing that brings in the majority of the money.
And GW doesn't seem to have stoped puting rules behind paywalls. Making an sm codex for all marine subfaction, only to follow it with a codex BA, SW and DW is just that.
Artificial paywalls, through frustration, are bad for consumers.
That GW still insists and now facilitates further paywalling, by making the special former codex owners now beeing forced to buy a Dex SM and a Supplement is , milking or whale hunting.
Especially considering how easy it would be to just throw their lists / restrictions and full rules in the same book. Basically a part of the former SM population get's now double monetized and experience the "nice side" of frustration marketing.
it's something done quite often in the gameing industry, especially in mobile gaming and F2P games.
Well technicaly there is one, unless someone takes something that should be single content, and cuts it up to sell it to people twice.
Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Or the stuff that was done to csm rules in 8th.
I am sure pre 8th ed, GW did the same thing, because it didn't seem like people playing longer were suprised by it.
Making a rule book and CA, and making people buy both, if they want to play the game normaly, is again the same. cutting something which should have been in a single book just to sell two books.
Jidmah wrote: My favorite Kirby move in 7th was selling a model which required you to pay another $10 for a single-page epub to get its rules.
That's still arguably not as bad as Forgeworld, where if I buy a Drukhari Reaper from them, I have to buy a book (99% of the datasheets of which are useless to me) to get it's rules.
BUt ForGEwORld Is tHe SaMe aS Gw!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: Well technicaly there is one, unless someone takes something that should be single content, and cuts it up to sell it to people twice.
Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Or the stuff that was done to csm rules in 8th.
I am sure pre 8th ed, GW did the same thing, because it didn't seem like people playing longer were suprised by it.
Making a rule book and CA, and making people buy both, if they want to play the game normaly, is again the same. cutting something which should have been in a single book just to sell two books.
While agree that GW is doing this cutting thing, I disagree with your examples.
We all saw the repercussions of having one and the same marine units printed in five different books. Every new units needs a pile of FAQs to introduce, hundred of pages worth of PA were worthless to everyone involved and GW kept forgetting to update rules for one or the other marine army causing confusion and head-aches. Having one book with general use units and one book with the units and rules specific to your chapter is the best option as they are clearly not going to do away with books.
There also is no need to buy both the rulebook and CA, if you buy CA you have everything you need for matched play. If you want to play crusade or open play, you don't need CA.
Spreading legions and chaos warbands across two books? Yeah, that one was indeed selling a car without a gas tank.
Jidmah wrote: My favorite Kirby move in 7th was selling a model which required you to pay another $10 for a single-page epub to get its rules.
That's still arguably not as bad as Forgeworld, where if I buy a Drukhari Reaper from them, I have to buy a book (99% of the datasheets of which are useless to me) to get it's rules.
BUt ForGEwORld Is tHe SaMe aS Gw!
by company data it is, it is infact not even a subsidiary but rather an internal division, unlike black library
Lance845 wrote: Honestly they need to stop doing this staggered release bs.
A new edition should come with a release of the full suite of new edition datasheets (index style) followed by the full suite of codexes. Followed by supplement books that give things to everyone, not 1 or 2 armies at a time.
Could you imagine if other competitive games released a patch to a single faction / hero / class and left them overpowered for a year? With every other patch never addressing the problem.
That be the death of the game competitively
Netrunner started to do this around when I left.
Yeah, it sucked absolute donkey farts after the first few waves being balanced. Suddenly having there be 2x as many green cards as any other faction for months killed any semblance of balance.
Yes but as long as people keep shoveling money to GW and giving them record profits they have no reason to change since it shows people are okay with it. We had our chance to really change how they operate and people fell for their smoke and mirrors bullgak hook, line, and sinker with 8th edition. So what did we get? More of the same but they are slightly more transparent and more open so everyone forgave them.
Wayniac wrote: Yes but as long as people keep shoveling money to GW and giving them record profits they have no reason to change since it shows people are okay with it. We had our chance to really change how they operate and people fell for their smoke and mirrors bullgak hook, line, and sinker with 8th edition. So what did we get? More of the same but they are slightly more transparent and more open so everyone forgave them.
Perhaps lots of people actually get good value for the money and time they spend on 40K? I stopped playing when I stopped having fun around 2014. I came back and stayed in 2017. I will leave if I stop finding it worthwhile.
Not Online!!! wrote: Artificial paywalls, through frustration, are bad for consumers.
That GW still insists and now facilitates further paywalling, by making the special former codex owners now beeing forced to buy a Dex SM and a Supplement is , milking or whale hunting.
Especially considering how easy it would be to just throw their lists / restrictions and full rules in the same book. Basically a part of the former SM population get's now double monetized and experience the "nice side" of frustration marketing.
it's something done quite often in the gameing industry, especially in mobile gaming and F2P games.
Feels to me like it is a matter of one's perspective and the requested price for something.
Three examples:
- Just as some Marine players (myself included) will have to pay for the BA supplement, others won't have to pay for a potentially higher priced base codex, if all supplements would be included in it.
- Players of some more neglected factions might be happy if GW announced for example a separate Night Lords supplement.
- Being able to pay only for the rules I want could be more customer friendly than only selling packages.
And at the end all examples stand or fall with the price, which is a subjective thing for everybody's own wallet. In a dream world where the supplement would cost 1€, nobody would care about the additional paywall.
I don't have the same "pressure to spend money feeling" about supplements as say in the mobile version of Dungeon Keeper or other games, where you have to wait for ressources to come back.
Not Online!!! wrote: Artificial paywalls, through frustration, are bad for consumers.
That GW still insists and now facilitates further paywalling, by making the special former codex owners now beeing forced to buy a Dex SM and a Supplement is , milking or whale hunting.
Especially considering how easy it would be to just throw their lists / restrictions and full rules in the same book. Basically a part of the former SM population get's now double monetized and experience the "nice side" of frustration marketing.
it's something done quite often in the gameing industry, especially in mobile gaming and F2P games.
Feels to me like it is a matter of one's perspective and the requested price for something.
Two examples:
- Just as some Marine players (myself included) will have to pay for the BA supplement, others won't have to pay for a potentially higher priced base codex, if all supplements would be included in it.
- Players of some more neglected factions might be happy if GW announced a separate Night Lords supplement.
- Being able to pay only for the rules I want could be more customer friendly than only selling packages.
And at the end all examples stand or fall with the price, which is a subjective thing for everybody's own wallet. In a dream world where the supplement would cost 1€, nobody would care about the additional paywall.
I don't have the same "pressure to spend money feeling" about supplements as say in the mobile version of Dungeon Keeper or other games, where you have to wait for ressources to come back.
TBF: Dungeon keeper is probably the worst exemple and offender of such a strategy.
That doesn't change the dual monetisation of the rules though.
And the prices and i'd say quality aswell, will absolutely decide if the playerbase is happy that i agree on.
Marine players aren't the ones calling everyone else NPC factions. it's mostly the people who like those factions using that term. If you think that Marine players are dismissive of other factions and want them squatted you're clueless.
Now Marine players have noted the economics of why Marine releases happen so often, but they're not being dismissive they're just pointing out the realistic facts
I haven't seen a marine player say that either, but have seen MANY behave in a remarkably dismissive manner here. You yourself are fairly quick to dismiss/deny/deflect any criticism at all in fact.
