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.

Early to call this a trend, but three armies with 8th Edition Codexes took the top 3 at another US GT.

https://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2021/03/21/another-week-another-major-tournament-super-spreader/

1st Place - Sisters of Battle (Nick Nanavati - maybe the player has some impact on the result)
2nd Place - Ad Mech (lots of Electropriests and Skorpius Disintegrators)
3rd Place - Drukhari with Aeldari

Before anyone rushes out to copy the Drukhari list it consists of four squads of 20 Wracks, which I do not think is possible with the new Codex (edit - nope it is possible, but Wracks are different in 8th). Does highlight the value of resilient Obsec squads in 9th. The Aeldari portion was mostly Forgeworld fire support with 2 x Lynx and 2 x Hornet.

20 wracks is possible in the new codex, it's just that wracks were SIGNIFICANTLY more durable in the old codex rules which is why they dropped down to 8pts.

Basically 3rd place here abuses the new point cost with the old rules resulting in busted. It's as indicative of the overall power level of drukhari as the lists winning competitive events off of 10pt reavers before that got 2-week FAQed.

Just standard competitive WAAC-ness on display.

the_scotsman wrote:
20 wracks is possible in the new codex, it's just that wracks were SIGNIFICANTLY more durable in the old codex rules which is why they dropped down to 8pts.

Basically 3rd place here abuses the new point cost with the old rules resulting in busted. It's as indicative of the overall power level of drukhari as the lists winning competitive events off of 10pt reavers before that got 2-week FAQed.

Just standard competitive WAAC-ness on display.

The new Codex isn't even out yet so why/how would they have been using the new rules?

 Bosskelot wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
20 wracks is possible in the new codex, it's just that wracks were SIGNIFICANTLY more durable in the old codex rules which is why they dropped down to 8pts.

Basically 3rd place here abuses the new point cost with the old rules resulting in busted. It's as indicative of the overall power level of drukhari as the lists winning competitive events off of 10pt reavers before that got 2-week FAQed.

Just standard competitive WAAC-ness on display.

The new Codex isn't even out yet so why/how would they have been using the new rules?

If I understand this correctly the recent point FAQ updated Drukhari to have the new points even if it was using the old codex. Ie. GW released the points for the new codex entries even if we didn't have a new codex available.

That's at least how I understand it.

 Eldarsif wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
20 wracks is possible in the new codex, it's just that wracks were SIGNIFICANTLY more durable in the old codex rules which is why they dropped down to 8pts.

Basically 3rd place here abuses the new point cost with the old rules resulting in busted. It's as indicative of the overall power level of drukhari as the lists winning competitive events off of 10pt reavers before that got 2-week FAQed.

Just standard competitive WAAC-ness on display.

The new Codex isn't even out yet so why/how would they have been using the new rules?

If I understand this correctly the recent point FAQ updated Drukhari to have the new points even if it was using the old codex. Ie. GW released the points for the new codex entries even if we didn't have a new codex available.

That's at least how I understand it.

No I know.

That's why I'm asking why it's such an issue.

It would seem he used the Munitorium Field Manual 2021 Mk 1 for points costs/unit size but the more resilient 8th Ed Wrack rules - which would have been completely legal. Its an exciting time with points updates and Codexes coming out in a jumble! Once the new Codex is actually out on the street for tourney play we'll see where it truly lands. Still interesting that the top 3 two weeks in a row is 8th Ed/PA Codexes.

No I know.

That's why I'm asking why it's such an issue.

Doesn't mean there is an issue, just that certain units will over-perform in the interim between updates.

 Bosskelot wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
20 wracks is possible in the new codex, it's just that wracks were SIGNIFICANTLY more durable in the old codex rules which is why they dropped down to 8pts.

Basically 3rd place here abuses the new point cost with the old rules resulting in busted. It's as indicative of the overall power level of drukhari as the lists winning competitive events off of 10pt reavers before that got 2-week FAQed.

Just standard competitive WAAC-ness on display.

The new Codex isn't even out yet so why/how would they have been using the new rules?

If I understand this correctly the recent point FAQ updated Drukhari to have the new points even if it was using the old codex. Ie. GW released the points for the new codex entries even if we didn't have a new codex available.

That's at least how I understand it.

No I know.

That's why I'm asking why it's such an issue.

Because Wracks went from 4++ invulnerable 6+ fnp in the okd codex (12pt model) to 6++ invulnerable 5+ fnp in the new codex (8pt model)

Using new point cost with old rules results in wracks being very very strong.

Interesting to see that the winning list is pretty much zero shenanigans - just melta, eviscerators, rhinos, and some paper-thin T3 objective holders looking to trade out against more expensive units.

