Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

the_scotsman wrote:

Spoiler:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
However that doesn't change the fact that this ancient and powerful artifact of a gun is worse than this new Primaris standard equipment. It's just another blip in the constant insult-to-other-factions that is Primaris.

It's the "old profile versus new profile" effect.
If Fire Dragon were introduced now, they'd be 2W 3+ 4++ models with a weapons that shots 1d3 shot at 18" S12 with straight up 2d6 damage. Or maybe 4d3 damage, even better.
Compare heavy bolter with rotor cannons, in the SAME unit (chaos havocs). One is old and one is new.

Right, like when they released those new kits for howling banshees and jain zar and -

-no wait, hold on.

New kit, same old profile, just like the new csm models. Gw refuses to update the 3rd-7th unit profiles for the new rules, while new units get profiles that are designed to function within them. Old units are given strategems and points cuts instead, so what used to be an elite unit becomes chaff. This, of course, favors the faction that gets the vast majority of new units. Guess who that is.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Edit: Although for a contrary example, while not as egregious, Pteraxii having Assault 5 guns seems a little ridiculous.

That's the leader only and there's a lot more to that unit.

1 point less than an Intercessor -- M12 FLY WS3 BS3 S4 T3 W2 A2 4+/6++

+1A when charging
Deepstrike
"Fly High"
Canticles

In shooting -
Leader : 12" pistol 5 S3 AP0
Unit : 12" assault D6 S4 AP1; Auto-hit; Ignores cover

In melee on the charge -
Leader : 4 S6 AP0; Unmod 6s to hit cause 2 additional hits
Unit : 3 S5 AP1

So what are you saying here Daed? Are you just pointing out that other factions have units that are good in comparison to loyalists or agreeing that new units seem to get better data sheets than older units that existed in previous editions? I mean, I look at all that and compare it to raptors and assault marines and think .

Difficult terrain is back, that could offer an opportunity to bring back rules that allow units to ignore it. Chosen lost their ability to infiltrate as well, with no replacement. Old units only lose things, it seems.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

So what are you saying here Daed? Are you just pointing out that other factions have units that are good in comparison to loyalists or agreeing that new units seem to get better data sheets than older units that existed in previous editions? I mean, I look at all that and compare it to raptors and assault marines and think .

That these are really good units and that Primaris are not the only ones being "gifted".

The Overlord got a 3" boost to his aura and it works on everything as opposed to just INFANTRY.
Necron Warriors picked up RR 1s on reanimate.
Scarabs went to always wounding on 5s to hit and wound on 6s to hit.

Primaris units don't have a plethora of super special rules. Each unit has one or sometimes two things it does extra. Eradicators double shoot. Aggressors double shoot or run and gun. Suppressors block O/W. Outriders get +2A on the charge. Inceptors do MW on the charge.

People are just very practiced at freaking out about marines, because of doctrines and traits.

Right, the new Admech jump infantry are good, they're also new. Gw seems reluctant to give new rules or stats to old units, even when they get new models like the aforementioned Banshees and csm. That's why it looks like primaris are always getting all the rules: they get the bulk of new models which get new rules. Gw needs to start updating older units so they can compete with the new ones, at minimum they should give them back some of the rules that they took away (why did my Chosen forget how to infiltrate?). As many have said, a big problem with the eradicators is how they look compared to older anti-tank infantry units. Eradicators wouldn't look as bad if multi-meltas were given improved rules. As I've said before, I don't want new units, I just want better rules for the units I already have. I think many would agree.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Your Chosen didn't forget how to infiltrate. They simply decided that was cowardly unless you decide you're Alpha Legion. FORGE THE NARRATIVE!

Getting closer to the enemy is cowardly?

Getting closer all sneaky like is cowardly compared to taking all the enemy's firepower! Those Chosen are actually Orks in disguise! FORGE THE NARRATIVE!