Could be, but from what I have been told GW best seller has always been marines.
IDK if it's true, but at one point near the end of Warhammer Fantasy, it was said that marines as a faction were outselling Warhammer Fantasy models in total - people were (supposedly) buying more space marine models than they were models from all the Warhammer Fantasy factions combined. I used to be one of the first ones to say "Yeah, they get more releases but they sell more so fair play". The problem is, those releases never previously happened at the expense of other lines, and they weren't near constant releases either. That's where non-marine players are getting tripped up. I do think some of the criticism has gone a bit far, but then, when you consider armies like Dark Eldar ... it should be easy for even the most ardent GW supporter to feel for those players.
My hope is that Corona just royally screwed up their plans, none of this has gone as they intended, and maybe, once they get through the first 4-5 releases (all but one of which will be marines) of 9th, we will go some time seeing only other factions getting the attention they need.
Releases mean sales. Nobody is buying tyranids this quarter. Or last quarter. Or the quarter before that, because nids haven't seen anything new to make anyone interested in playing them want to buy anything new.
Who thinks lictors, the red terror, death leaper, biovores, or hive tyrants have been major sellers for GW in the last calendar year? Lictors and Deathleaper are crap fine cast.with great 3rd party models or kit bashes available. Biovores are the same. The red terror is fething metal. And everyone already owns more hive tyrants then they need.
Releases equal sales. If GW doesn't do releases then factions don't get sales.
Lance845 wrote: Releases mean sales. Nobody is buying tyranids this quarter. Or last quarter. Or the quarter before that, because nids haven't seen anything new to make anyone interested in playing them want to buy anything new.
Who thinks lictors, the red terror, death leaper, biovores, or hive tyrants have been major sellers for GW in the last calendar year? Lictors and Deathleaper are crap fine cast.with great 3rd party models or kit bashes available. Biovores are the same. The red terror is fething metal. And everyone already owns more hive tyrants then they need.
Releases equal sales. If GW doesn't do releases then factions don't get sales.
TBF it was never really the Sculpts or modells for Tyranids that put me off, it was allways rules.
GSC was a combination of rules and the Pricetag associated with a mass faction + the new GW prices.
I rekon, that models are a great initial driver, that rules however are relevant for the retention of a playerpopulation of a given faction.
Lance845 wrote: Releases mean sales. Nobody is buying tyranids this quarter. Or last quarter. Or the quarter before that, because nids haven't seen anything new to make anyone interested in playing them want to buy anything new.
Who thinks lictors, the red terror, death leaper, biovores, or hive tyrants have been major sellers for GW in the last calendar year? Lictors and Deathleaper are crap fine cast.with great 3rd party models or kit bashes available. Biovores are the same. The red terror is fething metal. And everyone already owns more hive tyrants then they need.
Releases equal sales. If GW doesn't do releases then factions don't get sales.
TBF it was never really the Sculpts or modells for Tyranids that put me off, it was allways rules. GSC was a combination of rules and the Pricetag associated with a mass faction + the new GW prices.
I rekon, that models are a great initial driver, that rules however are relevant for the retention of a playerpopulation of a given faction.
Agreed. And the last 2 Tyranid rules releases was their codex in nov 2017 and their PA book Dec last year which had some decent ideas and even a good one or 2 but was over all underwhelming when stacked next to the 2 SM codex releases in a year + supplements that has been non stop improvements.
Releases and sales don't just mean models. It also means rules. And most factions don't get either. So what happens to their sales?
Lance845 wrote: Releases mean sales. Nobody is buying tyranids this quarter. Or last quarter. Or the quarter before that, because nids haven't seen anything new to make anyone interested in playing them want to buy anything new.
Who thinks lictors, the red terror, death leaper, biovores, or hive tyrants have been major sellers for GW in the last calendar year? Lictors and Deathleaper are crap fine cast.with great 3rd party models or kit bashes available. Biovores are the same. The red terror is fething metal. And everyone already owns more hive tyrants then they need.
Releases equal sales. If GW doesn't do releases then factions don't get sales.
And GW logic means those factions aren't selling so they don't need time spent on releases...
Lance845 wrote: Releases mean sales. Nobody is buying tyranids this quarter. Or last quarter. Or the quarter before that, because nids haven't seen anything new to make anyone interested in playing them want to buy anything new.
Who thinks lictors, the red terror, death leaper, biovores, or hive tyrants have been major sellers for GW in the last calendar year? Lictors and Deathleaper are crap fine cast.with great 3rd party models or kit bashes available. Biovores are the same. The red terror is fething metal. And everyone already owns more hive tyrants then they need.
Releases equal sales. If GW doesn't do releases then factions don't get sales.
And GW logic means those factions aren't selling so they don't need time spent on releases...
It's what happens when you have beancounters count beans, but are too lazy or ignorant to understand why the blue pile is smaller and get's smaller every year, even if regarded proportionally to the invested ressources the ammount should've increased relatively...
Jidmah wrote: My favorite Kirby move in 7th was selling a model which required you to pay another $10 for a single-page epub to get its rules.
That's still arguably not as bad as Forgeworld, where if I buy a Drukhari Reaper from them, I have to buy a book (99% of the datasheets of which are useless to me) to get it's rules.
Irony being FW do give away free downloads when they can get away with it, it's GW managment who told them to stop doing that.
Some of the internal politicing roumers I have heard about the devissions in GW make it sound more like kinder garden and less like a business.
Marine players aren't the ones calling everyone else NPC factions. it's mostly the people who like those factions using that term. If you think that Marine players are dismissive of other factions and want them squatted you're clueless.
Now Marine players have noted the economics of why Marine releases happen so often, but they're not being dismissive they're just pointing out the realistic facts
I haven't seen a marine player say that either, but have seen MANY behave in a remarkably dismissive manner here. You yourself are fairly quick to dismiss/deny/deflect any criticism at all in fact.
Could be, but from what I have been told GW best seller has always been marines.
Marine players may not be calling other factions "NPC factions" but the reason that term gets thrown around is because of the consistently obnoxious and predictable reaction to anybody getting anything that has any kind of advantage over the marine equivalent.
marine players love to pour out of the woodwork and moan about any faction getting anything good. Take the Kelermorph for example:
This is a game piece that is going to be a suicide assassin, designed to take out enemy character models. For a suicide assassin to be anything but a complete waste of points, it needs to have a fairly reasonable chance to remove its target from the board in a single round of shooting, and usually, a functional suicide unit returns about 40-50% of its points value in a bad situation, and 100-110% of its points in a good situation, because it's taken as a given that it can be removed fairly points-efficiently by an opponent the following turn.
OK, so what's the average, basic HQ character in 40k look like? I'd say it's got either a 5++ or a 4++, around W5, T3-T4, and it's about 90-100pts. So a good suicide assassin is able to deal about that much damage with average to decent rolling, and has a price point of 75-90pts.
This is why the Callidus assassin with A5 S4 Ap-3 D2+~1 mortal wound is generally considered a not super useful suicide assassin, while the eversor with A8 S5 reroll wounds AP-1 D1+4 S4 reroll wounds AP-1 D1 is considered pretty good. On average rolls he deals about 4.5 damage to a target with a 4++, while she deals only about 4. Exactly the same as the Kelermorph. The extra defenses and the explosion special rule and the alternate ability to rip up a unit of light infantry instead are what accounts for the slight points increase on the Eversor.
