Since the news are getting lost in the thread about those foolish followers of the corpse emperor, I asked for permission to create a separate one for the sons of Mortarion.
What is known so far?
*New* Jan 16th:
Video showing the whole codex (might have to watch in full screen to read):
Poxwalkers and cultsits can only be taken on a 1 to 1 relationship with other core infantry units. Bring two squads of plague marines? then the max poxwalker squads you can bring is 2.
Lords and Demon Princes can only be taken once in a detachment
Monstrous resilience is a rule that gives the unit -1D. Not clear exactly how this rule applies at the moment but looks like its a warlord trait.
- Not 100% confirmed but apparently from the same source:
Mortarion has a 5+++, shuts downs enemy aura buffs within 3" and classic arch contaminator within 6".
The plague companies give 1 relic, warlord trait and stratagem.
Dec 16th: Leaked datasheet for Deathshrouds
Changes:
- +1WS
- -1S
- +1A
- +1" move
- Plaguespurt gauntlet to 12" up from 6"
- Manreapers to 2 damage from d3 damage
Spoiler:
Dec 14th: Leaked datasheet for Blightlords
Changes:
- +1" Movement
- +1 Attack base
- +1 Wound
- Blightlauncher to 2 damage from d3 (already known)
- Plague spewer to 12" from 9" (already known)
- Bubotic axe +1S (already known)
- Flail of corruption -1S (already known)
- Balesword +1S
Dec 5th: Leaked datasheet for Plague Marines
Changes:
- +1 Attack base (already known)
- Blightlauncher to 2 damage from d3
- Plague belcher and Plague spewer to 12" from 9"
- Bubotic axe +1S
- Flail of corruption -1S
- Plague knives to AP-1 from AP0
- Plague sword +1S and to AP-1 from AP0
Dec 3rd: Leaked datasheet for Plagueburst Crawler
Changes: +1 BS, +1A, Entropy Cannon up to D3+d3 from D6, plague mortar to 2 damage from 1d3 and no minimum range, plaguespitter to S6 from S:User, Rothail Volleygun is rapid fire instead of heavy and down to AP-1 from AP-2
Spoiler:
Dec 1st: Leaked datasheet for Mortarion
Changes: +1T, +1A, Lantern -6", Silence up to D3+3 damage from d6, but second profile missing. Degrades on 9 and 5 instead of 8 and 4 wounds.
Spoiler:
Nov 30th: Units preview by GW https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/11/30/the-most-improved-units-from-codex-death-guard/ Summary:
Plague Marines +1W, +1A
Possessed +1T, fixed 4A, plague weapons, get access to army-wide rules Remorseless and Contagions of Nurgle (details of those unknown)
Defiler confirms BS/WS3+ for all daemon engines, +1A
Codex: CSM will be errata'ed with values from DG
Leaked datasheet for Foetid-Bloat Drone
Changes: +1 WS & BS, +1 Attack, -1 Wound (no degrading stats)
Fleshmower -1S (no idea on bonus attacks due to simplified sheet)
Heavy Blight Launcher +1AP, 2D instead of D3
Plaguespitter gets 12" range and fixed S6
Probe (its default melee weapon) lowered from D3 damage to 1D
Spoiler:
About box datasheet leaks: We know that some of these do have errors, but are in general leaks for Space Marines and Necrons were spot on.
Note that these datasheets only show stats and no rules whatsoever and no rules have been factored into their stats. For example, attacks form hatred blows would be in addition to any stats these sheets show, and none of them would show DR or plague weapon rules.
Expect these stats to be exactly what will be printed into the codex.
This is not a thread about loyalist space marines.
Jidmah wrote: This is not a thread about loyalist space marines.
Hoping for more datasheets to leak over the next few days but we probably won't get any answers to the most pressing issues (aka, what's happening with DR, and is our Cataphractii being given the relic treatment) until they start throwing previews at us. Fingers crossed for a Dec 5 preorder date.
Weapon changes
Fleshmower -1S (no idea on bonus attacks due to simplified sheet)
Heavy Blight Launcher +1AP, 2D instead of D3
Plaguespitter gets 12" range and fixed S6
Probe (its default melee weapon) lowered from D3 damage to 1D
2D blight launchers would be fantastic - seems likely, but fingers crossed. Very curious to see how some melee weapons are going to pan out as well (e.g. cleavers).
If basic Blight launchers become Ap-3 and D 2 as well I wonder why we would ever take plasma guns again they already had a hard time in DG but with this... These two weapons would be basically the same, but one blows you up if you try to fire it with the profile of the other one... I know, Plasma has higher strength but Blight launchers are plague weapons and why would you fire a Plasma gun at a tank anyway?
I like the Typhus buff but it seems that sadly we get the relic terminator stats too. Now maybe overall better mobility is better than the 4++ but I like that we are tanky over speedy. Drones going to 9 wounds with no degrading seems like a buff, and possibly all Daemon Engines hitting on 3's is great. Good buff for out arsenal of engines.
Makes me wonder what the Character will do though, I was personally speculating +1 to hit ala Disco Lords but that seems unlikely now. Although having said that, from playing against the new crons as well as the revealed Incubi stats, GW seems less reluctant to give 2+ BS/WS to units now so we'll see.
Yeah, daemon engines have been busted for a long time. We're going to infuse daemonic essences into these vehicles to make them even more powerful... by making them strictly worse at combat!
Voss wrote: Yeah, daemon engines have been busted for a long time. We're going to infuse daemonic essences into these vehicles to make them even more powerful... by making them strictly worse at combat!
Voss wrote: Yeah, daemon engines have been busted for a long time. We're going to infuse daemonic essences into these vehicles to make them even more powerful... by making them strictly worse at combat!
Voss wrote: Yeah, daemon engines have been busted for a long time. We're going to infuse daemonic essences into these vehicles to make them even more powerful... by making them strictly worse at combat!
It makes no sense.
More powerful =/= More accurate
Less accurate than any daemon you'd bother to summon, or the standard marine gunners that would be in there otherwise.
Still stupid.
Voss wrote: Yeah, daemon engines have been busted for a long time. We're going to infuse daemonic essences into these vehicles to make them even more powerful... by making them strictly worse at combat!
It makes no sense.
More powerful =/= More accurate
Less accurate than any daemon you'd bother to summon, or the standard marine gunners that would be in there otherwise.
Still stupid.
You mean the untamed daemon summoned and bound to a machine isn't accurate when it shoots stuff or tries to hit stuff in melee?
MAN who would've thunk it?
A Defiler should be better at punching people than a Guardsman.
Under what logic? How heavy do you think its claws are to wield compared to a Helbrute's fist?
So you don't like the idea that daemon engines are as effective at shooting and hitting as Hellbrutes? Why? If gw insists on making most csm vehicles daemon engines the least they can do is give them the same BS/WS as the rest of the armies that they're attached to.
I mean, daemon engines are other worldly manifestations of our deepest, darkest emotions who’ve been enslaved within the shell of a brutal vehicle covered in weapons. I feel like this incomprehensible monstrosity should be better at fighting than a basic foot soldier.
A Defiler should be better at punching people than a Guardsman.
Under what logic? How heavy do you think its claws are to wield compared to a Helbrute's fist?
So you don't like the idea that daemon engines are as effective at shooting and hitting as Hellbrutes? Why?
Because last 30 years of fluff plainly state that demons have problems with interacting with material world? Both seeing things and manipulating matter? And this was given as a reason why engines are unwieldy zillions of times in fluff? Or in game terms, a drawback to balance their self-healing and higher durability? But apparently flavor and balance isn't worth anything these days, all that matters are OP stats and broken rules so you can auto-win without trying, eh?
Try putting kitchen mittens on and manipulate something delicate, by your logic you guys won't have any problems because skill is the only thing that matters, inconvenient details be damned
They're untamed daemons bound to a machine and just thrown at the enemy. You think thats going to be as skilled as a Helbrute, already going insane, fighting?
A Defiler should be better at punching people than a Guardsman.
Under what logic? How heavy do you think its claws are to wield compared to a Helbrute's fist?
So you don't like the idea that daemon engines are as effective at shooting and hitting as Hellbrutes? Why? If gw insists on making most csm vehicles daemon engines the least they can do is give them the same BS/WS as the rest of the armies that they're attached to.
I already stated above why any Daemon Engine shouldn't be as effective as a Helbrute or Chaos Dread. It isn't difficult to grasp.
And guess what, the ones being piloted by CSM are, surprise surprise, WS/BS3+!
Voss wrote: Looks like a huge bump to bloat-drones overall.
I'll take non-degrading (if that simply isn't lost to the simplified sheet) for a wound any day.
Better ws/bs is just cake, as are the better guns.
Degration was shown on other datasheets of this kind by having 3 stat rows(new codex style). Degration went poof
Just to chime in, I get people feel weary of the buff to demon engines but I'd imagine it comes with extra points. I also imagine it the demons have been in the machines of some for awhile so they'd be more used to interacting with the physical world and perhaps be a bit better than a guard.
Hey, I love guard, but lets be honest the demons can have other ways to perceive things around them to help with their hits, I'd hope so anyways. Not every engine brought to where is freshly bound to the machine. Now maybe if you had two different point values and you could take cheaper yet weaker/harder to hit versions of the engines, that might be interesting but I don't think GW put that much thought into things.
Really it goes into the " How old is it ? " debate. Much like how every chaos marine is usually looked at as a heresy vet when that most likely isn't always the case. So if every chaos marine should be a super old vet, why can't every demon engine be an old timer ? Unless we are saying demons can't ever get better at anything. Just seems odd to have hate for better demon engines when their to hit has been sorta lame for awhile now.
It's also likely that they made this change to not end up tangling with having to find a proper price for certain weapons depending on whether they are on a daemon or a marine.
In any case, the buff was necessary to make daemon engines viable outside of daemonforging them every turn - a stratagem I fully expect to go away.
Most likely, and as long as its pointed properly I really don't see what the bad part of this is. Shouldn't unit entries feel usable and viable ? As it stood before some options just felt like wasted choices on demon engines. So long as it all feels like there aren't any no brainer choices and it's good choices you are picking from, that is a net positive. In my mind anyways.
Jidmah wrote: It's also likely that they made this change to not end up tangling with having to find a proper price for certain weapons depending on whether they are on a daemon or a marine.
In any case, the buff was necessary to make daemon engines viable outside of daemonforging them every turn - a stratagem I fully expect to go away.
They already got that buff indirectly with the cap on modifiers to hit.
Jidmah wrote: It's also likely that they made this change to not end up tangling with having to find a proper price for certain weapons depending on whether they are on a daemon or a marine.
In any case, the buff was necessary to make daemon engines viable outside of daemonforging them every turn - a stratagem I fully expect to go away.
They could also have altered their points or weapon profiles to make the lower accuracy less of an issue. They took the lazy way out imo.
Almost all daemon engines are equipped with imperial/chaos default weaponry though - multi-meltas, missile launchers, battlecannon, lascannons and so on, so altering weapon profiles isn't really a good solution.
Daemon engines have been sub-par choices for all of 8th and 9th so far, if fail to see how throwing them a bone to make them viable is such a problem.
Jidmah wrote: Almost all daemon engines are equipped with imperial/chaos default weaponry though - multi-meltas, missile launchers, battlecannon, lascannons and so on, so altering weapon profiles isn't really a good solution.
Daemon engines have been sub-par choices for all of 8th and 9th so far, if fail to see how throwing them a bone to make them viable is such a problem.
If they have stock weapons lower the chassis cost instead.
As someone who remembers the BS4(effectively BS 3+) on Craftworlds I am happy to see the army get some normalization on the BS. Especially since the platforms that are getting this buff have some of more important one-shot weapons in the army and currently provide Death Guard with one of the few long-range capacities.
There was a reason why Contemptor Dreadnoughts were popular in many Death Guard lists.
4+ WS and BS isn't somehow "immersive" and if space marine scouts can have WS3 and BS3 (back in the day they used to have inferio WS and BS to full blown marines) then so can deamon engines.
A couple of quotes from Codex: Death Guard about daemon engines:
"The daemons of nurgle are unusual, however, in that they adapt to their captivity more swiftly than other Dark Gods. Whether through glum resignation or the gleeful realization that such form allows them to inflict all manner of mayhem, a Daemon of Nurgle is much more amicable to being trapped inside a Defiler's shell."
"Should the enemy get too close, the Myphitic Blight-hauler falls upon them like a ravenous wolf, biting and devouring[...]"
"When combined with their potent marksmanship, and their ability to wreath the Death Guard battle line in covering fumes, it's not hard to see why these Daemon Engines are so highly valued."
"Myphitic Blight-haulers encircle their foe, strike at their most vulnerable points, then close in an consume the mangled corpses that are left in destruction's wake."
"The entities that possess Foetid Bloat-drones are more aggressive and spiteful than most Daemons of Nurgle."
If anything hitting just as well as the marines using them is more immersive than being strictly worse than an insane guy in a sarcophagus mindlessly rampaging across the battlefield.
Jidmah wrote: There is nothing immersive about stat-lines.
A couple of quotes from Codex: Death Guard about daemon engines:
"The daemons of nurgle are unusual, however, in that they adapt to their captivity more swiftly than other Dark Gods. Whether through glum resignation or the gleeful realization that such form allows them to inflict all manner of mayhem, a Daemon of Nurgle is much more amicable to being trapped inside a Defiler's shell."
"Should the enemy get too close, the Myphitic Blight-hauler falls upon them like a ravenous wolf, biting and devouring[...]"
"When combined with their potent marksmanship, and their ability to wreath the Death Guard battle line in covering fumes, it's not hard to see why these Daemon Engines are so highly valued."
"Myphitic Blight-haulers encircle their foe, strike at their most vulnerable points, then close in an consume the mangled corpses that are left in destruction's wake."
"The entities that possess Foetid Bloat-drones are more aggressive and spiteful than most Daemons of Nurgle."
If anything hitting just as well as the marines using them is more immersive than being strictly worse than an insane guy in a sarcophagus mindlessly rampaging across the battlefield.
If there's nothing immersive regards stat lines, why do orkshit on 5's with 3d to artificially inflate the results, why do plague marines even have t5?