Sneaky? Cowardly? Have you heard of the Night Lords before?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Right, the new Admech jump infantry are good, they're also new. Gw seems reluctant to give new rules or stats to old units, even when they get new models like the aforementioned Banshees and csm. That's why it looks like primaris are always getting all the rules: they get the bulk of new models which get new rules. Gw needs to start updating older units so they can compete with the new ones, at minimum they should give them back some of the rules that they took away (why did my Chosen forget how to infiltrate?). As many have said, a big problem with the eradicators is how they look compared to older anti-tank infantry units. Eradicators wouldn't look as bad if multi-meltas were given improved rules. As I've said before, I don't want new units, I just want better rules for the units I already have. I think many would agree.

Havocs. CSM don't have much, sure. But neither do Intercessors. GW doesn't touch much old stuff until they redo the kits, but not everything will get extra rules.

Raptors have *a* special rule that sucks mostly because 18 points and no +2 to charge just doesn't make it useful at all. Everything but the basic stuff typically has a special rule or two. Primaris are no exception. You're just noting Primaris more, because they have a lot of releases and people are freaking out about some of the abilities. ( If Outriders didn't have +2A they'd be a bit of a joke. )

You won't get Raptors suddenly dropping bombs or extra charge range, because nothing justifies it in their fluff (I know, I know). What we'll probably see though is a new kit and some ability that interacts with attrition or a better LD mod ability. They won't suddenly become an amazing melee blender or super shooters.

I wouldn't expect much for basic csm or intercessors either: those are basic troops. But older elite, heavy support, and fast attack units should be able to compete with newer units. Everyone can't get the same number of new units as loyalists, gw doesn't have the capacity. They can, however, update rules pretty easily. The hardest part would be rebalancing the points.

But if you're going to bring up raptors and their fluff, that's easy, as we have a perfectly good, fluffy set of rules that could be applied to them from an existing gw game. Night Raptors from the Horus Heresy. Convert that data sheet over to 9th, it would be just as easy as converting the old 7th ed raptor data sheet over to 8th was. It would even work with the existing raptor kit (though you couldn't have Nostroman chainglaives). Gw simply need to look at their own games for inspiration on that one.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yea no doubt, but then it becomes a situation of managing a lot of moving pieces and GW is not good at that. Doing a sweep across units would cause a ton of havoc.

If GW follows the format we'll see a base CSM book with supplements for the snowflakes and that release could easily be noise marines, bezerkers, raptors, and mutilators. Though TS and DG would make it weird where EC and WE deviate a lot less.

*shrug* Hopefully we'll see what's next before my country becomes a hellscape.

If you don't trust them to update existing units then how can you trust them with all of these new ones?

As to that other point, yeah, glad I'm already in the hills.

Tyel wrote:

The Newman wrote:
^^^ Yeah, the Russ averages 8 shots without support. ...it is 10 point more though, not sure how I did that wrong.

Sorry about that - obviously too late in the day and forgot the Russ can shoot twice.

On New Models/Old Models - I think its just kind of random. GW comes up with rules they think are cool, and then throws a dart at points.
I think CSM players are kidding themselves that they won't eventually go down the Primaris Route - but this will be something GW want to sell. They are unlikely to wake up one day and go "meh, everything in power armour has 2 wounds now"

I think the Marines in Indomitus have all been priced aggressively. Its unclear however that the Necrons have.

I mean where are the threads about how massed Skorpekh Destroyers are going to scuttle over the meta?

The release of the new kits in upscaled sizes that are still smaller than primaris doesn't seem to support "chaos primaris" (thankfully). I still wouldn't rule out things like cult troops and Chosen getting an extra wound, they need something to compete with the "good guys".

Ice_can wrote:The 30k vehicals actually got pretty decent rules from FW in there index (the advantage of them being written to balance vrs guard and eldar codex's) and had allowed me to carry marine 1.0 codex in a non tournament games and win a fair amount.

The initial Indexes were pretty well balanced against the non fw stuff, but ca 2018 nerfed a lot of fw stuff straight into the ground for no apparent reason. The index fellblade paid 50 points base over an index baneblade after factoring in the demolisher cannon being added into its cost (while the baneblade had to pay separately for its demolisher cannon), but ca 2018 jacked the price up 220 ppm (a 42% increase) with all the other super heavys taking similar hits, along with hits on other stuff.