But nobody begrudges the Eversor being able to do what he does, even though he's not a space marine. But suddenly it's an affront to all the universe if the Kelermorph can pop in and merk a basic marine captain with no additional defenses with very slightly above-average rolling on the drop. He's soooooo suspension of disbelief shattering, it's soooo stupid that this dumb hobo with a pistol can take down space marines so easily, he has to be hotfix nerfed to the level of completely nonfunctional non-marine assassins like lictors who stand absolutely no chance of accomplishing the goal of taking something down the turn it arrives.
part of the reasoning given why marines always need to be better than everyone else is, at least implied to be, that pretty much all factions should be worse than marines. That's why it's A-OK that necron immortals can be W1 and marines can be W2 universally despite "unstoppable durability" being the necrons' shtick. *shrug* well they're not a marine, sooo.....
nearly every faction has some form of ~100-110pt walker/monster with vehicle toughness+save, low movement, no degradation profile and a mix of shooting and melee weaponry. Carnifexes, Deff Dreads, Wraithlords, Talos Pain Engines, Dreadnoughts/Helbrutes.
So, how are they differentiated? Is the Wraithlord the fastest, the Carnifex and the Talos the toughest, the Helbrute and Deff Dread like a bezerk one, and the Dreadnought the shootiest?
Nope, Dreadnoughts/Helbrutes have the best shooting weapons, the best damage in melee, equivalent durability, and are tied for the fastest.
Ice_can wrote: Some of the internal politicing roumers I have heard about the devissions in GW make it sound more like kinder garden and less like a business.
Ice_can wrote: Some of the internal politicing roumers I have heard about the devissions in GW make it sound more like kinder garden and less like a business.
I think that's how all large companies operate
I think the successfully ones are just well less kindergarten and more 3rd Grade and everything in between
nearly every faction has some form of ~100-110pt walker/monster with vehicle toughness+save, low movement, no degradation profile and a mix of shooting and melee weaponry. Carnifexes, Deff Dreads, Wraithlords, Talos Pain Engines, Dreadnoughts/Helbrutes.
So, how are they differentiated? Is the Wraithlord the fastest, the Carnifex and the Talos the toughest, the Helbrute and Deff Dread like a bezerk one, and the Dreadnought the shootiest?
Nope, Dreadnoughts/Helbrutes have the best shooting weapons, the best damage in melee, equivalent durability, and are tied for the fastest.
???
Wraithlords are T8 though? And they don't sacrifice punching with more weapons. They do degrade though, because W10 instead of W8.
Helbrutes at least have the go crazy option.
Fexes have battering ram, can come in 3s, and a number of upgrades available.
Deff Dreads have a good bit of flex in quantity of attacks/weapons (yes, I now Ork BS) along with reroll charges.
Talos have a 5++ (Orks can easily, too) plus the other DE stacking.
Of all the dreadnought class models Space Marines are the most bland and are limited in their off hand to the ML. The Ironclad is slightly more interesting.
Jidmah wrote: My favorite Kirby move in 7th was selling a model which required you to pay another $10 for a single-page epub to get its rules.
Which model was that? That would have been from a period when I was only paying rudimentary attention to GWs releases.
There were a bunch. There was a "helbrute formation" where you took 3 of them or w/e and they gained some special rules. It was GW trying to give other armies similar benefits, but through a very ridiculous avenue.
Jidmah wrote: My favorite Kirby move in 7th was selling a model which required you to pay another $10 for a single-page epub to get its rules.
Which model was that? That would have been from a period when I was only paying rudimentary attention to GWs releases.
I know there were multiple, but I'm very sure that Be'lakor was one of them. You were unable to play the model unless you bought his dataslate from Black Library.
I, for one, am really excited for the wait. I'm buying less (models with not many weaponry possibilities to not mess up) and thinking that the next Codex will improve us, for sure.
The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
Wayniac wrote: Yes but as long as people keep shoveling money to GW and giving them record profits they have no reason to change since it shows people are okay with it. We had our chance to really change how they operate and people fell for their smoke and mirrors bullgak hook, line, and sinker with 8th edition. So what did we get? More of the same but they are slightly more transparent and more open so everyone forgave them.
{shrugs indifferently} Nearly every dime they receive from me is for models. As long as they keep making models I like they'll keep getting $ from me....
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wayniac wrote: Yes but as long as people keep shoveling money to GW and giving them record profits they have no reason to change since it shows people are okay with it. We had our chance to really change how they operate and people fell for their smoke and mirrors bullgak hook, line, and sinker with 8th edition. So what did we get? More of the same but they are slightly more transparent and more open so everyone forgave them.
{shrugs indifferently} Nearly every dime they receive from me is for models. As long as they keep making models I like they'll keep getting $ from me....
Hecaton wrote: The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
I played Necrons and AdMech too and have issues with the Kellermorph. Your move.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
Hecaton wrote: The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
I played Necrons and AdMech too and have issues with the Kellermorph. Your move.
Hecaton wrote: The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
I played Necrons and AdMech too and have issues with the Kellermorph. Your move.
That doesn't actually invalidate his point.
It is entirely possible that GW nerfed the Kellermorph purely because of how it was good against marines and that nerf helping other factions was entirely coincidental and not something GW intended.
Not saying it is likely, but it is within the realm of possibility, especially as GW has demonstrated time and again a complete lack of understanding the implications for the game of the rules they write.
Hecaton wrote: The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
I played Necrons and AdMech too and have issues with the Kellermorph. Your move.
That doesn't actually invalidate his point.
It is entirely possible that GW nerfed the Kellermorph purely because of how it was good against marines and that nerf helping other factions was entirely coincidental and not something GW intended.
Not saying it is likely, but it is within the realm of possibility, especially as GW has demonstrated time and again a complete lack of understanding the implications for the game of the rules they write.
I mean GW could have also done it because their lizard overlords told them too based off a protagnastion gained from reading bubbles in a glass of beer. thats just as valid.
Slayer-fans point is that unit was a serious problem for more then just marines so dismissing it's nerf as "ohh GW just wanted to address marine whining that they aren't OP" isn't exactly valid.
i like how you completely disregard the bigger conclusion of the argument and like others only partially quote what was stated, well done. How about you come back when your reading comprehension has improved to an adequate level, but here is one exemple of the effect i am attempting to describe:
Don't need to my friend, if you had progressed beyond your community college's intro to logic course you might have realized that I only responded to your whining about R and H because it's the only part that warranted addressing. Because I agree that near-exclusively focusing on Marines is bad for the game as a whole. I really wish that GW gave enough of a gak about the Eldar to give the Avatar decent rules rather than make him this laughably overpriced loser who runs as fast as a fething Great Unclean One. But to bring up some bs about RnH and equating them to the various flavors of Eldar (which you did do, don't lie to save face now my son) and pretend that them squatting RnH will hurt the game is laughable. It's a ridiculously silly notion and your sticking by it makes your argument overall weaker.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
i like how you completely disregard the bigger conclusion of the argument and like others only partially quote what was stated, well done. How about you come back when your reading comprehension has improved to an adequate level, but here is one exemple of the effect i am attempting to describe:
Don't need to my friend, if you had progressed beyond your community college's intro to logic course you might have realized that I only responded to your whining about R and H because it's the only part that warranted addressing. Because I agree that near-exclusively focusing on Marines is bad for the game as a whole. I really wish that GW gave enough of a gak about the Eldar to give the Avatar decent rules rather than make him this laughably overpriced loser who runs as fast as a fething Great Unclean One. But to bring up some bs about RnH and equating them to the various flavors of Eldar (which you did do, don't lie to save face now my son) and pretend that them squatting RnH will hurt the game is laughable. It's a ridiculously silly notion and your sticking by it makes your argument overall weaker.