A lot of people hating on all daemon engines possibly getting WS 3+ / BS 3+
Im all for it! drop the stupid daemon forge strat and then we'll have daemonic killing machines which dont feel awful to play in your army.
I can easily see something like forgefiend being WS 4+/ bs 3+ and mauler fiend being the inverse.
Daemon engines become more accurate unsupported, less accurate and damaging with Daemon forge (I use that strat, hate how it feels like such a crutch to make my defiler actually feel impactful)
The Lord of skulls for Khorne was already WS/BS 3+, just make it the baseline across the army so we can have better costed weapons on all tank/vehicle profiles (Bs 4 dual las cannons suck compared to bs3)
Jidmah wrote: Almost all daemon engines are equipped with imperial/chaos default weaponry though - multi-meltas, missile launchers, battlecannon, lascannons and so on, so altering weapon profiles isn't really a good solution.
Daemon engines have been sub-par choices for all of 8th and 9th so far, if fail to see how throwing them a bone to make them viable is such a problem.
If they have stock weapons lower the chassis cost instead.
They could adjust price of weapon as well. The way 9e codexes are made all weapons don't have to be same price. You can literally have different cost for every unit depending on how useful weapon is for unit.
Just for example could do melee upgrades cheaper for unit that doesn't benefit as much as dedicated melee unit.
Alas gw is too incompetent to do that way
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: There is nothing immersive about stat-lines.
.
Gir Spirit Bane wrote: A lot of people hating on all daemon engines possibly getting WS 3+ / BS 3+
Im all for it! drop the stupid daemon forge strat and then we'll have daemonic killing machines which dont feel awful to play in your army.
I can easily see something like forgefiend being WS 4+/ bs 3+ and mauler fiend being the inverse.
Daemon engines become more accurate unsupported, less accurate and damaging with Daemon forge (I use that strat, hate how it feels like such a crutch to make my defiler actually feel impactful)
The Lord of skulls for Khorne was already WS/BS 3+, just make it the baseline across the army so we can have better costed weapons on all tank/vehicle profiles (Bs 4 dual las cannons suck compared to bs3)
Why stop there, there's no real in-universe reason for a bs 3+ defiler, so if it's just because it'll make it suck less, go for bs 2+
The reasoning for it is "it makes my unit shoot better and saves me cp" which applies to literally every unit in the game.
If a model with a twin las cannon at bs4 costs 75% of a model with bs3+ they're balanced for damage output. People complain the game is "too killy/lethal" then want sweeping firepower increases.
Why does a regular space marine with blue armor die when he takes a hit from a rokkit, while one with white armor and a nartheticum or one holding a banner will always survive the hit, even if he decides to headbut the incoming projectile while not even wearing a helmet?
Why can't the Chapter Master of the White Scars run faster than fresh recruits to the imperial army?
Why is the super-human strength of Space Marines the same as totally human strength of catachan jungle fighters?
Why is it possible for genestealers to outrun super-sonic aircraft?
Why does a commissar fail to kill a heretic cultist two out of three times but always kills loyal troops when shooting them?
I could go on like this for days. Stats are means to an end, the datasheet as a whole needs to create a unit that feels immersive when played on the battlefield. Improving or decreasing a single value doesn't suddenly shatter immersion.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote: They could adjust price of weapon as well. The way 9e codexes are made all weapons don't have to be same price. You can literally have different cost for every unit depending on how useful weapon is for unit.
The price is irrelevant when you can only have three of them and they won't hit the broad side of a barn. The main reason things like lascannons, heavy blight launchers or entropy cannons were not used is because low RoF weapons with low BS on degrading platforms is just a bad investment, no matter how you look at it.
Jidmah wrote: There is nothing immersive about stat-lines. .
Ok. Bs3+ orks then
Shock-jump dragsta says hi.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote: Why stop there, there's no real in-universe reason for a bs 3+ defiler, so if it's just because it'll make it suck less, go for bs 2+
The reasoning for it is "it makes my unit shoot better and saves me cp" which applies to literally every unit in the game.
If a model with a twin las cannon at bs4 costs 75% of a model with bs3+ they're balanced for damage output. People complain the game is "too killy/lethal" then want sweeping firepower increases.
Just to be clear, you are fine with daemon engines re-rolling all hits and wounds, but not with them going to BS 3+ because they are daemons?
IMHO 4 WS and BS for deamon engines just feels unsastifying when you;re playing marines. you're used to 3s being your normal stats and 2s being your elites. the 4s on deamon engines was fine when it was literally once choice in the codex. but since 6th edition GW has really doubled down on deamon engines, (for example, most of the death guards heavy support options are deamon engines) so yeah I think revising them is definatly worth considering.
Jidmah wrote: Why does a regular space marine with blue armor die when he takes a hit from a rokkit, while one with white armor and a nartheticum or one holding a banner will always survive the hit, even if he decides to headbut the incoming projectile while not even wearing a helmet?
Why can't the Chapter Master of the White Scars run faster than fresh recruits to the imperial army?
Why is the super-human strength of Space Marines the same as totally human strength of catachan jungle fighters?
Why is it possible for genestealers to outrun super-sonic aircraft?
Why does a commissar fail to kill a heretic cultist two out of three times but always kills loyal troops when shooting them?
I could go on like this for days. Stats are means to an end, the datasheet as a whole needs to create a unit that feels immersive when played on the battlefield. Improving or decreasing a single value doesn't suddenly shatter immersion.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote: They could adjust price of weapon as well. The way 9e codexes are made all weapons don't have to be same price. You can literally have different cost for every unit depending on how useful weapon is for unit.
The price is irrelevant when you can only have three of them and they won't hit the broad side of a barn. The main reason things like lascannons, heavy blight launchers or entropy cannons were not used is because low RoF weapons with low BS on degrading platforms is just a bad investment, no matter how you look at it.
Jidmah wrote: There is nothing immersive about stat-lines.
.
Ok. Bs3+ orks then
Shock-jump dragsta says hi.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote: Why stop there, there's no real in-universe reason for a bs 3+ defiler, so if it's just because it'll make it suck less, go for bs 2+
The reasoning for it is "it makes my unit shoot better and saves me cp" which applies to literally every unit in the game.
If a model with a twin las cannon at bs4 costs 75% of a model with bs3+ they're balanced for damage output. People complain the game is "too killy/lethal" then want sweeping firepower increases.
Just to be clear, you are fine with daemon engines re-rolling all hits and wounds, but not with them going to BS 3+ because they are daemons?
If you want to pay cp for a strat to do that (which in reality will be changed if it even exists), sure go for your life, but thats not baked in to the unit.
You're also assuming they won't be rerolling everything on a 3+ as well.
Theyre 4+ for deeply established reasons in the setting, arbitrarily increasing that to make it "less bad" isn't the right approach.
Jidmah wrote:There is nothing immersive about stat-lines.
A couple of quotes from Codex: Death Guard about daemon engines:
"The daemons of nurgle are unusual, however, in that they adapt to their captivity more swiftly than other Dark Gods. Whether through glum resignation or the gleeful realization that such form allows them to inflict all manner of mayhem, a Daemon of Nurgle is much more amicable to being trapped inside a Defiler's shell."
Being happy somewhere doesn't mean they're suddenly better at fighting.
"Should the enemy get too close, the Myphitic Blight-hauler falls upon them like a ravenous wolf, biting and devouring[...]"
Ravenous beasts aren't exactly coordinated or know for being skilled combatants. Pretty sure a grot will fall upon someone biting and scratching like a ravenous animal as well, give it ws3+
"When combined with their potent marksmanship, and their ability to wreath the Death Guard battle line in covering fumes, it's not hard to see why these Daemon Engines are so highly valued."
Potent marksmanship relates to tri-lobe, ignoring that most IG units are noted to have potent marksmanship, but this is the best argument so far.
"Myphitic Blight-haulers encircle their foe, strike at their most vulnerable points, then close in an consume the mangled corpses that are left in destruction's wake."
Again, how does this imply they're expert fighters with great close combat skills? Again a grot knows to hit someone in the vulnerable parts, give them ws3+
"The entities that possess Foetid Bloat-drones are more aggressive and spiteful than most Daemons of Nurgle."
Being pissed off doesn't make you fight better.
If anything hitting just as well as the marines using them is more immersive than being strictly worse than an insane guy in a sarcophagus mindlessly rampaging across the battlefield.
I agree, if a helbrute becomes enraged, drop it to bs/ws 4+ and give an attacks boost.
Jidmah wrote:I just quoted multiple parts of fluff which contradict these "deeply established reasons".
You're arguing a daemon who has their own 4+/4+ stat line, coerced into a foreign body in a realm they're not used to manipulating is as skilled in combat as an eldar aspect warrior.
Gir Spirit Bane wrote: A lot of people hating on all daemon engines possibly getting WS 3+ / BS 3+
Im all for it! drop the stupid daemon forge strat and then we'll have daemonic killing machines which dont feel awful to play in your army.
I can easily see something like forgefiend being WS 4+/ bs 3+ and mauler fiend being the inverse.
Daemon engines become more accurate unsupported, less accurate and damaging with Daemon forge (I use that strat, hate how it feels like such a crutch to make my defiler actually feel impactful)
The Lord of skulls for Khorne was already WS/BS 3+, just make it the baseline across the army so we can have better costed weapons on all tank/vehicle profiles (Bs 4 dual las cannons suck compared to bs3)
Why stop there, there's no real in-universe reason for a bs 3+ defiler, so if it's just because it'll make it suck less, go for bs 2+
The reasoning for it is "it makes my unit shoot better and saves me cp" which applies to literally every unit in the game.
If a model with a twin las cannon at bs4 costs 75% of a model with bs3+ they're balanced for damage output. People complain the game is "too killy/lethal" then want sweeping firepower increases.
The sweeping firepower increases come without doubt point increases which is not a bad thing in my opinion.
Your reasons for hating on Daemon engines possibly getting +3 WS/BS seems more rooted in "Not my fluff, look at X Y sources" and ignoring all the evidence pointing to the contrary.
I'd expect a Daemon Engine specifically forged to murder and kill to be EQUALLY as dangerous as a hellbrute, which is just a crazy mutated dread that the Space Marines cant even control unlike the Daemon Engines.
"Should the enemy get too close, the Myphitic Blight-hauler falls upon them like a ravenous wolf, biting and devouring[...]"
Ravenous beasts aren't exactly coordinated or know for being skilled combatants. Pretty sure a grot will fall upon someone biting and scratching like a ravenous animal as well, give it ws3+
WS doesn't always equate to consummate martial skill, if something attacks in such overwhelming brutality/force you CANT really fight back properly/deflect. The grot point you raised is both silly in stat idea and ingame universe. and as I have to say sometimes things are abstracted in stats. WS can represent skill in arms or just ability to hit you with *something*, stop being so dense and ignoring other people's valid points because YOU don't like them.
Gir Spirit Bane wrote: A lot of people hating on all daemon engines possibly getting WS 3+ / BS 3+
Im all for it! drop the stupid daemon forge strat and then we'll have daemonic killing machines which dont feel awful to play in your army.
I can easily see something like forgefiend being WS 4+/ bs 3+ and mauler fiend being the inverse.
Daemon engines become more accurate unsupported, less accurate and damaging with Daemon forge (I use that strat, hate how it feels like such a crutch to make my defiler actually feel impactful)
The Lord of skulls for Khorne was already WS/BS 3+, just make it the baseline across the army so we can have better costed weapons on all tank/vehicle profiles (Bs 4 dual las cannons suck compared to bs3)
Why stop there, there's no real in-universe reason for a bs 3+ defiler, so if it's just because it'll make it suck less, go for bs 2+
The reasoning for it is "it makes my unit shoot better and saves me cp" which applies to literally every unit in the game.
If a model with a twin las cannon at bs4 costs 75% of a model with bs3+ they're balanced for damage output. People complain the game is "too killy/lethal" then want sweeping firepower increases.
The sweeping firepower increases come without doubt point increases which is not a bad thing in my opinion.
Your reasons for hating on Daemon engines possibly getting +3 WS/BS seems more rooted in "Not my fluff, look at X Y sources" and ignoring all the evidence pointing to the contrary.
I'd expect a Daemon Engine specifically forged to murder and kill to be EQUALLY as dangerous as a hellbrute, which is just a crazy mutated dread that the Space Marines cant even control unlike the Daemon Engines.
"Should the enemy get too close, the Myphitic Blight-hauler falls upon them like a ravenous wolf, biting and devouring[...]"
Ravenous beasts aren't exactly coordinated or know for being skilled combatants. Pretty sure a grot will fall upon someone biting and scratching like a ravenous animal as well, give it ws3+
WS doesn't always equate to consummate martial skill, if something attacks in such overwhelming brutality/force you CANT really fight back properly/deflect. The grot point you raised is both silly in stat idea and ingame universe. and as I have to say sometimes things are abstracted in stats. WS can represent skill in arms or just ability to hit you with *something*, stop being so dense and ignoring other people's valid points because YOU don't like them.
Back at you.
You're literally disregarding my points as invalid because they don't fit your viewpoint. I'm entitled to my opinion as is Jidmah.
Just because we don't agree doesn't mean we can't debate back and forth, at the end of the day we can walk away with our own opinions unchanged without name calling or finger pointing.
I can maybe understand Nurgle and Tzeentch Daemon Engines hitting on a 4+. I think they should hit on a 3+ for consistency's sake, given they're part of Codex CSM and not Codex Daemons, but for Nurgle and Tzeentch, their lesser Daemons hit on a 4+.
What about Khorne and Slaanesh? Their lesser Daemons hit on a 3+ base.
JNAProductions wrote: I can maybe understand Nurgle and Tzeentch Daemon Engines hitting on a 4+. I think they should hit on a 3+ for consistency's sake, given they're part of Codex CSM and not Codex Daemons, but for Nurgle and Tzeentch, their lesser Daemons hit on a 4+.
What about Khorne and Slaanesh? Their lesser Daemons hit on a 3+ base.
Honestly I'd be fine with it if they have a price for base chassis then a cost for the appropriate mark in the case of a choice, or simply price accordingly per book.
It does raise the question of why a bloodletter is bs 3+ and I think daemonettes are too?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ZebioLizard2 wrote: I mean this is the news post, there shouldn't be a debate about daemon engine stats at all here..