And this is why tournaments make zero sense.

Dude was allowed to use Munitorium Field Manual points costs from a White Dwarf that dropped on Friday, when lists should have been submitted significantly beforehand?

A.T. wrote:
Interesting to see that the winning list is pretty much zero shenanigans - just melta, eviscerators, rhinos, and some paper-thin T3 objective holders looking to trade out against more expensive units.

Hey let's double the MM shots and increase the damage potential for the same points cost, surely it won't cause any issue!

 Kanluwen wrote:
And this is why tournaments make zero sense.

Dude was allowed to use Munitorium Field Manual points costs from a White Dwarf that dropped on Friday, when lists should have been submitted significantly beforehand?

I have no idea what you're referencing here.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
And this is why tournaments make zero sense.

Dude was allowed to use Munitorium Field Manual points costs from a White Dwarf that dropped on Friday, when lists should have been submitted significantly beforehand?

I have no idea what you're referencing here.

Yeah me neither. Haven't the Munitorum FAQ points been out for some time?

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
It would seem he used the Munitorium Field Manual 2021 Mk 1 for points costs/unit size but the more resilient 8th Ed Wrack rules - which would have been completely legal. Its an exciting time with points updates and Codexes coming out in a jumble! Once the new Codex is actually out on the street for tourney play we'll see where it truly lands. Still interesting that the top 3 two weeks in a row is 8th Ed/PA Codexes.

This is what I'm referring to.

Friday saw White Dwarf drop, with a Munitorum Field Manual present in it.


Are the Mark I points not new? MFM tends to slip under my radar these days, because well...COVID's a thing.

KurtAngle2 wrote:

A.T. wrote:
Interesting to see that the winning list is pretty much zero shenanigans - just melta, eviscerators, rhinos, and some paper-thin T3 objective holders looking to trade out against more expensive units.

Hey let's double the MM shots and increase the damage potential for the same points cost, surely it won't cause any issue!

It hasn't really. Multi-melta gets used. Over using it gets you into trouble. His list had 6. Hardly what one would call spam of any sort.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
It would seem he used the Munitorium Field Manual 2021 Mk 1 for points costs/unit size but the more resilient 8th Ed Wrack rules - which would have been completely legal. Its an exciting time with points updates and Codexes coming out in a jumble! Once the new Codex is actually out on the street for tourney play we'll see where it truly lands. Still interesting that the top 3 two weeks in a row is 8th Ed/PA Codexes.

This is what I'm referring to.

Friday saw White Dwarf drop, with a Munitorum Field Manual present in it.


Are the Mark I points not new? MFM tends to slip under my radar these days, because well...COVID's a thing.

Interesting though I doubt he used those. The current MFM still reflects a discount for Wracks.

My understanding is that the White Dwarf is basically just outting the February points updates into print, as was promised when the FAQ first dropped in January, the points themselves havn't changed in nearly 2 months.

Really surprised to see a list with 10 Shadow Spectres do this well.

 Kanluwen wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
It would seem he used the Munitorium Field Manual 2021 Mk 1 for points costs/unit size but the more resilient 8th Ed Wrack rules - which would have been completely legal. Its an exciting time with points updates and Codexes coming out in a jumble! Once the new Codex is actually out on the street for tourney play we'll see where it truly lands. Still interesting that the top 3 two weeks in a row is 8th Ed/PA Codexes.

This is what I'm referring to.

Friday saw White Dwarf drop, with a Munitorum Field Manual present in it.

Are the Mark I points not new? MFM tends to slip under my radar these days, because well...COVID's a thing.

That's not new. That's just taking the existing points updates from weeks ago and putting it in paper form for those that wanted it in print. But these point values have been around since early February.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

A.T. wrote:
Interesting to see that the winning list is pretty much zero shenanigans - just melta, eviscerators, rhinos, and some paper-thin T3 objective holders looking to trade out against more expensive units.

Hey let's double the MM shots and increase the damage potential for the same points cost, surely it won't cause any issue!

It hasn't really. Multi-melta gets used. Over using it gets you into trouble. His list had 6. Hardly what one would call spam of any sort.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
It would seem he used the Munitorium Field Manual 2021 Mk 1 for points costs/unit size but the more resilient 8th Ed Wrack rules - which would have been completely legal. Its an exciting time with points updates and Codexes coming out in a jumble! Once the new Codex is actually out on the street for tourney play we'll see where it truly lands. Still interesting that the top 3 two weeks in a row is 8th Ed/PA Codexes.

This is what I'm referring to.

Friday saw White Dwarf drop, with a Munitorum Field Manual present in it.


Are the Mark I points not new? MFM tends to slip under my radar these days, because well...COVID's a thing.