The dreadnoughts seemed to do quite well, but the targeted nerfs at the hellforged leviathan and daredeo in the new ca, along with the moronic decision to price all the various contemptor models equally has me wondering about the new fw books. It was loyalist leviathans that were the big problem at the end of 8th, not the csm version, and daredeos were pretty important in a lot of csm armies. Hard not to see this as biased against csm.

Even with the "buffs" that some of the fw super heavys got in ca 2020 (some still got another increase) they're still massively overpriced, with the fellblade coming in at 285 base over a baneblade after factoring in the demolisher cannon (again, because gw can't be consistent with what wargear is free or not between various books).

I really want to see those new fw books.

Ice_can wrote:
Yeah I was talking 8th edition loyalists, as even the FW stuff got the benifits of doctorines etc.

Yeah FW stuff has just felt neglected since GW took over their rules.
Heck even the stuff they produced new rules for Knights got seriously WTF points as they rewrote the entire datasheet and never touched the points, like could you make it more obvious you suck at your job?

Or do they simply not give a damn?

Well, they apparently give a damn, just in the wrong direction, otherwise why did they take the time to do the ca 2018 nerf? It seems someone on the gw rules team just doesn't like fw, or at least the big stuff. How else do you explain the disparity between resin super heavy tanks and walkers vs the plastic ones? Really makes me worry what they're doing in those new fw books.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

Ice_can wrote:
Yeah I was talking 8th edition loyalists, as even the FW stuff got the benifits of doctorines etc.

Yeah FW stuff has just felt neglected since GW took over their rules.
Heck even the stuff they produced new rules for Knights got seriously WTF points as they rewrote the entire datasheet and never touched the points, like could you make it more obvious you suck at your job?

Or do they simply not give a damn?

The upcoming FW books are literally the first time GW is taking over FW rules. The upheaval on the FW team from the death of Alan Bligh didn't help.

No, it isn't. Gw has handled the points updates since ca 2018, as well as recent erratas and FAQs, fw only did the original Indexes. Do I need to remind you of exactly what they did to the points for many fw models in ca 2018?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

No, it isn't. Gw has handled the points updates since ca 2018, as well as recent erratas and FAQs, fw only did the original Indexes. Do I need to remind you of exactly what they did to the points for many fw models in ca 2018?

Yea, they took on a ton more work unexpectedly and just propped it up on stilts. They kicked models into the stratosphere that probably should be kept to Apocalypse.

Less unexpectedly than fw having mere weeks to get the Indexes done, and the same amount of time to come to grasps with the new rules for 8th, but fw still did it fairly well without copping out. Gw then had a full year between ca 2018 and ca 2019 and did nothing. And now it looks like they've only given them a cursory glance in ca 2020, pricing units by name instead of their rules.

And as far as "units that should be in Apocalypse", titans, obviously, but if Fellblades, Cerberus, Falchions, and the fw Knights should be relegated to Apocalypse then Baneblades, Wraithknights, and the plastic knights should go with them along with all other titanic units. Many make that argument, I didn't think you were one of them. I don't remember super heavys ever breaking the game in 7th, and they weren't a problem in 8th except for the initial Castellan build, maybe I was using mine wrong. They shouldn't be allowed below a 2000 point game, but other than that, I don't see the problem.

So who actually won? A Golden Banana Boy army or Loyalist Dogs?

I was referring to the GT that The Scotsman was talking about. Yes, we all know that the new primaris stuff is good.

And stop badmouthing the fw rules team, then literally only had weeks to figure out the 8th edition rules and fit their stuff into it. I think what we got was pretty good considering. And it was a lot better than what gw gave us after they took over. I mean, we're talking about the same team that did the 7th ed Imperial Armour books and HH. Bligh was incredibly good, but he didn't do everything. Give them some credit.

Honestly, why couldn't they have just left the fw Indexes alone? Was a 697 point Fellblade really breaking the game? Compared to what the codex super heavys costed at the end of 8th?