I'm however in favor of this change personally.
Maybe not but it is likely a massive balance shift for the book so not totally irrelevant.
Might be safer to leave it be for now though, agreed.
The first Daemon Engine ever introduced to mainline 40k started off with WS2 & BS4, so I'm not sure why some folks are so heavily invested in them hitting on a 4+/4+, or why there's some funky mental gymnastics going on arguing that "there's no lore to support them being more accurate than a guardsman" when we're stuck using a D6 system to hit with minimal granularity. Ideally there would be a space to fill between a guardsman's accuracy and the abilities of a transhuman super soldier, but there isn't. Saying that they "aren't used to their confinement" makes little sense when they might be stuck in their prisons for literally thousands of years, or longer, and being able to more effectively channel their abilities is the only pathway for them to gain some small measure of respite.
I mean, go through any CSM codex and look for a quote saying that Daemon Engines can't hit things properly without looking at a statline. You won't find one.
If Fenrisian Wolves can hit on a 3+, or a Chaos Dreadnought driven insane by millennia of captivity can hit on a 3+, there's no good reason to not give Daemon Engines 3+/3+. People are just used to seeing them at 4+/4+ and are twisting the lore to suit their interpretation when GW clearly disagrees. Best get used to the new reality.
Dudeface wrote: Being happy somewhere doesn't mean they're suddenly better at fighting.
It debunks the argument that daemons don't fight as well inside of daemon engines because they are fighting against their restraints.
Ravenous beasts aren't exactly coordinated or know for being skilled combatants.
You mean, like fenrisian wolves or possessed?
Pretty sure a grot will fall upon someone biting and scratching like a ravenous animal as well, give it ws3+
You might want to refresh your knowledge on gretchin - they are universally described a cowardly and weak, who only take on enemies that are weaker than them through strength of numbers.
Potent marksmanship relates to tri-lobe, ignoring that most IG units are noted to have potent marksmanship, but this is the best argument so far.
The tri-lobe is not related to this, and is only referenced in later paragraphs.
Again, how does this imply they're expert fighters with great close combat skills? Again a grot knows to hit someone in the vulnerable parts, give them ws3+
Gretchin are WS5+, precisely because they don't know the first thing about close combat, and they for sure don't know how how to find a vulnerable spot on a marine or tank.
If being able to hit vulnerable parts is no a sign of combat aptitude, what is?
Being pissed off doesn't make you fight better.
Really? In a universe where half the fluff is about righteous fury, rage or hatred effectively being super-powers, let alone living manifestations of those roaming the universe?
I agree, if a helbrute becomes enraged, drop it to bs/ws 4+ and give an attacks boost.
According to the fluff this would be always.
Jidmah wrote:You're arguing a daemon who has their own 4+/4+ stat line, coerced into a foreign body in a realm they're not used to manipulating is as skilled in combat as an eldar aspect warrior.
No, I'm arguing that putting the combat and marksman abilities of an entire universe on a 2-6 scale based on fluff is nonsense, and eldar aspect warriors and their phoenix lords are probably the ultimate example why stat line tweaking has absolutely nothing to do with fluff.
Marshal Loss wrote: The first Daemon Engine ever introduced to mainline 40k started off with WS2 & BS4, so I'm not sure why some folks are so heavily invested in them hitting on a 4+/4+, or why there's some funky mental gymnastics going on arguing that "there's no lore to support them being more accurate than a guardsman" when we're stuck using a D6 system to hit with minimal granularity. Ideally there would be a space to fill between a guardsman's accuracy and the abilities of a transhuman super soldier, but there isn't. Saying that they "aren't used to their confinement" makes little sense when they might be stuck in their prisons for literally thousands of years, or longer, and being able to more effectively channel their abilities is the only pathway for them to gain some small measure of respite.
I mean, go through any CSM codex and look for a quote saying that Daemon Engines can't hit things properly without looking at a statline. You won't find one.
If Fenrisian Wolves can hit on a 3+, or a Chaos Dreadnought driven insane by millennia of captivity can hit on a 3+, there's no good reason to not give Daemon Engines 3+/3+. People are just used to seeing them at 4+/4+ and are twisting the lore to suit their interpretation when GW clearly disagrees. Best get used to the new reality.
I don't think Ferisian Wolves should hit on a 3+ either. Whats your point? Some other units that shouldn't hit on a 3+ do so, and therefore we make Daemon Engines do the same?
GW clearly has never understood how "stride" works and why a dreadnought would move faster than a guardsman due to how long its legs are. If they cant wrap their heads around that, then a lot of other topics will never be understood either!
I mean back during 3rd Ed the Salamanders were SLOWER because they lived on high gravity world, yet most people know they would then move FASTER on normal worlds :p
Marshal Loss wrote: The first Daemon Engine ever introduced to mainline 40k started off with WS2 & BS4
Hum, wasn't that the Blood Slaughterer? It had WS4/BS4, at least in the Vehicle Manual.
The first with a model in a codex was the defiler in 3rd ed, which as martial loss points out hit on a 5 in melee and 3 at range.
Daemonic possession was also added as an upgrade to non-transport vehicles at this point, which from 4th onwards reduced the BS of the tank to hit on 4's (to represent the daemon struggling to function in the material world) in return for a boost in durability.
I really love the idea of Daemon Engines going to WS/BS3 I expect a bit of a points cost increase on some, but It will be nice for a bunch of the previously wimpy daemon engines to be threatening now.
Sasori wrote: I really love the idea of Daemon Engines going to WS/BS3 I expect a bit of a points cost increase on some, but It will be nice for a bunch of the previously wimpy daemon engines to be threatening now.
I totally agree.. having demon engines "feel" like demonic entities matters for my fluff diet.
Man when I saw this thread went to 3 pages overnight I assumed we just had a lot more DG fans than I thought. Turns out it is 2 pages of back and forth over whether or not BS/WS 3+ is fluffy on daemon engines. Take it to the background forum lads.
I'll just say I'll applaud 3+ just because it normalizes everything in my list to hit the same. Not a big issue when it doesn't, but it's just easier for me when it does. Especially since DG never got access to Demon Forged in the first place.
I'm just going to throw an assumption in like every one else. Perhaps the WS/BS adjustment is because they'll no longer be core and rather than make Chaos players pay for Daemonforge every turn (I expect the strat to stay), they're just throwing a bone another way because DE are our core vehicles, so for them to be permanent 4+ without access to re-rolls outside of a strat (and considering the new ease of accessing -1 to hit) would be pretty darn rough considering their current volume of attacks/damage output. Is there a more eloquent solution that could fit with fluff? Probably, there usually is. Is this an easy and cheerful way to solve it? Yeah. It's just another example of D6's limitations.
Back to Death Guard though. The present changes look promising if they hold up.
Pretty underwhelming as a whole. Not even seeing a reason for a 9th edition for this , one of the first armies' they came out for 8th- The whole wait for that codex was for nothing.
I’m still of the opinion that the DG release will be incredibly half-assed based on the radio silence from GW on something that should be coming out in two or three weeks.
Maybe this week or next will prove me wrong but I think a two model (termie lord and terrain) release with a repackaging of the zombies and ETB kits is all we get.
Plus the day one DLC rules in the campaign book, assuming those aren’t explicitly narrative only.
Oh boy how much I'll love needing two books off the bat for DG. Can't wait, but I'll just hope the rules are all good in the codex and the campaign is just narrative. I doubt that to be the case though as why miss a chance to force some bloat.
I don't mind if the model release is light so long as the kits we have feel viable. I'm hopefully optimistic, but I know what that sets me up for.
While Hateful Assault may be something spelled out in the beginning of the book and applying to all data sheets, it isn’t mentioned here now.
Nurgle’s Gift is applying to things outside the Lord of Contagion (if that’s even the same rule in the new codex).
Disgusting Resiliency may be FAQd across all armies simultaneously as “Refer to Codex Death Guard” if they do end up changing it as rumored.
I suspect in the new book Nurgle's gift maybe a catch all rule like the loyalist angels of death rule that will encompass hateful assault, bolter discipline and any doctrine type abilities we might get.
The existing lord of contagion Nurgle's gift mortal wound output rule will probably go or be renamed. Greater blight drone dishing out a mortal wound aura seems a bit odd...
Absolutely nothing indicates that the campaign book's rules content will be purely for narrative or open play, that would be extremely out of character for GW. Far safer to assume that it's a proper supplement at this stage.
PoorGravitasHandling wrote: Disgusting Resiliency may be FAQd across all armies simultaneously as “Refer to Codex Death Guard” if they do end up changing it as rumored.
They won't make other factions refer to a different Codex to get their rules.
They had very little in the way of 'NEW!' items accompanying them. It was the first way to get Outriders, Ghazghkull, and Ragnar by themselves that wasn't third party. There was the new painting handle and then the Combat Patrol boxes.
Blood Angels have gotten a bit of 'hype' because their Combat Patrol got leaked in advance when the Christmas Battleforces started to get leaked too.
Blood Angels also got what, 3 weeks of hype for the release?
Going to re-iterate that my gut feeling is a half-assed codex and release.
Wolves and dw were on same day so his statement isn't in conflict. Together or more than 1 week separated. Sw and dw were together. Ba and dg will be separated more than 1 week.
Hard to see them releasing on 26th(is that btw holiday in england?) So likely next sunday announcement. That or gw release schedule has gone nuts
Blood Angels also got what, 3 weeks of hype for the release?
Going to re-iterate that my gut feeling is a half-assed codex and release.
Wolves and dw were on same day so his statement isn't in conflict. Together or more than 1 week separated. Sw and dw were together. Ba and dg will be separated more than 1 week.
Hard to see them releasing on 26th(is that btw holiday in england?) So likely next sunday announcement. That or gw release schedule has gone nuts
26th is a national holiday in the UK (boxing day) so it must be announced next week.
Bit surprised it will be another week, but I can wait. As for letdown of a release I think I disagree. As long as the rules are solid I don't mind we only get a building, a character and a SC box. I don't feel we really miss something other than some long ranged fire support maybe, but 3+ Deamon engines will help with that anyway.
Blood Angels also got what, 3 weeks of hype for the release?
Going to re-iterate that my gut feeling is a half-assed codex and release.
Wolves and dw were on same day so his statement isn't in conflict. Together or more than 1 week separated. Sw and dw were together. Ba and dg will be separated more than 1 week.
Hard to see them releasing on 26th(is that btw holiday in england?) So likely next sunday announcement. That or gw release schedule has gone nuts
26th is a national holiday in the UK (boxing day) so it must be announced next week.
Is boxing day actually a legit holiday over there? in Canada it's mostly an excuse to have Sales. Given GW's refusal to do sales I could see them instead using a new codex as their "boxing day shopping draw"
26th would be a letdown, but I've learned from Orktober that the way GW does "releases in X month" doesn't really relate to the way normal people would interpret that statement. Unlike then, I've already got a functioning codex + PA for the time being so a week or 3 more isn't that bad in this case.
JWBS wrote: Why's that? Are people who might have bought it a week before or after just not gonna buy it if it lands on that day?
Well a lot of people are busy visiting family, a lot of people have very little spare cash by that point, lots of stores and companies are making an effort to allow staff have longer off this year offer the festive period, the first normal working day after the release stores are closed anyway, maybe little timny knows the book is coming out in December and GW wants to sell them it for Christmas?
Not saying they won't but it's not normal practice to release new products over bank holidays in the most expensive month of the year after everyone has just finished shopping and received lots of gifts.
bullyboy wrote: i think it's a pretty safe bet it's coming out on the 19th.
This. It's really not rocket science. Previews will start on 7th, pre-order date will be on the 12th for a release on the 19th - just in time for GW to disappear into holiday break like they do every year.
Dudeface wrote: Well a lot of people are busy visiting family, a lot of people have very little spare cash by that point, lots of stores and companies are making an effort to allow staff have longer off this year offer the festive period, the first normal working day after the release stores are closed anyway, maybe little timny knows the book is coming out in December and GW wants to sell them it for Christmas?
In Oz the 26th is Boxing Day, a public holiday, and the first day of the post-Christmas sales where everyone rushes to the stores to buy stuff.
There'd be no problem selling new things here on that day.
Dudeface wrote: Well a lot of people are busy visiting family, a lot of people have very little spare cash by that point, lots of stores and companies are making an effort to allow staff have longer off this year offer the festive period, the first normal working day after the release stores are closed anyway, maybe little timny knows the book is coming out in December and GW wants to sell them it for Christmas?
In Oz the 26th is Boxing Day, a public holiday, and the first day of the post-Christmas sales where everyone rushes to the stores to buy stuff.
There'd be no problem selling new things here on that day.
I read somewhere that December 26th (St. Stephen's Day here) is one of the biggest shopping days of the year since internet shopping became a thing. Lots of people with new devices cruising the internet for deals and making loads of sherry-induced impulse purchases.
JWBS wrote: Why's that? Are people who might have bought it a week before or after just not gonna buy it if it lands on that day?
Well a lot of people are busy visiting family, a lot of people have very little spare cash by that point, lots of stores and companies are making an effort to allow staff have longer off this year offer the festive period, the first normal working day after the release stores are closed anyway, maybe little timny knows the book is coming out in December and GW wants to sell them it for Christmas?
Not saying they won't but it's not normal practice to release new products over bank holidays in the most expensive month of the year after everyone has just finished shopping and received lots of gifts.
Yeah I'm not sure that GW products are quite as demand elastic as some things though, not to the point where day of release means +/- 10% sales. People are gonna buy their Codex of choice no matter what even if they have to wait until payday. Also, if little Timmy does have Dakka as one of his home tabs (he doesn't, we're all Old Gregs here) and knows the exact day his items drop, he can use his Christmas money if that day happens to be the day after xmas
Well for wanting leaks and info I kind of would like it sooner as opposed to later. I need to know if I should be happy or cry into cheerios. Planning my sorrow is one of lifes few remaining joys in 2020.
I am hoping we'll start seeing more leaks when more of the new boxes go into circulation and people take a photo of the instruction datasheet.