But by all means stay mad my friend.
O noes, whatever will i do with this Ad hominem,
The equation to eldar is to preciscly show gw's General disregard for faction health, it's the Same that did happen to fw factions, lacking the capability to realise that the only difference was internal politiking(as remarked) that Lead to one side beeing squatted for the near future whilest the others, eldar in this case , stagnate happily onwards is dishonest and shortsighted.
Hecaton wrote: The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
I played Necrons and AdMech too and have issues with the Kellermorph. Your move.
That doesn't actually invalidate his point.
It is entirely possible that GW nerfed the Kellermorph purely because of how it was good against marines and that nerf helping other factions was entirely coincidental and not something GW intended.
Not saying it is likely, but it is within the realm of possibility, especially as GW has demonstrated time and again a complete lack of understanding the implications for the game of the rules they write.
Except that that's the straw version of my point. I contrasted the damage that the kelermorph on the drop with the damage that pretty much any reliable, decent assassin model does on the charge vs typical T4 4++ characters. Spoiler alert, it's not that different, and the kelermorph is easier to take off the table than almost any of the competition since he's only got T3 and 5++ vs T4 4++ for imperial assassins, T3 3++ for Solitaires, etc. All the complaints made about the kelermorph, could be made about the eversor assassin, or the solitaire, who are both perfectly happy to make his points back by smacking an infantry unit or two around instead of assassinating a character.
And of course, everyone will scream and cry about that average unsaved 4.52 wounds from the kelermorph but a blood angels smash captain can deal 6.25 unsaved wounds to something with a 4++, before you bother with any relics, warlord traits, extra damage stratagems, whatever.
People made hay about the fact that the kelermorph could, if he spent 3CP, choose to attack twice, dealing craAaAaAaAzy damage, a thing that every single marine and pretty much every chaos marine unit can do on demand. An ability that's been in the game since the very first codex in 8th.
But it's OK if blood angel hammer man can cost 108 points and can charge in suicidally and spend 5Cp to fight 3 times, that's perfectly acceptable because he is a space man. The boundary for where people will start to cry "immersion breaking!" is 6" off the dirt for anything that's not a marine, and up in the stratosphere for anything that is.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
Yep, agreed.
Say, why do you figure it took GW 2-3 years to fix what was clearly busted ass broken immediately at the time of release when it came to GK.
it couldnt possibly be...that GW routinely doesn't give a gak about its less popular factions and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy of those factions remaining unpopular by neglecting them for long periods of time.
Hmmm its weird in 5th it felt like GK were this hugely popular faction that everyone played, and then GW gave them gak rules and 0 model support for 3 editions in a row, now theyre scraping the bottom of the barrel.
it's almost like the inherent appeal of marines ISNT enough to make a faction more popular.
its almost like if GW didnt put out a single model for marines 2 editions in a row and kept them bottom tier in competitive play, next to nobody would be playing them come 11th ed.
it's wild how we have this example sitting right in front of our noses of the meteoric fall in popularity of the grey knights faction, a marine faction, since 5th edition yet people still pretend when it comes to tyranids the fact that nobody plays them has nothing to do with their not getting a model since 2014 and having horrible awful boring rules edition after edition is just because of some inherent unlikeability of the faction.
it's wild how we have this example sitting right in front of our noses of the meteoric fall in popularity of the grey knights faction, a marine faction, since 5th edition yet people still pretend when it comes to tyranids the fact that nobody plays them has nothing to do with their not getting a model since 2014 and having horrible awful boring rules edition after edition is just because of some inherent unlikeability of the faction.
This is the crux isn't it.
This is what i meant with faction health, allbeit i disagree with the models beeing the reason for bad faction health for Tyranids.
it's wild how we have this example sitting right in front of our noses of the meteoric fall in popularity of the grey knights faction, a marine faction, since 5th edition yet people still pretend when it comes to tyranids the fact that nobody plays them has nothing to do with their not getting a model since 2014 and having horrible awful boring rules edition after edition is just because of some inherent unlikeability of the faction.
This is the crux isn't it.
This is what i meant with faction health, allbeit i disagree with the models beeing the reason for bad faction health for Tyranids.
Agreed, the nids range isn't bad and between 4th - 6th they were spoiled for nice new models really.
Hecaton wrote: The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
I played Necrons and AdMech too and have issues with the Kellermorph. Your move.
That doesn't actually invalidate his point.
It is entirely possible that GW nerfed the Kellermorph purely because of how it was good against marines and that nerf helping other factions was entirely coincidental and not something GW intended.
Not saying it is likely, but it is within the realm of possibility, especially as GW has demonstrated time and again a complete lack of understanding the implications for the game of the rules they write.
Except that that's the straw version of my point. I contrasted the damage that the kelermorph on the drop with the damage that pretty much any reliable, decent assassin model does on the charge vs typical T4 4++ characters. Spoiler alert, it's not that different, and the kelermorph is easier to take off the table than almost any of the competition since he's only got T3 and 5++ vs T4 4++ for imperial assassins, T3 3++ for Solitaires, etc. All the complaints made about the kelermorph, could be made about the eversor assassin, or the solitaire, who are both perfectly happy to make his points back by smacking an infantry unit or two around instead of assassinating a character.
And of course, everyone will scream and cry about that average unsaved 4.52 wounds from the kelermorph but a blood angels smash captain can deal 6.25 unsaved wounds to something with a 4++, before you bother with any relics, warlord traits, extra damage stratagems, whatever.
People made hay about the fact that the kelermorph could, if he spent 3CP, choose to attack twice, dealing craAaAaAaAzy damage, a thing that every single marine and pretty much every chaos marine unit can do on demand. An ability that's been in the game since the very first codex in 8th.
But it's OK if blood angel hammer man can cost 108 points and can charge in suicidally and spend 5Cp to fight 3 times, that's perfectly acceptable because he is a space man. The boundary for where people will start to cry "immersion breaking!" is 6" off the dirt for anything that's not a marine, and up in the stratosphere for anything that is.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
Yep, agreed.
Say, why do you figure it took GW 2-3 years to fix what was clearly busted ass broken immediately at the time of release when it came to GK.
it couldnt possibly be...that GW routinely doesn't give a gak about its less popular factions and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy of those factions remaining unpopular by neglecting them for long periods of time.
