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.

calypso2ts wrote:

pretre wrote:
I don't believe that they are designed in a vaccuum. I believe the codexes themselves attempt to be costed to compete with other codexes but that some abilities are worth more in different codexes. As a completely out there example, Meltaguns cost more for some armies because of how cheap their troops are, or how accurate their troops are, or their availability in multiple slots, etc. I think 40k should be better balanced as a whole, but making the same ability cost the same for every unit in the game is probably not the way to do it.

I completely agree with this statement. Also, the bad design in the SoB 'codex' imo is a combination of the special characters being under costed and the generic options being over costed. You cannot, however, compare a SM captain to Celestine.

No one has said she is not under costed, she is just not as game breaking (at tournament point levels) as people are making her out to be. Also, I never see Thawn played and he has essentially the same ability as Celestine while also being a scoring unit...

Thawn requires support to function and has a totally different use on the battlefield. He's also in the most overpowered book GW has put out in a decade. It's hard to compete with Draigo, the deep striking terminator making ghostman, or deathcult assassins that are scoring. You can bet that celestine would be in every Gk list too though.

ShumaGorath wrote:He's also in the most overpowered book GW has put out in a decade.

Okay, now you're really messing with us. That's just flat-out false. Chaos Daemons for fantasy was the most OP book GW put out this decade. It single-handedly 'broke 7th ed' from what I heard from the square basers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, see IG Armoured Company. Not really a book though. I also think the GK hysteria is uncalled for. If GK was as OP as everyone on the internet puts it out to be we'd probably have some different results in the competitive community.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Fair warning, I didn't play 4th, but wasn't the whole doctrines/traits thing pretty broken?

I didn't find the doctrines/traits broken at all in 4th.

skyth wrote:I didn't find the doctrines/traits broken at all in 4th.

Because the 'Cannot take allies' penalty really messed up so many armies.

Okay, now you're really messing with us. That's just flat-out false. Chaos Daemons for fantasy was the most OP book GW put out this decade. It single-handedly 'broke 7th ed' from what I heard from the square basers.

What is this "fantasy" thing?

Also, see IG Armoured Company. Not really a book though. I also think the GK hysteria is uncalled for. If GK was as OP as everyone on the internet puts it out to be we'd probably have some different results in the competitive community.

Gray knights being half or more of the top tables in every major tourney since the book was released isn't good enough?

Fair warning, I didn't play 4th, but wasn't the whole doctrines/traits thing pretty broken?

From a fluff perspective yes, it wasn't a good system and was abused nearly the entire time. It was in a low power book though, so it didn't make much difference. Vanilla marines have never been a dominant force in tourneys.

If you meant 4th IG then the same holds true except the part about "never been dominant".

DarkStarSabre wrote:

skyth wrote:I didn't find the doctrines/traits broken at all in 4th.

Because the 'Cannot take allies' penalty really messed up so many armies.

Or, the advantages weren't all that super awesome to the point that marines from that codex were running roughshod over everyone?

ShumaGorath wrote:[

Also, see IG Armoured Company. Not really a book though. I also think the GK hysteria is uncalled for. If GK was as OP as everyone on the internet puts it out to be we'd probably have some different results in the competitive community.

Gray knights being half or more of the top tables in every major tourney since the book was released isn't good enough?

Citation needed.

Here's some tourney results, let's take a look (edit: BoK hates my browser.)

Da Boyz GT: 1 GK in the top 10. 4 in the top 20.
http://www.daboyzgt.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=iNOdLfn_NBc%3d&tabid=96&mid=468

BFS - Looks like low GK to me in gold bracket at the top tables. At the least, Ragnar and Mike weren't playing GK, so that's 50% right there.
http://www.baldandscreaming.com/bfs2011results.htm

Bugeater - No GK in the top 20. Might have been too early after release. Believe this was June and Codex was April
http://www.bugeatergames.com/Bugeater_Results40k.pdf

'Ard Boyz
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/403205.page#3476714 - 4 GK of 22.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/403205.page#3476954 - 1 GK of 9.

So yeah.. Where's this GK domination?

1 Rick Puig 19 23 23 65 Imperial Guard
2 Mark Billings 12 24 22 58 Grey Knights
4 Bill Hennessey 22 9 22 53 Dark Angels
3 Charles Peters 11 23 16 50 Grey Knights
5 Mattew Bennett 15 16 19 50 Grey Knights
3 Aaron Aleong 21 14 9 44 Grey Knights

In the ard boyz all four of those GK players were in the top six.

In the DaBoyz GT the grey knights scored consistently above curve in the actual gameplay section of the scoring criteria. They get nailed on soft scores as they're seen as a cheap army to play. If it were not a soft scored tourney they would have been the overall winners according to the results.

I can't see what the BFS players were playing on that link.