Lists would be nice. Did the loyalist players use any of the Indomutus units? That would be some serious speed painting if they did.

Thanks Blood Hawk. Interesting to see soup still on the menu.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

Spoiler:

 Blood Hawk wrote:

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


You know, the six to seven army wide special rules they get in addition to the crazy bs on their profiles that make 7th ed eldar pale in comparison. But don't worry, they dont have a plethora of special rules daed said so

Hey remember when fire dragons got +1 on the damage table on their melta guns? Shoot twice melta unit lololol.

Incidentally the first GT results just came in. 4/10 marine armies, 4/10 custodes armies in the top 10. Shocked pikachu face.

I acknowledge the layered rules. I'm just talking about unit design.

Who the hell is hosting a GT? How many players and how many were marine?

I’m curious as well, would love to see more detailed results.

I found this using bing. https://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2020/07/29/we-have-our-1st-9th-edition-tournament-results/

First place was roughly half marines and half sisters. 2nd place custodes, 3rd place GK.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Lists would be nice. Did the loyalist players use any of the Indomutus units? That would be some serious speed painting if they did.

According to what I found the first player did have eradicators and one squad of bladeguard. The rest of the list was old marines and sisters.

Thanks for the link, it was interesting to see what people came up with, the marine/sister list spammed a bunch of relic contemptors, I am curious to see if they go up in points with the forge world books since they currently cost the same as the comtemptor Morris dreads with a much better statline and rules.

My guess is that the relic rules will probably change. I would like to see something like 1 per detachment myself.

So would I. More limitations would be nice. I mean, how is it your chapter/Legion has three of these super rare ancient relics? Limitations are good, HH proves that.

Also interesting to see that the loyalist/Sisters army won without any mono faction bonuses.

BrianDavion wrote:
I think forfitting the game because someone ahs a single blade guard vetern or eradicator squad is a little over the top.

And lame. How do you know whether you can beat them or not if you don't try?

 Xenomancers wrote:
How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?

Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......

 Eipi10 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?

Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......

Umm... He... He made a typo...

He meant "Who in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?" Who, not How.

It doesn't even make sense with how...

Obviously . He was implying that the executioner is overpriced, which it isn't. It goes back to your own point about how loyalist players see their units. Everything should be at least +1 of what everyone else has, for less points. So I fed him some satire. A flying tank with that many guns? And it only took a 16% hit? Compared to the points increase other armies got? And of course he wants it to be cheaper so loyalists can use it to move the already grossly underpriced eradicators quickly and safely up the board. Right, cut points for loyalists, they need all the help they can get.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Eipi10 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?

Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......

Umm... He... He made a typo...

He meant "Who in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?" Who, not How.

It doesn't even make sense with how...

Obviously . He was implying that the executioner is overpriced, which it isn't. It goes back to your own point about how loyalist players see their units. Everything should be at least +1 of what everyone else has, for less points. So I fed him some satire. A flying tank with that many guns? And it only took a 16% hit? Compared to the points increase other armies got? And of course he wants it to be cheaper so loyalists can use it to move the already grossly underpriced eradicators quickly and safely up the board. Right, cut points for loyalists, they need all the help they can get.

Oh no - I admit that eradicators are too cheap. I literally posted it in that thread lol. The executioner is dang near 100 points over costed though. At least 80. Twin Heavy bolters are all overcosted too. 6 str5 ap -1 is not worth 30 points. That is literally insane.
I'll break it down. Executioner lost it's special ability...POTMS - all non vheicals get that. Lost the ability to fail back and shoot. Half the heavy weapons in the game give it no save when you shoot it. Why the heck would I not just take 3 vindicators for the points? 33 t8 3+ wounds compared to 16...

Ok, once again, trying to respond to what I think you're trying to say. You mean that all vehicles get the equivalent of potms now, and not all "non vheicals", right? So are you saying everything that used to have potms/daemonic machine spirit should get a discount? Then how about super heavy tanks? "Steel Behemoth" no longer makes them special by allowing them to fire their weapons into and out of melee. Want to give them a discount too? Units shouldn't get a discount just because gw changed the rules for vehicles so that they make more sense and actually encourage movement instead of penalizing it. And as far as the executioner "losing" its ability to fall back and still shoot, no one is upset about that except for people who are sad their flying armory can no longer just float away from whatever was lucky enough to make it into combat with it, despite its -2 to charge rule, so that it can unload all 173.5 of its guns into them. That was a bad rule, and few will miss it.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Eipi10 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?

Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......

Umm... He... He made a typo...

He meant "Who in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?" Who, not How.

It doesn't even make sense with how...

Obviously . He was implying that the executioner is overpriced, which it isn't. It goes back to your own point about how loyalist players see their units. Everything should be at least +1 of what everyone else has, for less points. So I fed him some satire. A flying tank with that many guns? And it only took a 16% hit? Compared to the points increase other armies got? And of course he wants it to be cheaper so loyalists can use it to move the already grossly underpriced eradicators quickly and safely up the board. Right, cut points for loyalists, they need all the help they can get.

[
Oh no - I admit that eradicators are too cheap. I literally posted it in that thread lol. The executioner is dang near 100 points over costed though. At least 80. Twin Heavy bolters are all overcosted too. 6 str5 ap -1 is not worth 30 points. That is literally insane.
I'll break it down. Executioner lost it's special ability...POTMS - all non vheicals get that. Lost the ability to fail back and shoot. Half the heavy weapons in the game give it no save when you shoot it. Why the heck would I not just take 3 vindicators for the points? 33 t8 3+ wounds compared to 16...

Ok, once again, trying to respond to what I think you're trying to say. You mean that all vehicles get the equivalent of potms now, and not all "non vheicals", right? So are you saying everything that used to have potms/daemonic machine spirit should get a discount? Then how about super heavy tanks? "Steel Behemoth" no longer makes them special by allowing them to fire their weapons into and out of melee. Want to give them a discount too? Units shouldn't get a discount just because gw changed the rules for vehicles so that they make more sense and actually encourage movement instead of penalizing it. And as far as the executioner "losing" its ability to fall back and still shoot, no one is upset about that except for people who are sad their flying armory can no longer just float away from whatever was lucky enough to make it into combat with it, despite its -2 to charge rule, so that it can unload all 173.5 of its guns into them. That was a bad rule, and few will miss it.

You mean touch in CC with a gretchen and now all you can do is shoot the gretchen. Give me a break - it's dumb. All of the respulsors special abilities are null now. 16 wounds and 3+ save is at best 250-280 points. Can get 4 las on a 12 wound 2+ save 5++ relic contemptor with 4x lascannon and 2+ BS for 190.

Yes...Titan level units seem to have been nerfed a bit...considering you can shoot them through walls and they cant shoot back - a lot of them went down in points though. Executioner went up. 375 for an executioner is flat out absurd. So the point remains - Gravis is a little undercosted but all their transports are madly overcosted. The net result is short ranged slow infantry aren't that great.

Lots of titanic units went down? Ok, I'll bite, name "lots" of titanic units that got price cuts. And I wasn't arguing that they should, I was pointing out that they also lost some of their "special" status, and are perfectly fine, just like the executioner.

As for your grot comment, please see Insectum's post above.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Spoiler:

Rihgu wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:


Yes...Titan level units seem to have been nerfed a bit...considering you can shoot them through walls and they cant shoot back - a lot of them went down in points though. Executioner went up. 375 for an executioner is flat out absurd. So the point remains - Gravis is a little undercosted but all their transports are madly overcosted. The net result is short ranged slow infantry aren't that great.

Just to be clear - you can shoot them through walls....if you can see them.

I think he's referring to Obscuring terrain, specifically.

Right. You still have to be able to see the model to shoot through it. So if you have a 1 foot tall 3 foot wide block of styrofoam in the middle of the table, Obscuring rule does not make you able to shoot an 18+ wound model through that wall.

Ok fine, but how often do you see giant, solid pieces of terrain like that on the table? The terrain providing the infantry-can-shoot-at-Titanic-unit-that-can't-shoot-back scenario is waaaay more common.