Hmmm its weird in 5th it felt like GK were this hugely popular faction that everyone played, and then GW gave them gak rules and 0 model support for 3 editions in a row, now theyre scraping the bottom of the barrel.
it's almost like the inherent appeal of marines ISNT enough to make a faction more popular.
its almost like if GW didnt put out a single model for marines 2 editions in a row and kept them bottom tier in competitive play, next to nobody would be playing them come 11th ed.
it's wild how we have this example sitting right in front of our noses of the meteoric fall in popularity of the grey knights faction, a marine faction, since 5th edition yet people still pretend when it comes to tyranids the fact that nobody plays them has nothing to do with their not getting a model since 2014 and having horrible awful boring rules edition after edition is just because of some inherent unlikeability of the faction.
Literallg nobody defended Slamguinus, so basically you're just looking to be a victim.
it's wild how we have this example sitting right in front of our noses of the meteoric fall in popularity of the grey knights faction, a marine faction, since 5th edition yet people still pretend when it comes to tyranids the fact that nobody plays them has nothing to do with their not getting a model since 2014 and having horrible awful boring rules edition after edition is just because of some inherent unlikeability of the faction.
This is the crux isn't it.
This is what i meant with faction health, allbeit i disagree with the models beeing the reason for bad faction health for Tyranids.
Agreed, the nids range isn't bad and between 4th - 6th they were spoiled for nice new models really.
Well beyond the phallic arty piece...
And finecrap...
which should've been replaced LONG ago.
Reminds me i still have the old nid dex when they had their modify biomorph shenanigans ,where one could build immensly cutomised armies...
Something like that needs to come back, but alas, such dexes would require more playtesting and therefore more time and therefore cost more in development prices.
...
So gw wouldn't make it happen again..
Hecaton wrote: The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
I played Necrons and AdMech too and have issues with the Kellermorph. Your move.
That doesn't actually invalidate his point.
It is entirely possible that GW nerfed the Kellermorph purely because of how it was good against marines and that nerf helping other factions was entirely coincidental and not something GW intended.
Not saying it is likely, but it is within the realm of possibility, especially as GW has demonstrated time and again a complete lack of understanding the implications for the game of the rules they write.
Except that that's the straw version of my point. I contrasted the damage that the kelermorph on the drop with the damage that pretty much any reliable, decent assassin model does on the charge vs typical T4 4++ characters. Spoiler alert, it's not that different, and the kelermorph is easier to take off the table than almost any of the competition since he's only got T3 and 5++ vs T4 4++ for imperial assassins, T3 3++ for Solitaires, etc. All the complaints made about the kelermorph, could be made about the eversor assassin, or the solitaire, who are both perfectly happy to make his points back by smacking an infantry unit or two around instead of assassinating a character.
And of course, everyone will scream and cry about that average unsaved 4.52 wounds from the kelermorph but a blood angels smash captain can deal 6.25 unsaved wounds to something with a 4++, before you bother with any relics, warlord traits, extra damage stratagems, whatever.
People made hay about the fact that the kelermorph could, if he spent 3CP, choose to attack twice, dealing craAaAaAaAzy damage, a thing that every single marine and pretty much every chaos marine unit can do on demand. An ability that's been in the game since the very first codex in 8th.
But it's OK if blood angel hammer man can cost 108 points and can charge in suicidally and spend 5Cp to fight 3 times, that's perfectly acceptable because he is a space man. The boundary for where people will start to cry "immersion breaking!" is 6" off the dirt for anything that's not a marine, and up in the stratosphere for anything that is.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
Yep, agreed.
Say, why do you figure it took GW 2-3 years to fix what was clearly busted ass broken immediately at the time of release when it came to GK.
it couldnt possibly be...that GW routinely doesn't give a gak about its less popular factions and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy of those factions remaining unpopular by neglecting them for long periods of time.
Hmmm its weird in 5th it felt like GK were this hugely popular faction that everyone played, and then GW gave them gak rules and 0 model support for 3 editions in a row, now theyre scraping the bottom of the barrel.
it's almost like the inherent appeal of marines ISNT enough to make a faction more popular.
its almost like if GW didnt put out a single model for marines 2 editions in a row and kept them bottom tier in competitive play, next to nobody would be playing them come 11th ed.
it's wild how we have this example sitting right in front of our noses of the meteoric fall in popularity of the grey knights faction, a marine faction, since 5th edition yet people still pretend when it comes to tyranids the fact that nobody plays them has nothing to do with their not getting a model since 2014 and having horrible awful boring rules edition after edition is just because of some inherent unlikeability of the faction.
Literallg nobody defended Slamguinus, so basically you're just looking to be a victim.
Actually people did defend Slamguinus, because atleast initially, the rest of the dex BA was marines 1.0 bad.
Granted, it's also the asumption that a faction with 1 good option for comp can be considered "healthy".
Actually people did defend Slamguinus, because atleast initially, the rest of the dex BA was marines 1.0 bad.
Granted, it's also the asumption that a faction with 1 good option for comp can be considered "healthy".
Yeah. It's a weird thing that's happened w/Marine books the last few editions where, often times, even if the codex as a whole is kind of weak (8th ed Marines 1.0 - the afore mentioned BA codex, etc), there's still at least one thing that's OP, or at least borderline OP. So at the time, Slammy got defended because it was the one play they had.
Actually people did defend Slamguinus, because atleast initially, the rest of the dex BA was marines 1.0 bad.
Granted, it's also the asumption that a faction with 1 good option for comp can be considered "healthy".
Yeah. It's a weird thing that's happened w/Marine books the last few editions where, often times, even if the codex as a whole is kind of weak (8th ed Marines 1.0 - the afore mentioned BA codex, etc), there's still at least one thing that's OP, or at least borderline OP. So at the time, Slammy got defended because it was the one play they had.
It's not just marines, consider how well CSM were regarded from the comp standpoint, especially from the outside, because you had lashprinces and obliterators, or the hellturkey.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
Yeah you can play those SW, DA and BA that used to be standalone chapters but without tons of their unique stuff, to the point that you're basically playing a different army, or SM chapter to the very least.
It's like watching some like the last Avengers movie in an old black and white TV. You can watch it entirely, but it isn't the same thing and what you're missing is so big that probably it doesn't worth the effort (and the investment in the book) to play with just the general SM codex. It's a better analogy than the one involving the car because the car just has one puprose, to transport dude A to point B and it can do it perfectly without the upgrades options. A movie like Avengers relies a lot on visuals and in an old tv lots of its potential, and part of the purpose of the movie itself, is simply lost.
Hecaton wrote: The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
I played Necrons and AdMech too and have issues with the Kellermorph. Your move.
That doesn't actually invalidate his point.
It is entirely possible that GW nerfed the Kellermorph purely because of how it was good against marines and that nerf helping other factions was entirely coincidental and not something GW intended.
Not saying it is likely, but it is within the realm of possibility, especially as GW has demonstrated time and again a complete lack of understanding the implications for the game of the rules they write.
Except that that's the straw version of my point. I contrasted the damage that the kelermorph on the drop with the damage that pretty much any reliable, decent assassin model does on the charge vs typical T4 4++ characters. Spoiler alert, it's not that different, and the kelermorph is easier to take off the table than almost any of the competition since he's only got T3 and 5++ vs T4 4++ for imperial assassins, T3 3++ for Solitaires, etc. All the complaints made about the kelermorph, could be made about the eversor assassin, or the solitaire, who are both perfectly happy to make his points back by smacking an infantry unit or two around instead of assassinating a character.