I also doubt that it will go out on 26th of December considering the fact that the week preceding that will be hell for shipping supplies between countries as many European countries enjoy vacation on holidays and everything else is doing its last minute shipping to destinations. It would mean that most countries won't be getting their Death Guard until the first week of January.
Dudeface wrote: Well a lot of people are busy visiting family, a lot of people have very little spare cash by that point, lots of stores and companies are making an effort to allow staff have longer off this year offer the festive period, the first normal working day after the release stores are closed anyway, maybe little timny knows the book is coming out in December and GW wants to sell them it for Christmas?
In Oz the 26th is Boxing Day, a public holiday, and the first day of the post-Christmas sales where everyone rushes to the stores to buy stuff.
There'd be no problem selling new things here on that day.
Castozor wrote: 26th would be a letdown, but I've learned from Orktober that the way GW does "releases in X month" doesn't really relate to the way normal people would interpret that statement. Unlike then, I've already got a functioning codex + PA for the time being so a week or 3 more isn't that bad in this case.
Last time I checked, the 26th December is *in December*. I really don’t understand why some people are determined to be so pissy about this.
Stats changes look great. Very interested in what "Remorseless" and "Contagions of Nurgle" do, and still eager of course to find out what is happening with DR.
Didn't expect the additional attack. Killer. Hope this carries over to other Legions. Like the changes to Possessed too, even though I don't use them. Also looks like all daemon engines going to WS/BS3 confirmed. Glad for folks that use those too.
Ever since Codex: Space Marines bestowed non-Primaris Space Marines with a pesky extra Wound, Heretic Astartes have been on the back foot. Now Codex: Death Guard makes Plague Marines appropriately difficult to dispatch – and it’s just a taste of what’s to come for Chaos Space Marines in the future.
Sounds like there's definitely some previews of what to expect coming for the Loyalists.
Complete guess, but I imagine remorseless will be the equivalent of Angels of Death. Might be different things in there, but I expect that's where hateful assault and malicious volleys will live.
Contagions of Nurgle will hold DR or something like that I think
Doohicky wrote: Complete guess, but I imagine remorseless will be the equivalent of Angels of Death. Might be different things in there, but I expect that's where hateful assault and malicious volleys will live.
Contagions of Nurgle will hold DR or something like that I think
Contagions will probably replace the plague hosts as sub-faction choice.
Dudeface wrote: What do peeps think a plague marine will cost now?
Really hard to say without knowing what Disgustingly Resilient is. If it stays as a 5+++, then Plague Marines will be. . . heck IDK they'll be really expensive. Can't see them less than 25 points if that's the case.
Dudeface wrote: What do peeps think a plague marine will cost now?
Depends on what DR will do in the new codex. A 5+++ will be stronger on a multi-model unit of 2W models than the rumored -1 to wound against multi-damage weapons.
Dudeface wrote: What do peeps think a plague marine will cost now?
I guess 23-25 points per model. It heavily depends on what they will do with DR though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Possessed also are looking really great right now - +1 toughness, 4 attacks base, plague weapon and apparently gaining access to army-wide abilities.
As for Remorseless and Contagions of Nurgle, I assume the first being the CSM variant of Angels of Death, combining bolter drill, hateful blows and death to the false emperor, while the later is likely to be DR (whatever form that might take)+X
Dudeface wrote: What do peeps think a plague marine will cost now?
I guess 23-25 points per model. It heavily depends on what they will do with DR though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Possessed also are looking really great right now - +1 toughness, 4 attacks base, plague weapon and apparently gaining access to army-wide abilities.
As for Remorseless and Contagions of Nurgle, I assume the first being the CSM variant of Angels of Death, combining bolter drill, hateful blows and death to the false emperor, while the later is likely to be DR (whatever form that might take)+X
Possessed change bodes well for any lingering hand me downs from csm like spawn etc.
I used t think 22-23 per PM but with the extra attack as well I'm also thinking 23 to 25. Makes me wonder if flails will stay the same, because those are going to be brutal at 3 attacks.
Bit disappointing to see that the trend of increasing lethality continues but if everyone else is getting it we might as well benefit.
The only issue with 25ppm PMs is that would their damage output be good enough to warrant that price?
All well and good being tough to shift, but if they are armed with normal bolters then no one cares until they get into close combat.
Dudeface wrote: What do peeps think a plague marine will cost now?
I guess 23-25 points per model. It heavily depends on what they will do with DR though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Possessed also are looking really great right now - +1 toughness, 4 attacks base, plague weapon and apparently gaining access to army-wide abilities.
As for Remorseless and Contagions of Nurgle, I assume the first being the CSM variant of Angels of Death, combining bolter drill, hateful blows and death to the false emperor, while the later is likely to be DR (whatever form that might take)+X
The article also says that Possessed will be getting Contagions of Nurgle. So if that's what DR is going to be called now then it's a pretty good guess that at least all the infantry units Death Guard share with the Undivided Legions will now have abilities to match the rest of the army. +1 toughness too.
I would guess that Contagions of Nurgle may be the Doctrine/Protocols equilivant for running a mono-faction army. It sounds like something you cycle through.
Voss wrote: Wow. Didn't expect a huge boost to possessed. 4 attacks and T5?
Want to bet this means they're finally getting new models?
No bet. The history of possessed models AND rules is so insanely stupid, I wouldn't even try to predict anything.
They've botched this more often than not- if the rules are starting to look good, they're either going to pull the kit or make a new one that's somehow even worse.
Voss wrote: Wow. Didn't expect a huge boost to possessed. 4 attacks and T5?
Want to bet this means they're finally getting new models?
A buff to Possessed to shift old models that don't sell well sounds far more like the GW we know and love
Let's hold off on the perceived buffs until we see points. Extra attacks and T are all well and good, but if they cost stupid points then it's still worthless.
Doohicky wrote: The only issue with 25ppm PMs is that would their damage output be good enough to warrant that price?
All well and good being tough to shift, but if they are armed with normal bolters then no one cares until they get into close combat.
It seems pretty grim unless their Bolters get Plague Weapon too, which to be fair there is literally no reason they shouldn't.
Dudeface wrote: What do peeps think a plague marine will cost now?
I guess 23-25 points per model. It heavily depends on what they will do with DR though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Possessed also are looking really great right now - +1 toughness, 4 attacks base, plague weapon and apparently gaining access to army-wide abilities.
As for Remorseless and Contagions of Nurgle, I assume the first being the CSM variant of Angels of Death, combining bolter drill, hateful blows and death to the false emperor, while the later is likely to be DR (whatever form that might take)+X
Possessed change bodes well for any lingering hand me downs from csm like spawn etc.
I wouldn't expect it on Spawn, but the Lord/Sorcerer would seem in line, assuming they stick around.
Voss wrote: Wow. Didn't expect a huge boost to possessed. 4 attacks and T5?
Want to bet this means they're finally getting new models?
A buff to Possessed to shift old models that don't sell well sounds far more like the GW we know and love
That's a possibility as well. It will be interesting to see what buffs, if any, the other cult marines will get besides the additional wound, and if Chosen get something as well in order to give the Undivided Legions a boost.
Dudeface wrote: What do peeps think a plague marine will cost now?
I guess 23-25 points per model. It heavily depends on what they will do with DR though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Possessed also are looking really great right now - +1 toughness, 4 attacks base, plague weapon and apparently gaining access to army-wide abilities.
As for Remorseless and Contagions of Nurgle, I assume the first being the CSM variant of Angels of Death, combining bolter drill, hateful blows and death to the false emperor, while the later is likely to be DR (whatever form that might take)+X
The article also says that Possessed will be getting Contagions of Nurgle. So if that's what DR is going to be called now then it's a pretty good guess that at least all the infantry units Death Guard share with the Undivided Legions will now have abilities to match the rest of the army. +1 toughness too.
I am so excited for Possessed. These guys are going to be great running up the field at max unit size with psychic and character support.
Giving Death Guard Possessed the same rules as regular Death Guard Marines will hopefully be the start of GW breaking the asinine way they give rules to Chaos factions.
And WS/BS3+ Daemon Engines across the board? Well ain't that nice.
I'd heavily expect Plague Marines to be about 26 points per model, unless they nerf the heck out of their special rules. If their bolter ALSO gets plague weapon they'd be very good, and possibly under costed though.
26 would be way too much. You have to realize that without special weapons that add another 10-15 points per model they don´t kill squat. Plague bolters would be nice but let´s not pretend S4 AP- D1 is a particularly fearful profile even with reroll to wound.
Horla wrote: Are those new Dreadnoughts of some description in the background here?
Nope. Its the current Helbrute, set up for twin fist. Might even be the DG one from the store page, though if so, the lighting is shifting the colors a lot.
Hmmm. 26 points for a bolter sounds awful.
26 points for 2 T5 3+/5+++ wounds however sounds quite good.
There is always a "that's the point" to some of this - but I think you are seeing this strange increase of lethality, while at the same time basic S4/S5 AP- 1 damage attacks become more and more worthless.
People simply can't help but hate things that dare survive getting shot at
Currently a plague marine is 17 points, a tactical marine paid 3 points for an extra wound, so paying 4-5 for the effective 1.5 extra wounds seems like a fair deal. An extra attack on a marine profile seem to be worth 2 points so you'll end up with 23-24 if GW, maybe another point of spike tax.
Anything beyond that would be a hard nerf on a unit that already was struggling.
Jidmah wrote: People simply can't help but hate things that dare survive getting shot at
Currently a plague marine is 17 points, a tactical marine paid 3 points for an extra wound, so paying 4-5 for the effective 1.5 extra wounds seems like a fair deal. An extra attack on a marine profile seem to be worth 2 points so you'll end up with 23-24 if GW, maybe another point of spike tax.
Anything beyond that would be a hard nerf on a unit that already was struggling.
I don't think the bolded is a good analysis - as often as it comes up - because it assumes the 1 wound Tactical Marine was perfectly balanced at 15 points, which I don't think anyone believed. If the 1 wound tactical marine was actually worth about 13-14 points, then they paid 4-5 for the extra wound.
I mean boring analysis - at 24 points.
Intercessors with bolt rifles into Plague Marines.
2*2/3*1/3*1/2*2/3=0.1481. *12=1.77 points. Divided by 20=8.8% return.
Plague Marines regular Bolters into Intercessors.
2*2/3*1/2*1/3=0.222. *10=2.22 points. Divided by 24=9.26% return.
So factoring in doctrines etc and potentially more Death Guard rules its probably close enough. Arguably the DG are superior though, given the likelihood of a 5+++ messing with 2 damage weapons which you want to put into these units because of how poor the above returns are.
Jidmah wrote: People simply can't help but hate things that dare survive getting shot at
Currently a plague marine is 17 points, a tactical marine paid 3 points for an extra wound, so paying 4-5 for the effective 1.5 extra wounds seems like a fair deal. An extra attack on a marine profile seem to be worth 2 points so you'll end up with 23-24 if GW, maybe another point of spike tax.
Anything beyond that would be a hard nerf on a unit that already was struggling.
I don't think the bolded is a good analysis - as often as it comes up - because it assumes the 1 wound Tactical Marine was perfectly balanced at 15 points, which I don't think anyone believed. If the 1 wound tactical marine was actually worth about 13-14 points, then they paid 4-5 for the extra wound.
I mean boring analysis - at 24 points.
Intercessors with bolt rifles into Plague Marines.
2*2/3*1/3*1/2*2/3=0.1481. *12=1.77 points. Divided by 20=8.8% return.
Plague Marines regular Bolters into Intercessors.
2*2/3*1/2*1/3=0.222. *10=2.22 points. Divided by 24=9.26% return.
So factoring in doctrines etc and potentially more Death Guard rules its probably close enough. Arguably the DG are superior though, given the likelihood of a 5+++ messing with 2 damage weapons which you want to put into these units because of how poor the above returns are.
we also don't know what special rules death guard will get. it's a save bet they'll also have an "anti-souping" rule.
Jidmah wrote: People simply can't help but hate things that dare survive getting shot at
Currently a plague marine is 17 points, a tactical marine paid 3 points for an extra wound, so paying 4-5 for the effective 1.5 extra wounds seems like a fair deal. An extra attack on a marine profile seem to be worth 2 points so you'll end up with 23-24 if GW, maybe another point of spike tax.
Anything beyond that would be a hard nerf on a unit that already was struggling.
Assault Intercessors are 19 point. Intercessors are 20 points. Plague Marines are +1 T, -1 M compared to them. Their bolter & Plague Knife are inferior to the stock Intercessor options (Various Bolt Rifles or Heavy Bolt Pistol and Astartes Chainsword). So we are looking at a model that is maybe a hair better than an Intercessor if they keep a 5+++. Let's hope they aren't more than 22 points without upgrades (weapon or rules wise).
Plague marines are now a close combat unit. Cos like who cares about AP0 bolter shooting... Its a waste of dice rolling. Meanwile, T5 2W 2A with other rules is going to be good in close combat.
Eldenfirefly wrote: Plague marines are now a close combat unit. Cos like who cares about AP0 bolter shooting... Its a waste of dice rolling. Meanwile, T5 2W 2A with other rules is going to be good in close combat.
Especially if they keep the Vectors of Death and Disease special rule. Assault Intercessors who?
Assuming the DG special rules balance out doctrines, a heavy intercessor is effectively the same profile once DR is factored in. They're 28 points base with the better gun but worse melee option, so if plague rounds were added to bolters or something else mild then 24 seems OK.
Jidmah wrote: People simply can't help but hate things that dare survive getting shot at
Currently a plague marine is 17 points, a tactical marine paid 3 points for an extra wound, so paying 4-5 for the effective 1.5 extra wounds seems like a fair deal. An extra attack on a marine profile seem to be worth 2 points so you'll end up with 23-24 if GW, maybe another point of spike tax.
Anything beyond that would be a hard nerf on a unit that already was struggling.
I don't think the bolded is a good analysis - as often as it comes up - because it assumes the 1 wound Tactical Marine was perfectly balanced at 15 points, which I don't think anyone believed. If the 1 wound tactical marine was actually worth about 13-14 points, then they paid 4-5 for the extra wound.
Tactical marines and plague marines were the same unit though, and if plague marines were anywhere near "perfectly balanced", they would show up in lists more and not be replaced by nurgle daemons by everyone. Their main use right now is the grenade combo, which I'm absolutely sure will go away.