Interesting though I doubt he used those. The current MFM still reflects a discount for Wracks.

That's exactly the problem: before you needed 12 MM to have a worse damage output than the current one whilst in this moment you can get away with only 6 and still have a nice all around antivehicle/mc/mid sized unit

The issue is that when GW dropped their latest point adjustment the new DE codex was supposed to be out. And so that point adjustment had the new DE points. But the codex isn't out until next week.

So the 'current' points are for the new dex that isn't out yet and results in broken stuff like new Wrack points for old (superior) rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

A.T. wrote:
Interesting to see that the winning list is pretty much zero shenanigans - just melta, eviscerators, rhinos, and some paper-thin T3 objective holders looking to trade out against more expensive units.

Sisters might be T3 but they are still 3+/6++. I think its a mistake to label them as 'paper thin'.

KurtAngle2 wrote:
That's exactly the problem: before you needed 12 MM to have a worse damage output than the current one whilst in this moment you can get away with only 6 and still have a nice all around antivehicle/mc/mid sized unit

And the times people took 12MM back then? Exactly zero. Spending almost 25% of your points on a quick to die unit with short range wasn't viable.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:
That's exactly the problem: before you needed 12 MM to have a worse damage output than the current one whilst in this moment you can get away with only 6 and still have a nice all around antivehicle/mc/mid sized unit

And the times people took 12MM back then? Exactly zero. Spending almost 25% of your points on a quick to die unit with short range wasn't viable.

I think that's kind of the point. It wasn't even viable then. But now its even better (because of the added damage at close range and twice the shots) at half the cost/half the multimeltas, to the point that you don't consider 6 spamming.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:
That's exactly the problem: before you needed 12 MM to have a worse damage output than the current one whilst in this moment you can get away with only 6 and still have a nice all around antivehicle/mc/mid sized unit

And the times people took 12MM back then? Exactly zero. Spending almost 25% of your points on a quick to die unit with short range wasn't viable.

MM was always a sidegrade to Lascannons where you traded S9 and 48" for AP-4 and reroll D6 if within half range; right now MM has double the shots and better damage for 25 points (Sisters have it for 20 points) whereas Lascannon stayed the same at 15/20 points across the board, resulting in NOBODY ever considering taking Lascannons in all situations.

How to fix this? MM to 35 points, no other way around this.

Voss wrote:
I think that's kind of the point. It wasn't even viable then. But now its even better (because of the added damage at close range and twice the shots) at half the cost/half the multimeltas, to the point that you don't consider 6 spamming.

Two units that didn't even max their available heavy weapons is not spamming. It's the kind of list building you want. Taking a tool for effect and not having to over rely on that aspect to tackle most opponents.

I wonder if we'll ever reach a point in 40k's existence where somebody winning a tournament with something doesn't automatically cause the community to conclude that it requires enough of a nerf to never ever see it again.

It's sisters of battle. Multimeltas are their antitank. If they're taking antitank weapons, they're taking multimeltas, meltas, or i guess exorcists. Seeing a modest number of multimeltas in a sisters list and concluding that this means MMs must be nerfed to 35pts is like seeing someone take bolters in a space marine list and conclude this means bolters need a 5pt cost to curb their OPness.

the_scotsman wrote:
I wonder if we'll ever reach a point in 40k's existence where somebody winning a tournament with something doesn't automatically cause the community to conclude that it requires enough of a nerf to never ever see it again.

It's sisters of battle. Multimeltas are their antitank. If they're taking antitank weapons, they're taking multimeltas, meltas, or i guess exorcists. Seeing a modest number of multimeltas in a sisters list and concluding that this means MMs must be nerfed to 35pts is like seeing someone take bolters in a space marine list and conclude this means bolters need a 5pt cost to curb their OPness.

EVERYONE that has access to MM takes them, this is not a Sisters thing only (and Sisters in particular have access to the widest range of MMs in the entire game alongside Marines). Lascannons are effectively a deadweight option right now.

Ask yourself why Sisters are consistently top 3 in almost all tournaments, the answer is quite simple:

- Buff to HB
- Buff to Melta
- Buff to Melee scenarios

All things that define the entire Sisters of Battle faction and they take FULL ADVANTAGE from 9th edition changes like no one does.

KurtAngle2 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I wonder if we'll ever reach a point in 40k's existence where somebody winning a tournament with something doesn't automatically cause the community to conclude that it requires enough of a nerf to never ever see it again.

It's sisters of battle. Multimeltas are their antitank. If they're taking antitank weapons, they're taking multimeltas, meltas, or i guess exorcists. Seeing a modest number of multimeltas in a sisters list and concluding that this means MMs must be nerfed to 35pts is like seeing someone take bolters in a space marine list and conclude this means bolters need a 5pt cost to curb their OPness.