Infantry being able to fire at super heavys through obscuring terrain isn't the problem. The idea of relatively small troops hiding in cover to ambush heavy armour with anti-tank weapons makes sense. The problem is that the obscuring rule allows something like the aforementioned executioner to hide behind the same piece of terrain and freely target that super heavy with its heavy 2, S10, AP -4, D d3-6 weapon. That rule shouldn't apply to vehicles. Obscuring should be LOS blocking for vehicles on both sides, regardless of wounds.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:


Yes...Titan level units seem to have been nerfed a bit...considering you can shoot them through walls and they cant shoot back - a lot of them went down in points though. Executioner went up. 375 for an executioner is flat out absurd. So the point remains - Gravis is a little undercosted but all their transports are madly overcosted. The net result is short ranged slow infantry aren't that great.

Just to be clear - you can shoot them through walls....if you can see them.

I think he's referring to Obscuring terrain, specifically.

Right. You still have to be able to see the model to shoot through it. So if you have a 1 foot tall 3 foot wide block of styrofoam in the middle of the table, Obscuring rule does not make you able to shoot an 18+ wound model through that wall.

Ok fine, but how often do you see giant, solid pieces of terrain like that on the table? The terrain providing the infantry-can-shoot-at-Titanic-unit-that-can't-shoot-back scenario is waaaay more common.

Infantry being able to fire at super heavys through obscuring terrain isn't the problem. The idea of relatively small troops hiding in cover to ambush heavy armour with anti-tank weapons makes sense. The problem is that the obscuring rule allows something like the aforementioned executioner to hide behind the same piece of terrain and freely target that super heavy with its heavy 2, S10, AP -4, D d3-6 weapon. That rule shouldn't apply to vehicles. Obscuring should be LOS blocking for vehicles on both sides, regardless of wounds.

Ahh, I see. Ok that's a more reasonable issue. I guess I consider most vehicles to be pretty big, and I'd think the Titanic unit would be able to shuffle to the side a bit in order to draw LOS to some point on the hull. Then again, lots of infantry units have big footprints, too.

I think the idea is that it can still be tricky to draw a bead on many vehicles in dense terrain, and that there is a certain size where that's just no longer viable. That makes sense to me. I also think for the sake of gameplay involving traditionally sized vehicles, the rules as they are wind up being better, and the game should be designed around infantry and non-Titanic vehicles at the core. The fact that theres a bit of wonkiness around superheavies is acceptable in that context.

The issue isn't that super heavys can be targeted through obscuring terrain, like I said, it makes sense for infantry. It's that they can be targeted through obscuring terrain by other vehicles. We're talking about a tank sniping through a window (or some other gap in the terrain) at another tank. That's some serious accuracy from some very big guns. It also brings up the issue of size. Compare an executioner to a Spartan, or better yet, a standard Land Raider to an Achilles. One can be shot by other vehicles, the other can't. How is a Land Raider Achilles easier to spot than a standard Land Raider?

 Jidmah wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Because FW rules have never made sense and don't suddenly start doing so in 9th?

That has nothing to do with FW rules.

Here's another example:

My keeper of secrets (16 wounds) can whip a Great Unclean One (18 wounds) through obscuring terrain (say, a tiny window by her hoof), but the GUO cannot vomit back, even if the entire upper torso of my taller Keeper of Secrets is poking over the terrain.

"Your greater daemon is so fat, it can't be hidden by obscuring terrain?"

Terrain rules are clearly an abstraction, and abstractions are going to have weird edge cases. If the wound rule didn't exist we would have morkanauts hiding out of sight behind a tiny ruin.
Last edition we had "real" terrain and everybody hated it because the vast majority of terrain simply can't hide gak.

No, you wouldn't. If the terrain piece is too small to cover the Morkanaught it could still be targeted. Obscuring should simply serve to fill in any "holes" in the terrain. It should stop you shooting things through windows, which is what it basically does, just not for anything with 18+ wounds, regardless of whether or not it can actually fit behind the terrain.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Which is why a size stat is something that should've been implemented a while ago so we don't have these recurring issues.