In the bugeater there was one GK player in the entire tourney.

So yeah.. Where's this GK domination?

Half of what you just posted was GK dominated. One of the other two was pre codex it seems and the other doesn't show armies played.

ShumaGorath wrote:In the ard boyz all four of those GK players were in the top six.

So at one 'AB location there was >50% GK on the top 6.

In the DaBoyz GT the grey knights scored consistently above curve in the actual gameplay section of the scoring criteria. They get nailed on soft scores as they're seen as a cheap army to play. If it were not a soft scored tourney they would have been the overall winners according to the results.

Umm. I hate PDFs and I'm not going to go through the effort to retype that, so I'll let this go. Still isn't 50% at the top tables that you were claiming.

I can't see what the BFS players were playing on that link.

In the bugeater there was one GK player in the entire tourney.

Look at the top gold brackets. Mike played Guard, Ragnar played Chaos. That's 50% non-gk right there. Also, the bugeater proves my point.

Where's the complete sweep that you were talking about?

edit: No, one 'AB location was GK dominated. The rest weren't.

So, GK are like BA then? A book that places high but ultimately still plays bridesmaid to IG and SW.....? No one is going to deny that the GK book is very powerful, but IG and SW are still winning almost a year after the release.

Anyways, we should probably take this to another thread, Shuma. We're WAAAAY OT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Phazael wrote:So, GK are like BA then? A book that places high but ultimately still plays bridesmaid to IG and SW.....? No one is going to deny that the GK book is very powerful, but IG and SW are still winning almost a year after the release.

Shh. No logic. Just emotion!

GK's aren't nearly as powerful as doomsayers on the internet would have you believe. Oh, and the 3.5 Chaos Codex was probably the most broke 40k codex released in the last 10 years as far as it's impact on the community.

Celestine is cheap for her abilities but needed and still fits within the framework of the codex. Auto-include? Yes. Why Auto-include? Lack of options in a get-you-by codex. Honestly it's not worth the time of discussing since 1/50 40k players (maybe less) has a sisters army and is willing to actually play the new WD codex.

So at one 'AB location there was >50% GK on the top 6.

http://www.baldandscreaming.com/news/2011-ard-boyz-semi-finals-nationwide-results/

Umm. I hate PDFs and I'm not going to go through the effort to retype that, so I'll let this go. Still isn't 50% at the top tables that you were claiming.

Actually, it was. But this is a soft scored tourney so actual victories don't directly imply high placement.

Look at the top gold brackets. Mike played Guard, Ragnar played Chaos. That's 50% non-gk right there. Also, the bugeater proves my point.

You cherry picked four tourneys and were literally wrong on half of them. You're point is hardly "proven" if this is the best you had.

Hulksmash wrote:GK's aren't nearly as powerful as doomsayers on the internet would have you believe. Oh, and the 3.5 Chaos Codex was probably the most broke 40k codex released in the last 10 years as far as it's impact on the community.

I didn't mention that one because of the chaos player anguish and wrath that might descend on me if I did.

Honestly it's not worth the time of discussing since 1/50 40k players (maybe less) has a sisters army and is willing to actually play the new WD codex.

Woo! I am the 2%!

edit: Moved to the other thread.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here you go Shuma: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/417456.page

Made you your own thread. We can continue there.

ShumaGorath wrote:
She is highly mobile. Can not reasonably be tarpitted due to her tendency to die and ressurect outside of combat. She has six power weapon attacks on the charge that ignore toughness. She is a 2+/4+ IC with ws and I7. She has a heavy flamer. That stat-line in any other book would be worth ~190 points (230+ in the DE book). The fact that she can't actually be killed is icing, her raw stats already put her solidly into the wildly under costed category. .

They wound on a 4+, on average that makes two dead marines with six attacks if she charges. Compared to old 3.5 edition chaos daemon princes were you could get 21 str7 attacks from a flying MC thats pretty mediocre actually. Also, if you mean Drazhar then he has the high str to plow through marines that Celestine doesn't and with his spec abilities vs IC (re-roll misses and extra attacks from wounding) can very easily kill any other character in the game one on one. Celestine, probably wouldn't be able to that, as somebody said shes a disruptive unit that soaks up fire not a game breaker. A Battle conclave of Death cultists with I6 str 4 power weapon attacks is far more deadly.

Since I collect DE myself and know some characters like Lelith are over-costed I suppose 140-150pts would be fair. Any more than that and you are into CC monster territory which Celestine is seriously lacking in relative to them and would be unfair to charge those sort of points.

ShumaGorath wrote:
In the DaBoyz GT the grey knights scored consistently above curve in the actual gameplay section of the scoring criteria. They get nailed on soft scores as they're seen as a cheap army to play. If it were not a soft scored tourney they would have been the overall winners according to the results.