And of course, everyone will scream and cry about that average unsaved 4.52 wounds from the kelermorph but a blood angels smash captain can deal 6.25 unsaved wounds to something with a 4++, before you bother with any relics, warlord traits, extra damage stratagems, whatever.
People made hay about the fact that the kelermorph could, if he spent 3CP, choose to attack twice, dealing craAaAaAaAzy damage, a thing that every single marine and pretty much every chaos marine unit can do on demand. An ability that's been in the game since the very first codex in 8th.
But it's OK if blood angel hammer man can cost 108 points and can charge in suicidally and spend 5Cp to fight 3 times, that's perfectly acceptable because he is a space man. The boundary for where people will start to cry "immersion breaking!" is 6" off the dirt for anything that's not a marine, and up in the stratosphere for anything that is.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
Yep, agreed.
Say, why do you figure it took GW 2-3 years to fix what was clearly busted ass broken immediately at the time of release when it came to GK.
it couldnt possibly be...that GW routinely doesn't give a gak about its less popular factions and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy of those factions remaining unpopular by neglecting them for long periods of time.
Hmmm its weird in 5th it felt like GK were this hugely popular faction that everyone played, and then GW gave them gak rules and 0 model support for 3 editions in a row, now theyre scraping the bottom of the barrel.
it's almost like the inherent appeal of marines ISNT enough to make a faction more popular.
its almost like if GW didnt put out a single model for marines 2 editions in a row and kept them bottom tier in competitive play, next to nobody would be playing them come 11th ed.
it's wild how we have this example sitting right in front of our noses of the meteoric fall in popularity of the grey knights faction, a marine faction, since 5th edition yet people still pretend when it comes to tyranids the fact that nobody plays them has nothing to do with their not getting a model since 2014 and having horrible awful boring rules edition after edition is just because of some inherent unlikeability of the faction.
Literallg nobody defended Slamguinus, so basically you're just looking to be a victim.
Actually people did defend Slamguinus, because atleast initially, the rest of the dex BA was marines 1.0 bad.
Granted, it's also the asumption that a faction with 1 good option for comp can be considered "healthy".
That's not defending Slamguinus, that's just saying "you better fix the rest of the codex".
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
Yeah you can play those SW, DA and BA that used to be standalone chapters but without tons of their unique stuff, to the point that you're basically playing a different army, or SM chapter to the very least.
It's like watching some like the last Avengers movie in an old black and white TV. You can watch it entirely, but it isn't the same thing and what you're missing is so big that probably it doesn't worth the effort (and the investment in the book) to play with just the general SM codex. It's a better analogy than the one involving the car because the car just has one puprose, to transport dude A to point B and it can do it perfectly without the upgrades options. A movie like Avengers relies a lot on visuals and in an old tv lots of its potential, and part of the purpose of the movie itself, is simply lost.
Just to clarify, because the Ultramarines have a bunch of unique units and characters too - are you agreeing that the UM ALSO need two books for their army? And, while we're at it, all the other First Founders too, if people use any of the unique features in the supplements?
Also, if a BA/DA army doesn't feature any "unique" units, is it still a BA/DA army? Is a DA/BA army defined by those unique units, and wouldn't be one if not? Because I think that's incredibly reductionist. What, if I play UM without Tyrannic War Vets, Honour Guard and Victrix Guard, I'm not playing Ultramarines?
Hecaton wrote: The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
I played Necrons and AdMech too and have issues with the Kellermorph. Your move.
That doesn't actually invalidate his point.
It is entirely possible that GW nerfed the Kellermorph purely because of how it was good against marines and that nerf helping other factions was entirely coincidental and not something GW intended.
Not saying it is likely, but it is within the realm of possibility, especially as GW has demonstrated time and again a complete lack of understanding the implications for the game of the rules they write.
Except that that's the straw version of my point. I contrasted the damage that the kelermorph on the drop with the damage that pretty much any reliable, decent assassin model does on the charge vs typical T4 4++ characters. Spoiler alert, it's not that different, and the kelermorph is easier to take off the table than almost any of the competition since he's only got T3 and 5++ vs T4 4++ for imperial assassins, T3 3++ for Solitaires, etc. All the complaints made about the kelermorph, could be made about the eversor assassin, or the solitaire, who are both perfectly happy to make his points back by smacking an infantry unit or two around instead of assassinating a character.
And of course, everyone will scream and cry about that average unsaved 4.52 wounds from the kelermorph but a blood angels smash captain can deal 6.25 unsaved wounds to something with a 4++, before you bother with any relics, warlord traits, extra damage stratagems, whatever.
People made hay about the fact that the kelermorph could, if he spent 3CP, choose to attack twice, dealing craAaAaAaAzy damage, a thing that every single marine and pretty much every chaos marine unit can do on demand. An ability that's been in the game since the very first codex in 8th.
But it's OK if blood angel hammer man can cost 108 points and can charge in suicidally and spend 5Cp to fight 3 times, that's perfectly acceptable because he is a space man. The boundary for where people will start to cry "immersion breaking!" is 6" off the dirt for anything that's not a marine, and up in the stratosphere for anything that is.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
Yep, agreed.
Say, why do you figure it took GW 2-3 years to fix what was clearly busted ass broken immediately at the time of release when it came to GK.
it couldnt possibly be...that GW routinely doesn't give a gak about its less popular factions and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy of those factions remaining unpopular by neglecting them for long periods of time.
Hmmm its weird in 5th it felt like GK were this hugely popular faction that everyone played, and then GW gave them gak rules and 0 model support for 3 editions in a row, now theyre scraping the bottom of the barrel.
it's almost like the inherent appeal of marines ISNT enough to make a faction more popular.
its almost like if GW didnt put out a single model for marines 2 editions in a row and kept them bottom tier in competitive play, next to nobody would be playing them come 11th ed.
it's wild how we have this example sitting right in front of our noses of the meteoric fall in popularity of the grey knights faction, a marine faction, since 5th edition yet people still pretend when it comes to tyranids the fact that nobody plays them has nothing to do with their not getting a model since 2014 and having horrible awful boring rules edition after edition is just because of some inherent unlikeability of the faction.
Literallg nobody defended Slamguinus, so basically you're just looking to be a victim.
Actually people did defend Slamguinus, because atleast initially, the rest of the dex BA was marines 1.0 bad.
Granted, it's also the asumption that a faction with 1 good option for comp can be considered "healthy".
That's not defending Slamguinus, that's just saying "you better fix the rest of the codex".
Their argument at the time was, that Slamguinus is fine because the rest sucked.
That is a defensive argument for the smashcaptain.
The later part is just my view on the general dex health and what was /is considered healthy, especially in regards to tournament data.
That's not really correct. People used the same argument with Flyrants in 6th/7th but that wasn't defending Flyrants themselves. It's literally just because it's Marines.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
Erik Lathouroas won Briscon in 2019 with pure Grey Knights, so I’d say the army is not fully unplayable without PA. It’s definitely better with it and needs the boost, especially after CSM 2, but it was playable years after publishing despite your complaints to the opposite.
Hecaton wrote: The Kellermorph thing is a perfect example of how GW treats Astartes players with kid gloves these days. They can't be expected to win a fair fight, so they're given all sorts of advantages, and anyone who's beating them is nerfed mercilessly... gotta keep that cash cow happy.