EVERYONE that has access to MM takes them, this is not a Sisters thing only (and Sisters in particular have access to the widest range of MMs in the entire game alongside Marines). Lascannons are effectively a deadweight option right now.

Ask yourself why Sisters are consistently top 3 in almost all tournaments, the answer is quite simple:

- Buff to HB
- Buff to Melta
- Buff to Melee scenarios

All things that define the entire Sisters of Battle faction and they take FULL ADVANTAGE from 9th edition changes like no one does.

That more just means lascannons need a rework, not a MM nerf. If MM was really getting spammed a nerf might be justified, but it's not. Lascannons just aren't very good at their current job (long range AT). This is partially because boards are smaller and there is more LoS blocking terrain the range on a lascannon, it's big selling point, is rather wasted.

If we were getting creative, giving it the ability to 'punch through' a layer of obscuring terrain (with like a damage or hit penalty or something) would probably fix it overnight.

KurtAngle2 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I wonder if we'll ever reach a point in 40k's existence where somebody winning a tournament with something doesn't automatically cause the community to conclude that it requires enough of a nerf to never ever see it again.

It's sisters of battle. Multimeltas are their antitank. If they're taking antitank weapons, they're taking multimeltas, meltas, or i guess exorcists. Seeing a modest number of multimeltas in a sisters list and concluding that this means MMs must be nerfed to 35pts is like seeing someone take bolters in a space marine list and conclude this means bolters need a 5pt cost to curb their OPness.

EVERYONE that has access to MM takes them, this is not a Sisters thing only (and Sisters in particular have access to the widest range of MMs in the entire game alongside Marines). Lascannons are effectively a deadweight option right now

Lascannons are dead, because people aren't really taking things that you need to kill at range. People are starting to realize that the small number of eradicators can't handle knights all that well - especially at range. Once they get the tweaks they need knights will be a difficult challenge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I wonder if we'll ever reach a point in 40k's existence where somebody winning a tournament with something doesn't automatically cause the community to conclude that it requires enough of a nerf to never ever see it again.

It's sisters of battle. Multimeltas are their antitank. If they're taking antitank weapons, they're taking multimeltas, meltas, or i guess exorcists. Seeing a modest number of multimeltas in a sisters list and concluding that this means MMs must be nerfed to 35pts is like seeing someone take bolters in a space marine list and conclude this means bolters need a 5pt cost to curb their OPness.

EVERYONE that has access to MM takes them, this is not a Sisters thing only (and Sisters in particular have access to the widest range of MMs in the entire game alongside Marines). Lascannons are effectively a deadweight option right now.

Ask yourself why Sisters are consistently top 3 in almost all tournaments, the answer is quite simple:

- Buff to HB
- Buff to Melta
- Buff to Melee scenarios

All things that define the entire Sisters of Battle faction and they take FULL ADVANTAGE from 9th edition changes like no one does.

Of those things MM played the smallest role. He sprung for Bloody Rose, which is more AP in melee and an extra attack. If he could get away with taking zero MM he would.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I wonder if we'll ever reach a point in 40k's existence where somebody winning a tournament with something doesn't automatically cause the community to conclude that it requires enough of a nerf to never ever see it again.

It's sisters of battle. Multimeltas are their antitank. If they're taking antitank weapons, they're taking multimeltas, meltas, or i guess exorcists. Seeing a modest number of multimeltas in a sisters list and concluding that this means MMs must be nerfed to 35pts is like seeing someone take bolters in a space marine list and conclude this means bolters need a 5pt cost to curb their OPness.

EVERYONE that has access to MM takes them, this is not a Sisters thing only (and Sisters in particular have access to the widest range of MMs in the entire game alongside Marines). Lascannons are effectively a deadweight option right now

Lascannons are dead, because people aren't really taking things that you need to kill at range. People are starting to realize that the small number of eradicators can't handle knights all that well - especially at range. Once they get the tweaks they need knights will be a difficult challenge.

No, Lascannons are dead because 1 shot D6 damage weapons are complete garbage and have been since this damage system was first introduced.

There is a reason no one was using Lascannons before either but using multishot weapons with less damage.

D6 damage is way way to unreliable to be of any real use.

I mean.

Fusion pistols though, right?

the_scotsman wrote:
I mean.

Fusion pistols though, right?

5 Points 6" Melta on the most mobile units that can shoot off their Open Topped Vehicles with a 22" Advance movement...yes everyone would take them if they had that same option and support.
They too are broken, 5 points alone would be fine if you had to effectively reach 6" without that much movement tricks but in Harlequins that hilariously underpriced (8-10 is where it should belong)