Did you actually look at the scores for the 'soft scores' in this tournament and related them to GK? This statement is patently false. The top battle point armies were, actually, not GK. The top GK army scored 172 Battle Points, the next army scored 149. There was 1 GK army in the top 10 overall. In Battle Points the best GK player was 3rd in Battle Points. There was nothing dinstinctive about GK at Da Boyz and it had NOTHING to do with soft scores.

Psst. calypso2ts, I quoted your post over here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/417456.page#3689350

calypso2ts wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:
In the DaBoyz GT the grey knights scored consistently above curve in the actual gameplay section of the scoring criteria. They get nailed on soft scores as they're seen as a cheap army to play. If it were not a soft scored tourney they would have been the overall winners according to the results.

Did you actually look at the scores for the 'soft scores' in this tournament and related them to GK? This statement is patently false. The top battle point armies were, actually, not GK. The top GK army scored 172 Battle Points, the next army scored 149. There was 1 GK army in the top 10 overall. In Battle Points the best GK player was 3rd in Battle Points. There was nothing dinstinctive about GK at Da Boyz and it had NOTHING to do with soft scores.

I stated that they scored consistently above curve, which they did. They scored consistently below in other areas. I did not say that they were all of the top tables. Da Boyz GT was not a hyper competitive tourney as most would consider them. The organizers prided themselves on being an alternative to such formats and the tourney had force comp requirements..

Hey, keep it in the other thread.

If Celestian is an auto include, its because Robbin Cruddface decided that after two decades of virtually every Cannoness ever fielded having a jump pack that this was no longer acceptable to him. My wife has three Cannoness models with Jump Packs... and St Celestine. Thank you Robbin Cruddace, for expanding my bunghole another two sizes after the Tyranid raping.

Phazael wrote: two decades of virtually every Cannoness ever fielded having a jump pack that this was no longer acceptable to him. .

I might be wrong here, I'll have to check my C: Chapter Approved, but I don't remember Jump Pack canonesses before C:WH being a thing. I may have missed the boat though since I ran Redemptionist spam during 3rd ed.

Hulksmash wrote:Celestine is cheap for her abilities but needed and still fits within the framework of the codex. Auto-include? Yes. Why Auto-include? Lack of options in a get-you-by codex. Honestly it's not worth the time of discussing since 1/50 40k players (maybe less) has a sisters army and is willing to actually play the new WD codex.

Funny enough, in all the games I've played with this WD dex.... I've never used her. lol.

Revarien wrote:Funny enough, in all the games I've played with this WD dex.... I've never used her. lol.

HERESY! The interwebs now declare you Terribad.

I really hope this new Sisters book comes out soon. My buddy refuses to play with the new book, and I can't convince him to run the old one either (even with points adjustments for rhinos and immolators). Bah!

I would say that WFB Demons and 40k Chaos (3.5) were the most broken books GW has put out in 10 years. Nothing like going to a tourney and seeing nothing but IW on the field. :shiver: Those were dark days for the Tau Empire. Dark days.

Demons at least had help (VC was a little rough with how it manipulated the fear system, but stop the magic phase and poof!) but the shift to 8th ed was worthless if its intent was to balance demons. All it ended up doing was nerfing VC. >.< I wonder who wrote that Demon book for fantasy? :thinks:











(It was Mat Ward.)

Surprise it took us this long to get draigo'd.
/facepalm

pretre wrote:

Phazael wrote: two decades of virtually every Cannoness ever fielded having a jump pack that this was no longer acceptable to him. .

I might be wrong here, I'll have to check my C: Chapter Approved, but I don't remember Jump Pack canonesses before C:WH being a thing. I may have missed the boat though since I ran Redemptionist spam during 3rd ed.

The second edition book had them. That book remains one of my favorite codexes ever published by GW, actually.

Phazael wrote:The second edition book had them. That book remains one of my favorite codexes ever published by GW, actually.

It is damn cool. I never got to play it, but I own a copy. Lookit that, JP Canoness with JP Retinue. Neato.

i feel kinda dumb for asking but no one answered my question

just a little thing as i was looking through celestine's rules

the whole place her within one inch of were she "died"

what if it is not possible to do that?

what if there is a giant mob of orks on top of her... or something similar?


i know it has moved past this and i really am curious about it would someone please explain ?





pretre i got to say this YOU AWESOME though i am still going to hate on Celestine i do see your point.

though i just forgot what it was

haters gotta hate man

marmaduke wrote: i feel kinda dumb for asking but no one answered my question

just a little thing as i was looking through celestine's rules

the whole place her within one inch of were she "died"

what if it is not possible to do that?

what if there is a giant mob of orks on top of her... or something similar?

It is in the codex. You move her the minimum distance necessary.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

marmaduke wrote: haters gotta hate man

Indeed. Indeed.

pretre: Hardcore Celestine apologist.