I played Necrons and AdMech too and have issues with the Kellermorph. Your move.
That doesn't actually invalidate his point.
It is entirely possible that GW nerfed the Kellermorph purely because of how it was good against marines and that nerf helping other factions was entirely coincidental and not something GW intended.
Not saying it is likely, but it is within the realm of possibility, especially as GW has demonstrated time and again a complete lack of understanding the implications for the game of the rules they write.
Except that that's the straw version of my point. I contrasted the damage that the kelermorph on the drop with the damage that pretty much any reliable, decent assassin model does on the charge vs typical T4 4++ characters. Spoiler alert, it's not that different, and the kelermorph is easier to take off the table than almost any of the competition since he's only got T3 and 5++ vs T4 4++ for imperial assassins, T3 3++ for Solitaires, etc. All the complaints made about the kelermorph, could be made about the eversor assassin, or the solitaire, who are both perfectly happy to make his points back by smacking an infantry unit or two around instead of assassinating a character.
And of course, everyone will scream and cry about that average unsaved 4.52 wounds from the kelermorph but a blood angels smash captain can deal 6.25 unsaved wounds to something with a 4++, before you bother with any relics, warlord traits, extra damage stratagems, whatever.
People made hay about the fact that the kelermorph could, if he spent 3CP, choose to attack twice, dealing craAaAaAaAzy damage, a thing that every single marine and pretty much every chaos marine unit can do on demand. An ability that's been in the game since the very first codex in 8th.
But it's OK if blood angel hammer man can cost 108 points and can charge in suicidally and spend 5Cp to fight 3 times, that's perfectly acceptable because he is a space man. The boundary for where people will start to cry "immersion breaking!" is 6" off the dirt for anything that's not a marine, and up in the stratosphere for anything that is.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
Yep, agreed.
Say, why do you figure it took GW 2-3 years to fix what was clearly busted ass broken immediately at the time of release when it came to GK.
it couldnt possibly be...that GW routinely doesn't give a gak about its less popular factions and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy of those factions remaining unpopular by neglecting them for long periods of time.
Hmmm its weird in 5th it felt like GK were this hugely popular faction that everyone played, and then GW gave them gak rules and 0 model support for 3 editions in a row, now theyre scraping the bottom of the barrel.
it's almost like the inherent appeal of marines ISNT enough to make a faction more popular.
its almost like if GW didnt put out a single model for marines 2 editions in a row and kept them bottom tier in competitive play, next to nobody would be playing them come 11th ed.
it's wild how we have this example sitting right in front of our noses of the meteoric fall in popularity of the grey knights faction, a marine faction, since 5th edition yet people still pretend when it comes to tyranids the fact that nobody plays them has nothing to do with their not getting a model since 2014 and having horrible awful boring rules edition after edition is just because of some inherent unlikeability of the faction.
Literallg nobody defended Slamguinus, so basically you're just looking to be a victim.
Actually people did defend Slamguinus, because atleast initially, the rest of the dex BA was marines 1.0 bad.
Granted, it's also the asumption that a faction with 1 good option for comp can be considered "healthy".
That's not defending Slamguinus, that's just saying "you better fix the rest of the codex".
It is obvious (to me, at least) that it should be OK for a unit to exist within a largely suicidal framework.
I.e., it should be OK for me strategically to take a unit that I know is fairly easy for you to remove using equal to or less than the points I paid for him with units from your army, because I have a reasonable assurance that he will remove equal to or close to his points in a single turn of action. And that ideally, because I get to make the choice what, when, and where to remove, and you have no choice but to remove my model, I should be OK with "trading down" in terms of points efficiency of removal.
In concept, there is no significant difference between the performance of the kelermorph, the dagger Sanctus from the same codex, a callidus or eversor assassin, or a blood angel smash captain, except that of the lot of them the smash captain requires an investment in CP to reliably get to combat and do his damage and therefore has a higher average damage than any of them (even before he takes relics/traits, fights twice, etc etc.)
With a profile of W4 T3 Sv5++, the kelermorph is pretty trivial to remove for less than his points value. You can do it with a squad of guardsmen.
Any argument about whether any of them is fair should be based around how efficiently he does what he does, but that's not what the argument was about with the kelermorph. The argument was about why a model like the kelermorph should even be allowed to remove a basic T4 4++ hq in the first place. The nerfs people wanted wasn't the nerf from 65pts to 80pts, it was reducing his gun to D1 or removing the 'hits = extra shots' ability, basically making him only able to do his job if you somehow find a way to use him non-suicidally, or bring two of him somehow, or happen to be playing against one of the three to four factions whose characters would actually be killable by that profile.
^And the reasoning was crazy. "How is it possible for a pistol to be that good!" when I can outfit Vanguard with dual Plasma Pistols that can fire at S8 D2. The Kellermorph nerfs are lame.
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Easy, it fires faster.
Edit:
Or the bullets are really big, or travel really fast, or have some change in material or form that make them cause more damage on impact, or. . .
Considering the tremendous variety of "stubber" available in our own world, there's plainly a wide, wide number of variables you can apply to both weapon and ammunition.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
Erik Lathouroas won Briscon in 2019 with pure Grey Knights, so I’d say the army is not fully unplayable without PA. It’s definitely better with it and needs the boost, especially after CSM 2, but it was playable years after publishing despite your complaints to the opposite.
It was actaully quite good until the Deep strike nerf. Then it became garbage.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
Erik Lathouroas won Briscon in 2019 with pure Grey Knights, so I’d say the army is not fully unplayable without PA. It’s definitely better with it and needs the boost, especially after CSM 2, but it was playable years after publishing despite your complaints to the opposite.
If it isn't consistent toppings you don't prove a point.
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Ammunition choice. Or is your point that non-Astartes should always lose to Astartes? To be frank complaints that your character can get assassinated by a human/alien hybrid who's basically designed from the genetic level to do that come off as childish and entitled.
Karol wrote:Like selling a car and its gas tank separate. Making an BA or SW player buy the SM and BA codex to get rules for their army, is something like that. And it is not just an update like in the case of waiting for a supplement that fixs your book for 2-3 years, as bad as it maybe.
Not really true. From what we have been told you can purchase Codex Space Marines and run BA, SW, or DA directly from the book. However, there are options for those factions that are not in the book. So CSM is functional for BA, DW, or DA.
So a better analogy is GW is selling you a car and then providing upgrades options like power windows, keyless entry, and super fancy stereo set. The basic car works just fine, but you may want to send some money on heated seats.
You know people try to say that, and my anwser to it is. Try playing the GK codex without the PA rule set. Can you legaly do it? yes. Does it give an army that works? no. It is exactly like a car without an engine. You can take a trip in one too, by pushing it all the way, but how many people are willing to do that.
Erik Lathouroas won Briscon in 2019 with pure Grey Knights, so I’d say the army is not fully unplayable without PA. It’s definitely better with it and needs the boost, especially after CSM 2, but it was playable years after publishing despite your complaints to the opposite.
If it isn't consistent toppings you don't prove a point.
It negates the assertion that the army didn't work, though, by providing an example that went the 5 rounds. (Faction chosen for the guy by his community, no less...)