I mean boring analysis - at 24 points. Intercessors with bolt rifles into Plague Marines. 2*2/3*1/3*1/2*2/3=0.1481. *12=1.77 points. Divided by 20=8.8% return. Plague Marines regular Bolters into Intercessors. 2*2/3*1/2*1/3=0.222. *10=2.22 points. Divided by 24=9.26% return.
Not to discount you work, but this kind of comparison is worthless. Essentially you are comparing the speed of two cars driving on different tracks. You need to have both units shoot at the same target to compare their offensive output.
So factoring in doctrines etc and potentially more Death Guard rules its probably close enough. Arguably the DG are superior though, given the likelihood of a 5+++ messing with 2 damage weapons which you want to put into these units because of how poor the above returns are.
2W and FNP are effectively 3 wound models, which die to 2 damage shots 4 out of 9 times. Obviously shooting them with 2 damage weapon is just as a bad idea as shooting gravis models with 2 damage weapons.
Galas wrote:Hellbrute, Defiler and old finecast daemon prince of Nurgle.
Voss wrote:
Horla wrote: Are those new Dreadnoughts of some description in the background here?
Nope. Its the current Helbrute, set up for twin fist. Might even be the DG one from the store page, though if so, the lighting is shifting the colors a lot.
Thanks, I'm not that familiar with a lot of the big Chaos machines. Yet.
cuda1179 wrote: I'd heavily expect Plague Marines to be about 26 points per model, unless they nerf the heck out of their special rules. If their bolter ALSO gets plague weapon they'd be very good, and possibly under costed though.
They'd better add -1 AP to the bolter then because in ranged combat Death Guard is very pillow-fisted unless they use the few special weapons they have access to.
I don't think 1 to 1 comparison of units between codices is very accurate as Space Marines have a much larger toolkit to work from - making them more flexible - whereas Death Guard has a much more limited toolkit. Those things must be taken into account when balancing pointwise.
What I am curious about is whether Nurgle Daemons will still stay in the codex or if they are going away.
I'd much rather they scrap summoning as-is, incorporate Nurgle daemons into the Death Guard list wholesale (without messing up subfaction rules), and then allow them to deep strike as a stratagem.
Jidmah wrote: Not to discount you work, but this kind of comparison is worthless. Essentially you are comparing the speed of two cars driving on different tracks.
You need to have both units shoot at the same target to compare their offensive output.
2W and FNP are effectively 3 wound models, which die to 2 damage shots 4 out of 9 times. Obviously shooting them with 2 damage weapon is just as a bad idea as shooting gravis models with 2 damage weapons.
If you were just interested in offensive output that might make sense - but since the whole thing of "tough" armies is that they take less damage but, for balance, do less damage, you aren't. You are trying to see the nexus of offensive+defensive stats for a certain number of points.
I think the second quoted paragraph is sort of key to the debate.
Basically are Plague Marines meant to be "Heavy Intercessors with gimped guns" (i.e. 28 points minus something) - or "significantly tougher intercessors" (still with slightly weaker guns - but special rules depending maybe not by much) - in which case its 20 points plus something.
I'm more in the former - and certainly at 22 points I think the defensive profile is faintly ridiculous.
I guess it will just highlight Tau problems - but an unbuffed fire warrior, with two shots, is getting a 13.5% return on his points, while the Plague Marine would get an 18.1% return shooting back with his bolter. A tactical marine gets an awful 6% return shooting at Plague Marines, while the Plague Marine gets 9% shooting back.
If you think Plague Marines should have this superiority then that's fine. I mean its unclear why Intercessors should remain arguably the best troops in the game forever and ever.
But its concerning to me I think that 40k is evolving into a game where you basically have a melta gun, or you do nothing. (To a degree its always been the case, but Marines becoming a 2/3 wound army seems to be really pushing it.)
Which in turn it feeds the view that everything dies too fast, because everything is skewed to expensive but powerful offensive output.
Jidmah wrote: Not to discount you work, but this kind of comparison is worthless. Essentially you are comparing the speed of two cars driving on different tracks.
You need to have both units shoot at the same target to compare their offensive output.
2W and FNP are effectively 3 wound models, which die to 2 damage shots 4 out of 9 times. Obviously shooting them with 2 damage weapon is just as a bad idea as shooting gravis models with 2 damage weapons.
If you were just interested in offensive output that might make sense - but since the whole thing of "tough" armies is that they take less damage but, for balance, do less damage, you aren't. You are trying to see the nexus of offensive+defensive stats for a certain number of points.
I think the second quoted paragraph is sort of key to the debate.
Basically are Plague Marines meant to be "Heavy Intercessors with gimped guns" (i.e. 28 points minus something) - or "significantly tougher intercessors" (still with slightly weaker guns - but special rules depending maybe not by much) - in which case its 20 points plus something.
I'm more in the former - and certainly at 22 points I think the defensive profile is faintly ridiculous.
I guess it will just highlight Tau problems - but an unbuffed fire warrior, with two shots, is getting a 13.5% return on his points, while the Plague Marine would get an 18.1% return shooting back with his bolter. A tactical marine gets an awful 6% return shooting at Plague Marines, while the Plague Marine gets 9% shooting back.
If you think Plague Marines should have this superiority then that's fine. I mean its unclear why Intercessors should remain arguably the best troops in the game forever and ever.
But its concerning to me I think that 40k is evolving into a game where you basically have a melta gun, or you do nothing. (To a degree its always been the case, but Marines becoming a 2/3 wound army seems to be really pushing it.)
Which in turn it feeds the view that everything dies too fast, because everything is skewed to expensive but powerful offensive output.
This all makes sense to me, my impression was always that a faction intent on being the durable one had higher damage output in the long run due to having more of it's forces left alive, rather than expecting them to be able to trade blows equally with offensive units which inevitably cranks the points up.
I would say ironically in the age of everyone being unhappy with the increased lethality in the game, requiring more small arms fire to kill stuff is actually a good thing, but people immediately then want to default back to making their stuff more killy to bypass the increased durability.
Tyel wrote: If you were just interested in offensive output that might make sense - but since the whole thing of "tough" armies is that they take less damage but, for balance, do less damage, you aren't. You are trying to see the nexus of offensive+defensive stats for a certain number of points.
The only thing you've shown is that Plague Marines are more efficient at shooting intercessors than intercessors are at shooting plague marines. That's about as valuable as saying "a football team is better at playing basketball than a basketball team is at playing football." and then trying to figure out which one is the better team by comparing scores. At the very least you need to have both shoot intercessors *and* plague marines. And let's face it, at <10% return of investment neither has any business shooting the other if they can help it.
Basically are Plague Marines meant to be "Heavy Intercessors with gimped guns" (i.e. 28 points minus something) - or "significantly tougher intercessors" (still with slightly weaker guns - but special rules depending maybe not by much) - in which case its 20 points plus something.
"Something" can easily be calculated.
The same unit with the same stats and costs can be great in one codex and bad in another, because of context. You cannot convert army context to points. Absolute point values always contain army context. Therefore you cannot compare absolute values at the accuracy you are trying to do, but only compare whether they are roughly in the same ballpark.
What you can compare is relativ values. The extra wound provides the exact same relative gain in durability to any single wound model. Plague marines already paid a ~21% tax compared to tacticals for their extra durability and army context when they had just one wound, and GW seems to value the extra wound on marines at ~29% extra points, and an extra attack at ~11%. No matter whether we are looking at a plague marine with an extra wound and attack for 17*1.29*1.11= 24.3 or at an intercessor with death guard tax 20*1.21=24.2. Either way, you end up with 24-25 points.
That said, intercessors are a fairly solid unit, while plague marines were not. On the other hand, tacticals have become decent with their second wound, so I wouldn't see a point change in either way. And yes, 22 would be on the low side and would only be worth discussion if they get no further buffs to their damage.
I guess it will just highlight Tau problems - but an unbuffed fire warrior, with two shots, is getting a 13.5% return on his points, while the Plague Marine would get an 18.1% return shooting back with his bolter. A tactical marine gets an awful 6% return shooting at Plague Marines, while the Plague Marine gets 9% shooting back.
As explained above, another worthless calculation. The only thing this proves is that tau fire warriors are the wrong tool to kill plague marines, while plague marines are good at killing tau fire warriors. Neither of which is particularly surprising. How about you math out which one of them kills more intercessors? Traditionally, you compare unit efficiency by targeting guardsmen, marines and a rhino.
If you think Plague Marines should have this superiority then that's fine. I mean its unclear why Intercessors should remain arguably the best troops in the game forever and ever.
Frankly, yes I think that plague marines should be one of the most durable troops, only to be outdone by things like custodes guardians, grey knight terminators and similar units. That's the whole point of plague marines. If you make them exactly a durable per point as marines are, they fail at that job by definition. Yet, you have failed to actually provide a reason why this is a bad thing for a unit that is armed that moves 1" less than marines is armed with regular boltguns that have both no AP and 6" less range. And that's assuming that the doctrines and army tactics from the new codex even remotely compares in offensive power to what marines get. The perceived superior offensive power solely stems from you comparing apples to oranges.
Just a quick point on returns assuming everyone is in rapid fire with no doctrines etc. firing at a 20 point intercessor:
Fire warrior: 4.44 points in damage done for a 49% return
Plague marine (assumed 24 points): 4.44 points in damage done for a 18.5% return
Intercessor: 6.67 points in damage done for a 33% return
Guardsman: 2.2 points in damage done for a 44.4% return
Same grounds against a 24 point plague marine:
Fire warrior: 2.67 points in damage done for a 29.6% return
Plague marine (assumed 24 points): 2.4 points in damage done for a 9.9% return
Intercessor: 3.56 points in damage done for a 17.8% return
Guardsman: 1.8 points in damage done for a 35.6% return
Some numbers smoothed out for rounding but gives you a better bench mark for not just firing at random stuff etc.
Jidmah wrote: Frankly, yes I think that plague marines should be one of the most durable troops, only to be outdone by things like custodes guardians, grey knight terminators and similar units. That's the whole point of plague marines. If you make them exactly a durable per point as marines are, they fail at that job by definition.
Yet, you have failed to actually provide a reason why this is a bad thing for a unit that is armed that moves 1" less than marines is armed with regular boltguns that have both no AP and 6" less range. And that's assuming that the doctrines and army tactics from the new codex even remotely compares in offensive power to what marines get.
The perceived superior offensive power solely stems from you comparing apples to oranges.
I agree that cross-faction comparisons are difficult due to the differing synergies with those units. I'm not convinced they are worthless though, because units which seem good in absolute terms compared with all other units usually make into lists which prove to be effective at winning games.
I'm comparing units shooting each other because I am trying to demonstrate if the additional defensive stats Plague Marines get *for their points* offsets the weaker shooting. Or if it doesn't. Because yes, obviously intercessors outshoot Plague Marines in isolation if the Plague Marine is 20+ points, due to having a better gun (and ultimately doctrines etc).
But if Plague Marines are significantly more likely to survive over the course of the game (due to T5 and a 5+++), this may not matter. The fact the Marine player would kill say a Guard player's army quicker than the DG player in isolation of how much damage the Guard Player could do to the Marine and DG player's armies seems a bit meaningless.
Resilience stats can be hard to value - because if you have a particular tough unit which low offensive output, you can often just kill it last knowing it won't do much over the course of the game (although 9th's objectives do help there). But at the same time, if Plague Marines were say 18 points, so they had the same shooting as Tactical Marines (pending doctrines etc) - but just took significantly less damage due to T5/5+++, then I think at least they would clearly be superior, even with -1M.
What I've been trying to demonstrate is that at 22 points, Plague Marines would be getting significantly more defensive stats for those points to their loss of offensive stats for those points in comparison to other infantry in the game. I think around 24/25 its probably close enough.
I understand what you are trying to do, your method is just flawed. Whenever you compare two things, you must have to have common point of reference. This is an absolute truth for every comparison ever, and this is what your calculation is lacking.
If you compare two units by having them at shoot at different things, the outcome of such a comparison is always useless due to the methodical error.
Though it's still a tad too much based on models for my taste, I like it. Lots of extra details that isn't stupid huge (like it is on physical models for different reasons) and a good colour palette that doesn't scream candy. More of this, yes please.
Also loving the close integration of plague marines and their supporting ships in the operation, whoever is being pounded by those is going to have a bad day.
Jidmah wrote: I understand what you are trying to do, your method is just flawed. Whenever you compare two things, you must have to have common point of reference. This is an absolute truth for every comparison ever, and this is what your calculation is lacking.
If you compare two units by having them at shoot at different things, the outcome of such a comparison is always useless due to the methodical error.
I don't see why, because you are comparing how the two units interact with each other. It can be misleading, because you interact with all units in the game, so it may be one unit is good versus X and bad versus Y, but that is why you'd look at that.
But okay, to sort of repeat Dudeface's numbers, which I think are slightly off.
Lets have an intercessor shoot a guardsman, an intercessor and a 22 point plague marine. Then lets have the plague marine shoot those targets.
Intercessor shooting.
Guardsman: 2*2/3*2/3*5/6*5= 3.7. Divided by 20=18.5% return.
Intercessor: 2*2/3*1/2*1/2*10= 3.3. Divided by 20=16.6% return.
Plague Marine: 2*2/3*1/3*1/2*2/3*11= 1.62. Divided by 20=8.1% return.
Plague Marine shooting.
Guardsman: 2*2/3*2/3*2/3*5= 2.96. Divided by 22=13.4% return.
Intercessor: 2*2/3*1/2*1/3*10= 2.22. Divided by 22=10.1% return
Plague Marine: 2*2/3*1/3*1/3*2/3*11= 1.09. Divided by 22=4.94% return.
Conclusion, the intercessor does more damage for its points against all targets. Which is not really a surprise due to that point of AP on the guns and 10% lower cost.
Now lets have both units can be shot by those units.
Intercessor being shot.
Guardsman: 2*1/2*1/3*1/3*10= 1.11. Divided by 5=22.2% return.
Intercessor: 2*2/3*1/2*1/2*10= 3.3. Divided by 20=16.6% return.
Plague Marine: 2*2/3*1/2*1/3*10= 2.2. Divided by 22=10.1% return.