Or, if it fits behind the terrain, you can't shoot it. I'm fine with super heavys not benefiting from dense cover, that makes sense, but a 16 wound tank shouldn't be sniping 18+ wound tanks through windows. Infantry, yes, because they can actually lean out of the window and take aim, but not vehicles.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yes, but it is a much less stark balance change to adjust keywords rather than wounds.

Removing the Titanic keyword from units (or adding it on) doesn't mean much except in this specific case, while removing wounds has a huge impact (god forbid if it's a character model and dips beneath 10 for some reason).

The Triumph of St. Katherine is a perfect example, requiring an FAQ to be hidden behind obscuring terrain despite being Infantry-sized. If they'd just had a keyword (heck, make a special once called nonobscurable or something) then it'd have been much better.

Fair call, fair call. You might be totally right in that Titanic would have been a better cutoff. One wonders why they went the Wound route, then.

To hit the Daemon Primarchs, obviously. Along with the aforementioned Morkanaughts and Gorkanaughts.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yes, but it is a much less stark balance change to adjust keywords rather than wounds.

Removing the Titanic keyword from units (or adding it on) doesn't mean much except in this specific case, while removing wounds has a huge impact (god forbid if it's a character model and dips beneath 10 for some reason).

The Triumph of St. Katherine is a perfect example, requiring an FAQ to be hidden behind obscuring terrain despite being Infantry-sized. If they'd just had a keyword (heck, make a special once called nonobscurable or something) then it'd have been much better.

Fair call, fair call. You might be totally right in that Titanic would have been a better cutoff. One wonders why they went the Wound route, then.

To hit the Daemon Primarchs, obviously. Along with the aforementioned Morkanaughts and Gorkanaughts.

Why? And why couldn't they just have gotten the Titanic keyword?

Because gw only considers something TITANIC if it has 20+ wounds. Why? Ask them. This rule seems to be targeted at anything gw considers "too big", not stuff with the TITANIC keyword or even LOWs.

 Jidmah wrote:

Spoiler:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yes, but it is a much less stark balance change to adjust keywords rather than wounds.

Removing the Titanic keyword from units (or adding it on) doesn't mean much except in this specific case, while removing wounds has a huge impact (god forbid if it's a character model and dips beneath 10 for some reason).

The Triumph of St. Katherine is a perfect example, requiring an FAQ to be hidden behind obscuring terrain despite being Infantry-sized. If they'd just had a keyword (heck, make a special once called nonobscurable or something) then it'd have been much better.

Fair call, fair call. You might be totally right in that Titanic would have been a better cutoff. One wonders why they went the Wound route, then.

To hit the Daemon Primarchs, obviously. Along with the aforementioned Morkanaughts and Gorkanaughts.

Why? And why couldn't they just have gotten the Titanic keyword?

Because then Morkanauts would be able to fall back and shoot just like they could in 8th. Orks can't have nice things.

Big'n'Stompy doesn't still let them do that? Did I miss that in the FAQ?

 Jidmah wrote:
Big'n'Stompy received the same errate as all the other knight-equivalents and mega-tanks. Except all those are TITANIC which now inherently allows them to fall back and shoot.

So they can't do that anymore? But still get the same disadvantage of being sniped through windows by stuff they can't shoot back at. That sucks. Gw really had it in for Orks this time around.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Big'n'Stompy received the same errate as all the other knight-equivalents and mega-tanks. Except all those are TITANIC which now inherently allows them to fall back and shoot.

So they can't do that anymore? But still get the same disadvantage of being sniped through windows by stuff they can't shoot back at. That sucks. Gw really had it in for Orks this time around.

my gut feeling is thats not intended.

I think you may be right. It looks like gw was a bit haphazard when rewriting the various fallback and shoot/charge rules for some of the bigger models. The Steel Behemoth rule for super heavy tanks has also been reworded oddly, as previously they could fire into/out of cc at full ballistic skill, now since they rely on the Big Guns Never Tire rule to fire into combat it would appear they do so at -1 for heavy weapons, which is 99% of what they are armed with. Probably should send some emails to gw about this.