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Ammunition choice. Or is your point that non-Astartes should always lose to Astartes? To be frank complaints that your character can get assassinated by a human/alien hybrid who's basically designed from the genetic level to do that come off as childish and entitled.
Let's just put it this way:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2, S4 AP -1?
And the Kellermorph has 3 of them, so really it's Pistol 6, S4 AP -1! I think people can justifiable say WTF
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Ammunition choice. Or is your point that non-Astartes should always lose to Astartes? To be frank complaints that your character can get assassinated by a human/alien hybrid who's basically designed from the genetic level to do that come off as childish and entitled.
Let's just put it this way:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2, S4 AP -1?
And the Kellermorph has 3 of them, so really it's Pistol 6, S4 AP -1! I think people can justifiable say WTF
And 2 plasma pistols is 2x S8 D2 -3, and a third arm would get you a 3rd shot.
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Ammunition choice. Or is your point that non-Astartes should always lose to Astartes? To be frank complaints that your character can get assassinated by a human/alien hybrid who's basically designed from the genetic level to do that come off as childish and entitled.
Let's just put it this way:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2, S4 AP -1?
And the Kellermorph has 3 of them, so really it's Pistol 6, S4 AP -1! I think people can justifiable say WTF
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Ammunition choice. Or is your point that non-Astartes should always lose to Astartes? To be frank complaints that your character can get assassinated by a human/alien hybrid who's basically designed from the genetic level to do that come off as childish and entitled.
Let's just put it this way:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2, S4 AP -1?
And the Kellermorph has 3 of them, so really it's Pistol 6, S4 AP -1! I think people can justifiable say WTF
Stubcarbine: Pistol 3, S4, AP0.
Which apparently doesn't fire much faster even though that's implied.
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Ammunition choice. Or is your point that non-Astartes should always lose to Astartes? To be frank complaints that your character can get assassinated by a human/alien hybrid who's basically designed from the genetic level to do that come off as childish and entitled.
Let's just put it this way:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2, S4 AP -1?
And the Kellermorph has 3 of them, so really it's Pistol 6, S4 AP -1! I think people can justifiable say WTF
And 2 plasma pistols is 2x S8 D2 -3, and a third arm would get you a 3rd shot.
Theres a mechanicus 5 shot pistol, iirc.
It's fine.
honestly from a thematic POV when you're comparing what the GSCs have to the Space Marines and the Admech I do kinda have to raise an eyebrow.
I mean these are supposed to be rebels and the like. commoners. yet they're outfitted with weapons that would be a space marine relic?!
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Ammunition choice. Or is your point that non-Astartes should always lose to Astartes? To be frank complaints that your character can get assassinated by a human/alien hybrid who's basically designed from the genetic level to do that come off as childish and entitled.
Let's just put it this way:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2, S4 AP -1?
And the Kellermorph has 3 of them, so really it's Pistol 6, S4 AP -1! I think people can justifiable say WTF
Stubcarbine: Pistol 3, S4, AP0.
Which apparently doesn't fire much faster even though that's implied.
A carbine is not necessarily fully automatic. Whereas the name autostub would definitely imply a weapon capable of fully automatic fire.
No. GSC infiltrate every level of a society. They could be a planets leaders. Their highest ranking military commanders. Anyone with access to anything.
I mean these are supposed to be rebels and the like. commoners. yet they're outfitted with weapons that would be a space marine relic?!
Its a big universe. And it isn't that he has one super strong marine type pistol. He's a freak with a bunch of arms and a bunch of pistols. If a marine has multiple plasma guns it might appear shocking, but the technology isn't obscene.
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Ammunition choice. Or is your point that non-Astartes should always lose to Astartes? To be frank complaints that your character can get assassinated by a human/alien hybrid who's basically designed from the genetic level to do that come off as childish and entitled.
Let's just put it this way:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2, S4 AP -1?
And the Kellermorph has 3 of them, so really it's Pistol 6, S4 AP -1! I think people can justifiable say WTF
And 2 plasma pistols is 2x S8 D2 -3, and a third arm would get you a 3rd shot.
Theres a mechanicus 5 shot pistol, iirc.
It's fine.
honestly from a thematic POV when you're comparing what the GSCs have to the Space Marines and the Admech I do kinda have to raise an eyebrow.
I mean these are supposed to be rebels and the like. commoners. yet they're outfitted with weapons that would be a space marine relic?!
Reminder: lowly Hive Gangers can get plasma weapons.
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Ammunition choice. Or is your point that non-Astartes should always lose to Astartes? To be frank complaints that your character can get assassinated by a human/alien hybrid who's basically designed from the genetic level to do that come off as childish and entitled.
Let's just put it this way:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2, S4 AP -1?
And the Kellermorph has 3 of them, so really it's Pistol 6, S4 AP -1! I think people can justifiable say WTF
I just realized I forgot the most important part:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0 D1
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0 D1
Stubcarbine - Pistol 3, S4 AP 0 D1
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0 D1
Ironhail Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP -1 D1
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2 (6 for 3), S4 AP -1 D2
What the hell does the Kellermorph fire from that gun?
alextroy wrote: I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder why the Krellermorph’s Autostub is better than a Boltpistol.
Ammunition choice. Or is your point that non-Astartes should always lose to Astartes? To be frank complaints that your character can get assassinated by a human/alien hybrid who's basically designed from the genetic level to do that come off as childish and entitled.
Let's just put it this way:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2, S4 AP -1?
And the Kellermorph has 3 of them, so really it's Pistol 6, S4 AP -1! I think people can justifiable say WTF
I just realized I forgot the most important part:
Autopistol - Pistol 1, S3 AP 0 D1
Autogun - Rapid Fire 1, S3 AP 0 D1
Stubcarbine - Pistol 3, S4 AP 0 D1
Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP 0 D1
Ironhail Heavy Stubber - Heavy 3, S4 AP -1 D1
Liberator Autostub - Pistol 2 (6 for 3), S4 AP -1 D2
What the hell does the Kellermorph fire from that gun?
Explosive rounds of some sort. One of the guys from the Rogue Trader box has a gun that's essentially the same thing but Heavy 4.
alextroy wrote: Rotor Cannon (Heavy 4 S4 AP -1 D2) is a whole lot more of a weapon than a sub machine pistol.
It fires the same caliber of rounds, apparently. It's just much more rapid firing, and presumably the barrel isn't rifled. The point is that that kind of equipment isn't unheard of; it's rare, sure, but that's why the Kelermorph is a hero unit.
Also the "Liberator Autostub" doesn't fire fully automatic, presumably.
Have you seen how many BOLT weapons there are the ridiculously absurd number of different profiles they have?
Heavy bolt rifles
auto bolt rifles
heavy bolt pistols
that executor one or whatever it's called
occulus
sniper
blah blah bolter
etc etc
If marines can have 50+ bolt variants then it's beyond trivial for ONE bloody model to get a gun that's SLIGHTLY better than other variants of the gun.
No one's been screaming the world down because there are now more bolter variants than units types in xenos armies, but one xenos army gets a single weapon that's slightly better than a normal one and oh no we can't have that.
Honestly, i think the kellermorph, shouldn't have been a gunslinger but a saboteur.
High explosives, and a Stub carbine. Heck even a special one if need be.
.
)
).