Plague Marine being shot.
Guardsman: 2*1/2*1/3*1/3*2/3*11=0.814. Divided by 5=16.3% return.
Intercessor: 2*2/3*1/3*1/2*2/3*11=1.63. Divided by 20=8.1% return.
Plague Marine: 2*2/3*1/3*1/3*2/3*11= 1.086. Divided by 22=4.94% return.
Again, not a huge surprise, the Plague Marine is considerably more resilient than the intercessor and gives up a lower number of points.
In conclusion, the intercessor does about 60% more damage when shooting Intercessors or 22 point Plague Marines than a 22 point plague marine. But in turn, he takes about 100% more damage from intercessors or 22 point plague marines. So the Plague Marine is getting more in toughness than it's giving up in damage output.
Perhaps interestingly with Guardsmen it is more balanced, with the intercessor doing 38% more damage, but expecting to take 36% more damage back. Which is indicative that the Plague Marines's T5 only helps with S4/S5/S8 guns - but those are exactly the guns you'd usually aim at MEQ. (I'd do the above but with Plasma Inceptors - but I don't think there is a simple mathematical way of showing the impact of a 5+++ on 2 damage weapons, due to creating 1 wound models that then eat 2 wound shots. I think it would be a big win for 22 point Plague Marines though.)
I'm not really sure what this analysis tells you which the other didn't. At 22 points, when compared to Intercessors, Plague Marines would get more toughness for their points than they would be giving up in damage output.
So okay, if you are expecting to put the unit down and it will never be shot, the intercessor would be the superior choice - whether shooting guardsmen, marines, rhinos, whatever. But the whole point is trying to put a value on the additional toughness Plague Marines get, so I don't see what that thought experiment shows.
Tyel wrote: I don't see why, because you are comparing how the two units interact with each other. It can be misleading, because you interact with all units in the game, so it may be one unit is good versus X and bad versus Y, but that is why you'd look at that.
A single point of reference is important if you want to compare two things. Let's try this:
Your original attempt was like this
Spoiler:
It's not really possible to tell which one has more "damage".
Now you have done this
Spoiler:
This way damage can be easily compared.
Cheers!
Which is indicative that the Plague Marines's T5 only helps with S4/S5/S8 guns - but those are exactly the guns you'd usually aim at MEQ.
Plague marines aren't MEQ though, T5/3+/5++ is a statline that is exceptionally resilient to small arms fire, while T4/3+ is not. Assuming that Plague Marines are just marines is common reason why people have lost against my DG, by the way. You don't expect a bolter to do well against bikes, so why would you expect them to do well against plague marines?
(I'd do the above but with Plasma Inceptors - but I don't think there is a simple mathematical way of showing the impact of a 5+++ on 2 damage weapons, due to creating 1 wound models that then eat 2 wound shots. I think it would be a big win for 22 point Plague Marines though.)
It's not a problem that can be solved with just averages, but I guess you could just do one shot of plasma and then calculate the chances of 0, 1 or 2 damage. Or you can just content with the approximation that a plague marine is a 3 wound model which dies do a 2 wound weapon 44.4% of the time.
I'm not really sure what this analysis tells you which the other didn't. At 22 points, when compared to Intercessors, Plague Marines would get more toughness for their points than they would be giving up in damage output.
So okay, if you are expecting to put the unit down and it will never be shot, the intercessor would be the superior choice - whether shooting guardsmen, marines, rhinos, whatever. But the whole point is trying to put a value on the additional toughness Plague Marines get, so I don't see what that thought experiment shows.
The difference is that this analysis actually has numbers you can compare to each other, while the other number implied that a plague marine was superior to a plague marine or fire warrior in every way.
But in general, we both agree that 22 points is probably a tad bit too low for plague marines.
You can math the effects of a 2 damage weapon on a plague marine.
You simply count the plague marine as a 1 wound model and the plasma weapon as a damage 1 weapon, then give the plague marine a FNP which works 40% of time.
40% is the chance that a plague marine can survive a plasma shot while also considering that the same plague marine has a chance of having already survived a plasma shot, which could have left him on one wound.
Works well if you math many plasma shots together. Doesn't work really well for few plasma shots, since it assumes that even the first hit could potentially hit an already wounded PM.
That is some nice looking artwork, looking forward to the rest.
Tyel you keep mentioning that due to staying around longer, PM would effectively out-damage intercessors over the course of a game if I understand you correctly. I think that is a fair point but also consider that the best defense in this game continues to be killing the other guy which is what the intercessors do better. So were PM scale offensively by not dying, intercessors increase their survive ability simply because they remove more threats.
Castozor wrote: That is some nice looking artwork, looking forward to the rest.
Tyel you keep mentioning that due to staying around longer, PM would effectively out-damage intercessors over the course of a game if I understand you correctly. I think that is a fair point but also consider that the best defense in this game continues to be killing the other guy which is what the intercessors do better. So were PM scale offensively by not dying, intercessors increase their survive ability simply because they remove more threats.
This needs to change and wanting plague marines to have more damage output isn't the answer, at best it just continues a pointless arms race and at worst results in infantry that are horrendously over optimised and/or woefully expensive.
oh I´m sorry if i came across as wanting more damage output on my PM. I agree 22 points would be too low with the extra attack, 23-24 is far more reasonable. My argument is that you can´t just say PM outperform Intercessors eventually because they refuse to die, when the intercessors themselves also get "hidden" durability from killing enemies faster than PM's ever will. Because the former is what I interpreted Tyel's argument and your argument to be.
Castozor wrote: oh I´m sorry if i came across as wanting more damage output on my PM. I agree 22 points would be too low with the extra attack, 23-24 is far more reasonable. My argument is that you can´t just say PM outperform Intercessors eventually because they refuse to die, when the intercessors themselves also get "hidden" durability from killing enemies faster than PM's ever will. Because the former is what I interpreted Tyel's argument and your argument to be.
Well Plague Marines have always been pretty bad in terms of damage output at range. The saving grace they've always had was proliferation of Special Weapons.
Thats why I'm glad for the second attack: it makes them be more aggressive and the Axe not a point sink, but a natural rerolling 1 to wound with the Plague Knife is just fine.
Castozor wrote: oh I´m sorry if i came across as wanting more damage output on my PM. I agree 22 points would be too low with the extra attack, 23-24 is far more reasonable. My argument is that you can´t just say PM outperform Intercessors eventually because they refuse to die, when the intercessors themselves also get "hidden" durability from killing enemies faster than PM's ever will. Because the former is what I interpreted Tyel's argument and your argument to be.
I'm sort of tempted to leave it because I don't think we are really disagreeing - but here we go.
My point was that since Plague Marines take less damage from things shooting them, its acceptable (in fact required) that they in turn do less damage when they shoot back - *for a given number of points*.
So yes, arguably Intercessors (or anything really) do have a "hidden" durability from killing things faster than say Plague Marines. But I'd consider any potential balance issue to be between those two units (the intercessors and whatever you are killing), rather than the Plague Marines who are not on the table. My whole point was that Intercessors don't kill Plague Marines faster than the Plague Marines kill Intercessors. (Or at least not at 22 points, at 24~ its closer.)
To go another way, imagine a very simple system. It would theoretically be balanced if Fire Warriors get a 30% return shooting Intercessors, and a 15% turn shooting Plague Marines, and Intercessors get a 30% return shooting Fire Warriors and a 15% return shooting Plague Marines and Plague Marines get a 15% return shooting Fire Warriors and a 15% return shooting Intercessors. (Its more complicated than this due to synergies and movement and assault etc - but hopefully the point is clear). Everyone's getting roughly the same expected outcome for their points.
You might say its boring - precisely because every unit is effectively doing about the same damage output *for its points* to each unit - but it still alters gameplay, since it means you'd expect the Tau/Marine game to be over quickly as everything dies fast, while any of the games with Death Guard are more slow grinding affairs with much more being left on the table because the effective damage output of both sides is much lower. As said, its a very simple system, in practice you'd want to spice things up with vehicles and anti-vehicle weapons etc. You'd want some rock/paper/scissors.
You might say Plague Marines *should* beat other infantry in a slanging match - because they are meant to be amongst the toughest things in the galaxy. But it obviously raises issues. You can say they are a bit slow - but is that enough of a downside? Its likely only a few inches over a game. You could try and meta it - so infantry lose to Plague Marines, but some particular unit type is good against them - but in practice, anything that's good against Plague Marines at 22 points, is going to be exceptionally good at killing Marines at a similar points cost who are only T4 and no FNP.
Obviously this can equally go the other way. I think Death Guard were quite bad for much of 8th (and you can argue have been dropping off pre-Codex now), due to GW significantly overvaluing their defensive stats. So you ended up with models that weren't actually that tough *for their points* - but had very low damage output. So were just bad.
I just think 22 points for 2 T5 3+/5+++ wounds is too far the other way and sought to show why with numbers.
They're probably not keeping the 5+++. They'll likely be be downgraded to 6+++, which makes them more comparable to Iron Hands Intercessors. Keep in mind though that, since we don't know what exactly the army bonus is yet, the Plague Marine could be strictly better via proliferation of rules. The Iron Hands Intercessor only gains a 6+++ (and obviously they don't get the bonus regarding the Vehicle Damage Chart LOL), but the Plague Marine WILL get something else.
A slightly better Bolter will likely not make up for whatever the bonus is. I'm going to guarantee that. I already find Immortals a lot better than Intercessors currently, and I am expecting Plague Marines now to be strictly better.
I see Tyel, you are right it seems we do not disagree at all. Seems my reading comprehension was off again.
As for the 5+ DR, I think it will stay if only because I see no reason for GW to remove it. IH kept theirs and for 1 wound models Necrons arguably gained something even better than 5+ FNP. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but I see no justification for the constant scaremongering in some DG communities about how we will lose DR or it is getting nerfed. I'm not directing this at you mind Slayer, but I've seen this idea come up again and again the last few months and I just don't understand were it comes from.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: They're probably not keeping the 5+++. They'll likely be be downgraded to 6+++, which makes them more comparable to Iron Hands Intercessors. Keep in mind though that, since we don't know what exactly the army bonus is yet, the Plague Marine could be strictly better via proliferation of rules. The Iron Hands Intercessor only gains a 6+++ (and obviously they don't get the bonus regarding the Vehicle Damage Chart LOL), but the Plague Marine WILL get something else.
A slightly better Bolter will likely not make up for whatever the bonus is. I'm going to guarantee that. I already find Immortals a lot better than Intercessors currently, and I am expecting Plague Marines now to be strictly better.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: They're probably not keeping the 5+++. They'll likely be be downgraded to 6+++, which makes them more comparable to Iron Hands Intercessors. Keep in mind though that, since we don't know what exactly the army bonus is yet, the Plague Marine could be strictly better via proliferation of rules. The Iron Hands Intercessor only gains a 6+++ (and obviously they don't get the bonus regarding the Vehicle Damage Chart LOL), but the Plague Marine WILL get something else.
A slightly better Bolter will likely not make up for whatever the bonus is. I'm going to guarantee that. I already find Immortals a lot better than Intercessors currently, and I am expecting Plague Marines now to be strictly better.
I'm sure you have a source for that, right?
My source: do you think even GW thinks they can properly cost a T5 W2 3+ 5+++ model?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: They're probably not keeping the 5+++. They'll likely be be downgraded to 6+++, which makes them more comparable to Iron Hands Intercessors. Keep in mind though that, since we don't know what exactly the army bonus is yet, the Plague Marine could be strictly better via proliferation of rules. The Iron Hands Intercessor only gains a 6+++ (and obviously they don't get the bonus regarding the Vehicle Damage Chart LOL), but the Plague Marine WILL get something else.
A slightly better Bolter will likely not make up for whatever the bonus is. I'm going to guarantee that. I already find Immortals a lot better than Intercessors currently, and I am expecting Plague Marines now to be strictly better.
I'm sure you have a source for that, right?
My source: do you think even GW thinks they can properly cost a T5 W2 3+ 5+++ model?
Yes, they do and it won't stop them trying. Its not like they didnt try and price a t5 w2 2+/5++/5+++ terminator
I think the interesting thing is whether Mortarion gets "only take 6 wounds in a phase" or something.
I know there's some criticism of rolling it out to everything - but... meh. I feel its kind of necessary on these 500~ point units, even if it potentially brings its own issues. Admittedly the Silent King doesn't have it - but I feel the Menhirs sort of work in the same way by hopefully breaking up damage.
So maybe they are nerfing him down to C'Tan levels to drop his points?
Reaping didn't lose its AP; it doesn't appear at all. It has either been turned into an ability or removed entirely, leaving him only with eviscerating blow
So maybe they are nerfing him down to C'Tan levels to drop his points?
Reaping didn't lose its AP; it doesn't appear at all. It has either been turned into an ability or removed entirely, leaving him only with eviscerating blow
Also c'tan aren't packing 18 t8 wounds with DR on top, he'll always be more expensive by a fair chunk.
Well we we have to wait and see I guess, T8 is a step in the right direction and he might be gaining a woundcap to prevent one rounding. Losing his sweep would be annoying though I'd imagine.
My source: do you think even GW thinks they can properly cost a T5 W2 3+ 5+++ model?
Yes, they do and it won't stop them trying. Its not like they didnt try and price a t5 w2 2+/5++/5+++ terminator
4++ even. During 8th Blightlords and I think even Deathshroud saw some play from time to time but in my recollection they were never overbearing and nicely priced for what they did. These models also have a better offensive profile than regular PM's and can deepstrike. If they could balance these I'm sure they'll manage with our new PM.
Jidmah wrote: He can be one-rounded though and can't hide.
Did they re-price him at the start of 9th? Because if they increase his stats his cost won't be going down from that logically.
I agree he won't go down but in all honesty he should even with the buff.
He's almost 500pts and has to be your warlord.
The warlord trait is useless as he has to go straight at the enemy and the other DG units are too slow to keep up with him(there are exceptions, but there always are)
He is so big there is no way he will not be shot from turn 1.
There are many armies that can easily one shot him, and even if they don't he is so weak he's rendered useless.
In a vacuum he looks great, but if DG go second he is a waste
Jidmah wrote: He can be one-rounded though and can't hide.
Did they re-price him at the start of 9th? Because if they increase his stats his cost won't be going down from that logically.
I agree he won't go down but in all honesty he should even with the buff.
He's almost 500pts and has to be your warlord.
The warlord trait is useless as he has to go straight at the enemy and the other DG units are too slow to keep up with him(there are exceptions, but there always are)
He is so big there is no way he will not be shot from turn 1.
There are many armies that can easily one shot him, and even if they don't he is so weak he's rendered useless.
In a vacuum he looks great, but if DG go second he is a waste
He may well get a new warlord trait, new psychic powers maybe, the t8 counts for a lot as well. Just need to wait and see about big morty.
Jidmah wrote: It has always been 3 damage flat, but used hit all units between Mortarion and his target. At 12" that ability wouldn't make much sense.
Oh okay then. Not sure why they couldn't just keep that ability for 12".
We've got no evidence he hasn't, yet - that sort of weapon special rule won't show up on these sheets, like Plague Weapon doesn't.
We need to remember the limitations of the source, and not jump to conclusions that aren't supported by the format. Anything that isn't a pure number isn't up for change here.
Jidmah wrote: It has always been 3 damage flat, but used hit all units between Mortarion and his target. At 12" that ability wouldn't make much sense.
Oh okay then. Not sure why they couldn't just keep that ability for 12".
We've got no evidence he hasn't, yet - that sort of weapon special rule won't show up on these sheets, like Plague Weapon doesn't.
We need to remember the limitations of the source, and not jump to conclusions that aren't supported by the format. Anything that isn't a pure number isn't up for change here.
Jidmah wrote: He can be one-rounded though and can't hide.
Did they re-price him at the start of 9th? Because if they increase his stats his cost won't be going down from that logically.
I agree he won't go down but in all honesty he should even with the buff.
He's almost 500pts and has to be your warlord.
The warlord trait is useless as he has to go straight at the enemy and the other DG units are too slow to keep up with him(there are exceptions, but there always are)
He is so big there is no way he will not be shot from turn 1.
There are many armies that can easily one shot him, and even if they don't he is so weak he's rendered useless.
In a vacuum he looks great, but if DG go second he is a waste
That's not really true anymore.
Yes, it can happen from game to game that you meet an army that can remove a model like that before you can use it, but we are talking about one list out of ten.
This isn't 8th. Lists aren't geared to take down knights. Lists are at the very least 50% melee units, which are VERY scared by him.
I can only think about Admech being able to seriously threaten him, and should you ever meet that kind of list, then that is the one time that you put him in reserves.
An eradicator squad with chapter master buff is only 5 wounds on him, and that is usually the amount of heavy firepower that he will have to eat during turn 1.
Out of the common 9th lists I can't find anything more than Admech that can really put the hurt on him:
- White scars? No
- Blood Angels? No
- Dark Angels? No
- Demons? No
- Harlequins? No
- Custodes? No
- Tyranids? No
- Orks? Maybe if they spam a lot of mek gunz and they get really lucky.
- Necrons? Don't know the new ones well enough, but I don't think that they play all that long ranged firepower.
An eradicator squad with chapter master buff is only 5 wounds on him, and that is usually the amount of heavy firepower that he will have to eat during turn 1.
Where are you getting this? Eradicators can shoot twice if they all fire at the same unit and haven't advanced. If they all hit and just half get through, there is a potential 5D6 damage. 5D6+10 if they're in half range or using heavy melta. 5D6+20 if they're both in half range and carrying heavy melta. And that's only if half of them wound. If the average roll of two dice is seven, then there is anywhere from 17 damage to 37 damage he can take from just ONE unit of Eradicators. But let's be fair. Let's say 7 of 10 hit, and he saves 3 of them. So, there are only 4 getting through, and only 2 of those wound - he only takes 2 wounds. That still translates into 2D6+4 with heavy melta at normal range, 2D6+8 with heavy melta at half range. That could still severely cripple him. And that's the shooting from one unit that is in every marine list now.
Jidmah wrote: It has always been 3 damage flat, but used hit all units between Mortarion and his target. At 12" that ability wouldn't make much sense.
Oh okay then. Not sure why they couldn't just keep that ability for 12".
We've got no evidence he hasn't, yet - that sort of weapon special rule won't show up on these sheets, like Plague Weapon doesn't.
We need to remember the limitations of the source, and not jump to conclusions that aren't supported by the format. Anything that isn't a pure number isn't up for change here.
Are we still pretending that GW isn't doing this?
One a day, no PL reveals, interesting units only.
I don't know who is posting them, but you've missed what I was meaning by "source" here - I wasn't referring to who is posting the pictures, but the assembly instruction datasheet itself. While we might see some changes to numerical values in stat lines on there, we can't draw any conclusions regarding special rules as these sheets lack them entirely.
An eradicator squad with chapter master buff is only 5 wounds on him, and that is usually the amount of heavy firepower that he will have to eat during turn 1.
Where are you getting this? Eradicators can shoot twice if they all fire at the same unit and haven't advanced. If they all hit and just half get through, there is a potential 5D6 damage. 5D6+10 if they're in half range or using heavy melta. 5D6+20 if they're both in half range and carrying heavy melta. And that's only if half of them wound. If the average roll of two dice is seven, then there is anywhere from 17 damage to 37 damage he can take from just ONE unit of Eradicators. But let's be fair. Let's say 7 of 10 hit, and he saves 3 of them. So, there are only 4 getting through, and only 2 of those wound - he only takes 2 wounds. That still translates into 2D6+4 with heavy melta at normal range, 2D6+8 with heavy melta at half range. That could still severely cripple him. And that's the shooting from one unit that is in every marine list now.
He's talking about averages, not potential.
Grot squad of 30 POTENTIALLY causes 30 wounds to it.
That theory is all nice and dandy, but in all games of 9th I played him in so far, he imploded in turn one and when he didn't, the enemy just didn't let him charge anything and killed him turn two. A good number of armies listed above can take him out with minimal casualties, for example harlquins can just melta-boat him and Thrakka, a Keeper of Secrets or a Lord of Change are more than match for him in combat.
Keep in mind that we know that Mortarion is likely to become Bubonic Astartes and therefore cannot be warp-timed any more.
More napkin maths, 1 unit of heavy melta rifles and 2 multi meltas with a chapter master and lieutenant buffing from max range them do 12.44444 wounds to Morty at max range with his new stats (since I can't see an easy way to get all 3 within 12").
That's assuming no -1 modifiers for terrain/miasma.
It seems rough but that's 475 points of firepower from the most overtuned unit in the game with all the rerolls they can get. That's really fairly durable.
Morty was outstanding when he was released. He would singlehandedly destroy armies for me. As 8th developed though I was lucky to see him survive past turn 1. I really hope they introduce something to help with his survivability. As well as having a max number of wounds taken per phase, Gotrek in AoS is a prime example of how rules can keep key characters alive.
Appreciate it, but I am fine. I have the heroes, I am just more about waiting to get my free PM hahaha
Actually I only have 5 of the heroes as my batch had a duplicate. Waiting for them to send me out the missing one.
I actually got the Nurgle number when it finally arrives haha
I'm going to guess Deathshroud. Its only Wednesday, so why post something juicy like Blightlords or Plague Marines. They'll have some changes (movement, maybe 2+ WS, plague gauntlet range 12, +1 W, +1 attack, maybe some man reaper changes) to talk about but
PoorGravitasHandling wrote: I'm going to guess Deathshroud. Its only Wednesday, so why post something juicy like Blightlords or Plague Marines. They'll have some changes (movement, maybe 2+ WS, plague gauntlet range 12, +1 W, +1 attack, maybe some man reaper changes) to talk about but
Geeze, you like to flirt! I was just hoping for the extra range and wound.
+1 BS Entropy Cannon becomes D3+3 instead of D6 The mortar gets D2 instead of D1d3, & has no minimum distance
Spitters are flat S6 (like the bloat drone)
Rothail is rapid fire, lost 1AP
Loving the new entropy cannons - even better than what we got in psychic awakening.
+1 BS Entropy Cannon becomes D3+d3 instead of D6 The mortar gets D2 instead of D1d3, & has no minimum distance
Spitters are flat S6 (like the bloat drone)
Rothail is rapid fire
Loving the new entropy cannons - even better than what we got in psychic awakening.
Probably, but all these buffs are starting to worry me. If everything gets better and more expensive, you'll end up with even less models on the table which might cause DG to end up weird spot where they have great units, but not enough board presence.
Probably, but all these buffs are starting to worry me. If everything gets better and more expensive, you'll end up with even less models on the table which might cause DG to end up weird spot where they have great units, but not enough board presence.
DR could have been nerfed or removed to compensate so that we're still getting a similar number of models on the table. Impossible to judge until we see points + special rules of course, but at least our statlines are looking incredible so far. As far as things to worry about go, this is on the better end of the spectrum
Probably, but all these buffs are starting to worry me. If everything gets better and more expensive, you'll end up with even less models on the table which might cause DG to end up weird spot where they have great units, but not enough board presence.
Maybe Death Guard will end up becoming Custodes, except Chaos.
Jidmah wrote: (pure) Death Guard already have a unique playstyle, I would be sad to see that replaced.
I agree, and with the current lethality of their boltguns and poxwalkers I have a hard time seeing DG becoming some elite force.
You get get 2 from durable, killy or cheap unfortunately, so if they're buffing output and durability the price must go up. I could see pox walkers being nerfed down slightly somehow and made cheaper to fill bodies/swarms a little more to offset a lower body count though.
Jidmah wrote: There really isn't much left of pox walkers to be nerfed though. Plus being force to play junk infantry instead of your signature troops always sucks.
Well you wouldn't be forced, if the plague marines are fairly priced even if low in numbers, it becomes a choice.
Probably, but all these buffs are starting to worry me. If everything gets better and more expensive, you'll end up with even less models on the table which might cause DG to end up weird spot where they have great units, but not enough board presence.
Maybe Death Guard will end up becoming Custodes, except Chaos.
I had this feeling as well. Maybe Death Guard will mirror Custodes.
Probably, but all these buffs are starting to worry me. If everything gets better and more expensive, you'll end up with even less models on the table which might cause DG to end up weird spot where they have great units, but not enough board presence.
Maybe Death Guard will end up becoming Custodes, except Chaos.
I had this feeling as well. Maybe Death Guard will mirror Custodes.
Can't see how that will work. Custodes are much faster and have much better standard weapons. Sticking an extra attack for CC does not make them even close to custodes.
You can see with Custodes the prevalent build is bike heavy as it's needed to be fast when such a small force.
In general, DG will lose damage from the CORE mechanic though and it's not like their isn't room for buffs to get them up to speed with other tier 1 or 2 factions, especially if the synergy with nurgle daemons gets curbed as expected
The one unit that clearly has to go up in points are MBH as well as plague marines because of their extra wound. Outside of that though? I could even see Blightlords stay the same or drop in points despite getting an extra wound when I see how aggressive loyalist terminators are priced now.
Can't see how that will work. Custodes are much faster and have much better standard weapons. Sticking an extra attack for CC does not make them even close to custodes.
You can see with Custodes the prevalent build is bike heavy as it's needed to be fast when such a small force.
Right, but we've seen like 1% of the codex so far? There could be plenty of changes that allow DG to be on par with Custodes in firepower and survivability. I'm just saying it would be an interesting place for DG to be.
Can't see how that will work. Custodes are much faster and have much better standard weapons. Sticking an extra attack for CC does not make them even close to custodes.
You can see with Custodes the prevalent build is bike heavy as it's needed to be fast when such a small force.
Right, but we've seen like 1% of the codex so far?
Ha.
DG are a very small codex. At this point we've seen a lot of the units, or at least the major changes to a lot of the units (full statline for DG, just changes to possessed) and even a single unit is more than 1%.
The buff to Entropy cannons is nice and may signal more of our PA book stuff gets rolled into the datasheets rather than being CP upgrades. I´m thinking of reroll aura for the LoC´s, reroll 1´s and 2´s for plague weapons for the surgeon, DR for units that don´t have it normally, possibly plague bolters.
As for points increases, PM and MBH will definitely go up but the rest I´m not too sure of big increases. Seems GW just loves to up the lethality with these new books and paying a premium for it would go against that. Only unit I really fear for is the Blightspawn because he´s just that good. Anti-charge aura and a crazy good flamer.
Castozor wrote: The buff to Entropy cannons is nice and may signal more of our PA book stuff gets rolled into the datasheets rather than being CP upgrades. I´m thinking of reroll aura for the LoC´s, reroll 1´s and 2´s for plague weapons for the surgeon, DR for units that don´t have it normally, possibly plague bolters.
As for points increases, PM and MBH will definitely go up but the rest I´m not too sure of big increases. Seems GW just loves to up the lethality with these new books and paying a premium for it would go against that. Only unit I really fear for is the Blightspawn because he´s just that good. Anti-charge aura and a crazy good flamer.
I understand your argument but I don't think just blanket upping lethality for free and deeming it the in thing is a wise move. We certainly shouldn't be expecting or wanting massive firepower increases for free on anything.
You could already do much of that by spending a few CP though, and DG weren't exactly killing stuff left and right, so I don't think this is a big problem.
Now I have and play DG so I have a dog in this race as it is but I think a little of this feels like a knee jerk reaction to things getting better.
How come it is loyalist marines can improve leaps and bounds and get every release under the sun and that is all fine, but DG look like they may get some viable choices to be made and increased viability for their handful of choices and people start saying we gotta dial it back ?
If we were going to dial it back shouldn't that have started in the beginning of all this ? In part it did with some of the stuff with " Core " however freaking that demon engines will hit on 3s was the first Reeee ! moment, all marine stuff these days tends to hit on 3's or better. Just because it was decreed a time ago demons suck at aiming or hitting things with hands doesn't mean it should always be so.
I don't want to get into a whole big thing but it feels from what I keep reading like people expect DG to play fair and stay weak while other books grow stronger in the jungle ( kudos to anyone who gets that movie reference. ) because they have some moral imperative to set an example ?
So far I don't really see anything that is " OMG !!!! " out of these rumors and changes. I do see increasing viability and people may actually need to be concerned over some of this stuff more than previously. Is that a bad thing however ? I don't think so. Everyone should have something people fear, find powerful or a problem to deal with.
So if the handful of options DG have feel like they may have more teeth both literal and figurative, this should be a good thing and a sign of hope for codex releases.
What you don't want is auto win button choices and I haven't seen anything yet, especially without knowing points, that hints to anything like that.
DG feeling strong isn't a bad thing, them increasing in appeal is a good thing for a new codex drop.
Hell I play DA as well and let me tell you, when their 3.5 -4 ed codex dropped it was so lack luster wasn't anyone saying it " Strong " no one found their rules " fit other groups better " and you don't want a codex drop to make you feel, meh for lack of a better term.
Castozor wrote: The buff to Entropy cannons is nice and may signal more of our PA book stuff gets rolled into the datasheets rather than being CP upgrades. I´m thinking of reroll aura for the LoC´s, reroll 1´s and 2´s for plague weapons for the surgeon, DR for units that don´t have it normally, possibly plague bolters.
As for points increases, PM and MBH will definitely go up but the rest I´m not too sure of big increases. Seems GW just loves to up the lethality with these new books and paying a premium for it would go against that. Only unit I really fear for is the Blightspawn because he´s just that good. Anti-charge aura and a crazy good flamer.
I understand your argument but I don't think just blanket upping lethality for free and deeming it the in thing is a wise move. We certainly shouldn't be expecting or wanting massive firepower increases for free on anything.
Eh. DG were already pretty pillowfisted. Not getting the global bump to lethality in the face of everyone else (including the upcoming Dark Eldar, where the only thing we know is 'Moar Attacks! Moar Damage!') and a multi-faction upgrade to defenses seems like kicking a three-legged dog while its down.
Unfortunately that's the part of the GW cycle we're in. Getting left out of the 'paradigm' for the edition means getting left behind, likely for years.
I understand your argument but I don't think just blanket upping lethality for free and deeming it the in thing is a wise move. We certainly shouldn't be expecting or wanting massive firepower increases for free on anything.
As mentioned by others, DG offensive output atm is pretty lackluster outside of cheeky tricks like the grenade combo. We could stand to gain a bit in that department without much of an increase in points. Furthermore I do not applaud this increase in lethality for little to no cost, but it is my personal observation from the Necron Codex and the Dark Eldar teaser that this is just the way GW does things now. If that is indeed the case why wouldn't we get the same treatment. DG is not bad by any means, but so far it seems the early 9th predictions of "DG are totally going to be top contenders" isn't true either. Having power on par to SM, Necrons, Quins, Demons isn't necessarily a bad thing.
DG can hardly kill anything. It won mainly by playing the objective game. It had that one grenade combo everyone can see coming from a mile away. (And we don't even know if that will stay in its current form).
With DG, either you couldn't kill the army, and it won from objectives or you could kill it, and its a race to see if you can catch up in points after you killed most of the army. Let's see the whole codex before we rush in to claim that the lethality is increasing too much.
I don't understand why loyalists space marine can be allowed to be so "lethal" while their chaos counterparts who fell into chaos for power ends up being weaker in almost every other way.
I mean, look at an Iron Hands space marine army. It is far more lethal in damage output, but it is probably only slightly less resilient than a DG army. (but close enough).
I can kinda understand people not wanting another codex as strong as the Space Marines one but at the same time....I kinda can't? I mean, if DG end up with a weaker codex than SM, they get to be stuck below SM for the whole of the edition. And that's kinda crappy? They were pretty bad for most of 8th. It doesn't seem so outlandish to hope that they will be on par with marines (who will be tweaked a lot more as the edition continues).
That is also something to consider, before we say broken or OP for DG. Consider the fact that loyalist marines will probably keep increasing, growing in units and ability, unless we believe that once the last supplement is out there will be no more loyalist marine stuff. I wouldn't take that bet, so the books that will be touched on less, given less attention past the first drop kind of need to be swinging for the fences at the start.
Which, not to make it a thing but that is currently a big problem with GWs intelligent design.
Every other army has to make due with a codex, maybe way down the line a touch up in a book with other stuff in it and that is it. Like DG last time, one of the first books out and nothing until the PA book. So these single of codex releases have to be able to be good for awhile, where as loyalist marines seem to just get 75% at least of the design space and new rules and models put out growing all edition long in power and capability.
That was a lot to just say, lets try not to worry about it, we need to see the whole picture but so far while some of the stuff is good, I doubt we are seeing DG pulled in as the new no brainer list that will crush all without mercy. Lets not fall into panic mode just because something is getting better when better doesn't mean the best.
AngryAngel80 wrote: That is also something to consider, before we say broken or OP for DG. Consider the fact that loyalist marines will probably keep increasing, growing in units and ability, unless we believe that once the last supplement is out there will be no more loyalist marine stuff. I wouldn't take that bet, so the books that will be touched on less, given less attention past the first drop kind of need to be swinging for the fences at the start.
Which, not to make it a thing but that is currently a big problem with GWs intelligent design.
Every other army has to make due with a codex, maybe way down the line a touch up in a book with other stuff in it and that is it. Like DG last time, one of the first books out and nothing until the PA book. So these single of codex releases have to be able to be good for awhile, where as loyalist marines seem to just get 75% at least of the design space and new rules and models put out growing all edition long in power and capability.
That was a lot to just say, lets try not to worry about it, we need to see the whole picture but so far while some of the stuff is good, I doubt we are seeing DG pulled in as the new no brainer list that will crush all without mercy. Lets not fall into panic mode just because something is getting better when better doesn't mean the best.
Don't forget that Death Guard are getting a new campaign book in a couple months as well, so will see a further bump from that.
Maybe they will see a bump in that, we currently don't know if they will get any rules at all in it. They could just be a narrative plot point with little or not actual power in it, especially so close after release of their new codex. I guess it depends on if that was supposed to be further down the line and the virus stuff just has everything backed up or they thought they'd need more stuff so soon after they just got their codex brought up to speed.
I'd hope they wouldn't need more power that quickly, or that they wouldn't just spread rules out over two books just for more money, just can't be sure though until we know more about it. Maybe they'll surprise us all and it'll just be a narrative or crusade focused release ? That could be interesting.
Unlikely they would release TWO crusade specific books at once. There's already 1 crusade book so odds are the other book is matched play rules for the 4 factions, dg included.
Books for books god is GW's motto. Supplements were inevitable.
Well I just hope it won't be the case however much it seems like it might be. Crusade being a newish thing however I'm not about to write off them pushing that trying to get momentum for Crusade games being their new child as it is.
Just saying we will see. My heart of heart thinks it'll be matched play stuff to try and make it a felt as mandatory buy, but I hope it'll be a not mandatory feeling crusade book.
I have to agree with much of the sentiment here. Death Guard weren't really wrecking face with their arms and some of the top contender lists in tourneys were often relying on Contemptor Dreadnoughts to provide some "Oomph" to their army. If anything I'd say that some of the changes are bringing DG up to par with some of their loyalist counterparts, but even then DG suffers from having a way smaller toolkit. Death Guard doesn't have any heavy infantry for example and have to rely exclusively on larger units like MPH and PBC to give them some firepower.
Regarding the campaign book I imagine we'll see something similar to the Vigilus book. A small CP semi-formation maybe. It would be rather pointless to release a book so close to the codex that expands the codex a great deal. Also, there are quite a few other factions in the book so maybe DG will get a very limited thing while the other factions get better supported.
Eldarsif wrote: Death Guard doesn't have any heavy infantry for example and have to rely exclusively on larger units like MPH and PBC to give them some firepower.
I might be mis-interpreting "heavy infantry" here, but by most standards both the Blightlords and Deathshrouds would qualify, especially if we assume +1W and possibly +1A for them.
Eldarsif wrote: Death Guard doesn't have any heavy infantry for example and have to rely exclusively on larger units like MPH and PBC to give them some firepower.
I might be mis-interpreting "heavy infantry" here, but by most standards both the Blightlords and Deathshrouds would qualify, especially if we assume +1W and possibly +1A for them.
I believe Eldarsif was refering to heavy [weapon] infantry rather than heavy [armour] infantry.
So like Devastators, Havocs, Retributors etc.
Eldarsif wrote: Regarding the campaign book I imagine we'll see something similar to the Vigilus book. A small CP semi-formation maybe. It would be rather pointless to release a book so close to the codex that expands the codex a great deal. Also, there are quite a few other factions in the book so maybe DG will get a very limited thing while the other factions get better supported.
Pointless? You mean players wouldn't buy it if it has good rules? After all only point that matters is moving money from players wallet to GW's wallet. That's why GW releases stuff.
Eldarsif wrote: Death Guard doesn't have any heavy infantry for example and have to rely exclusively on larger units like MPH and PBC to give them some firepower.
I might be mis-interpreting "heavy infantry" here, but by most standards both the Blightlords and Deathshrouds would qualify, especially if we assume +1W and possibly +1A for them.
I believe Eldarsif was refering to heavy [weapon] infantry rather than heavy [armour] infantry.
So like Devastators, Havocs, Retributors etc.
...the sort of infantry the plague-ridden parade float was really not a fan of?
I guess his point was that in order to have a working theme of lightly armed infantry supported by armored artillery, that armored artillery actually need to have some bite.
Jidmah wrote: I guess his point was that in order to have a working theme of lightly armed infantry supported by armored artillery, that armored artillery actually need to have some bite.
Eldarsif wrote: Death Guard doesn't have any heavy infantry for example and have to rely exclusively on larger units like MPH and PBC to give them some firepower.
I might be mis-interpreting "heavy infantry" here, but by most standards both the Blightlords and Deathshrouds would qualify, especially if we assume +1W and possibly +1A for them.
I believe Eldarsif was refering to heavy [weapon] infantry rather than heavy [armour] infantry.
So like Devastators, Havocs, Retributors etc.
My point exactly. Devs, Havocs, and Retributors is a design choice Mortarion doesn't appear to believe in much and those units do serve a valuable role in most armies. Since Death Guard doesn't get them it means we must rely on things such as MPH and PBC to do the heavy lifting in regards to heavy weaponry. If those units were to be kept underpowered or hard to fit into a list then you'll have an army that has a hard time dealing with any armor at all. (Personally I do feel DG should get Obliterators but that's only because he technically helped make them)
This is especially problematic after the Forgeworld index was released and Contemptors and Leviathans became inaccessible for Death Guard. Now, that might change if there are keyword changes in the new codex and that somehow makes them available again.
I'd also add that this is also more problematic now as GW wants to give more support to mono-armies with some kind of rules, and having Death Guard need to ally with Standard CSM for firepower would kind of break that paradigm.
Eldarsif wrote: Regarding the campaign book I imagine we'll see something similar to the Vigilus book. A small CP semi-formation maybe. It would be rather pointless to release a book so close to the codex that expands the codex a great deal. Also, there are quite a few other factions in the book so maybe DG will get a very limited thing while the other factions get better supported.
Pointless? You mean players wouldn't buy it if it has good rules? After all only point that matters is moving money from players wallet to GW's wallet. That's why GW releases stuff.
It is a question of how subtle GW wants to be in regards to this. If they release a huge DG supplement a month after the codex it will be rather obnoxious. If they release mostly updates to non-updated codex armies it will feel like a bone thrown to codexes lagging behind.
So the question is how cheeky GW is. I imagine it could go both ways.
Jidmah wrote: I guess his point was that in order to have a working theme of lightly armed infantry supported by armored artillery, that armored artillery actually need to have some bite.
Then we end up back at bite + durable = expensive
The thing is they are quite expensive right now and do not have that big of a bite so giving them a slightly better bite would most likely justify their current cost in many ways.
It is good to keep in mind that Death Guard aren't necessarily performing at their point value at the moment.
...the sort of infantry the plague-ridden parade float was really not a fan of?
Nurgle is displeased with this description of his most magnificent of all Primarchs.
Eldarsif wrote: This is especially problematic after the Forgeworld index was released and Contemptors and Leviathans became inaccessible for Death Guard. Now, that might change if there are keyword changes in the new codex and that somehow makes them available again.
This thread has focused almost entirely on differences in existing units but maybe these FW units are being denied because there will now be Conemptors and Leviathans (or something similar) in the Codex itself? Hard to imagine a new Codex without a bunch of new models and units.
Eldarsif wrote: This is especially problematic after the Forgeworld index was released and Contemptors and Leviathans became inaccessible for Death Guard. Now, that might change if there are keyword changes in the new codex and that somehow makes them available again.
This thread has focused almost entirely on differences in existing units but maybe these FW units are being denied because there will now be Conemptors and Leviathans (or something similar) in the Codex itself? Hard to imagine a new Codex without a bunch of new models and units.
One never knows, but so far they've been rather reluctant to include FW models within the codexes, and currently very little in reveals for potential new units except those that have already been previewed.
We do know we are getting a new HQ that is supposed to boost Daemon Engines so I am a bit excited to see how he turns out. Still, it would leave us with the current crop of units and now an extra cost on top of that to buff them.
Hopefully we'll see some articles pop up in the coming week telling us more. At this point I desperately want to see the new faction traits.
Eldarsif wrote: This is especially problematic after the Forgeworld index was released and Contemptors and Leviathans became inaccessible for Death Guard. Now, that might change if there are keyword changes in the new codex and that somehow makes them available again.
This thread has focused almost entirely on differences in existing units but maybe these FW units are being denied because there will now be Conemptors and Leviathans (or something similar) in the Codex itself? Hard to imagine a new Codex without a bunch of new models and units.
There is no precedent for FW resin moving to codex entries in the last years. The chance of that happening for DG is very close to zero.
Eldarsif wrote: This is especially problematic after the Forgeworld index was released and Contemptors and Leviathans became inaccessible for Death Guard. Now, that might change if there are keyword changes in the new codex and that somehow makes them available again.
This thread has focused almost entirely on differences in existing units but maybe these FW units are being denied because there will now be Conemptors and Leviathans (or something similar) in the Codex itself? Hard to imagine a new Codex without a bunch of new models and units.
There is no precedent for FW resin moving to codex entries in the last years. The chance of that happening for DG is very close to zero.
I was thinking of a new model entirely but maybe I'm just a dreamer and not ready for this harsh reality we live in!
they already had a hard time in 
