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.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Exactly, they just need to errata the rules. But two FAQs later and it doesn't look like they're in any kind of a hurry to do it. They have an easily errated system, they just need to use it.

I think the issue is more about GW not being interested in investing any more into FW 40k than they have to. When was the last time they released anything? They are just maintaining it until it has reached its end of life.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Exactly, they just need to errata the rules. But two FAQs later and it doesn't look like they're in any kind of a hurry to do it. They have an easily errated system, they just need to use it.

I think the issue is more about GW not being interested in investing any more into FW 40k than they have to. When was the last time they released anything? They are just maintaining it until it has reached its end of life.

Nah, loyalist's fw units have all of their rules. It's more of how they look at CSM at the moment: "We'll just fix it whenever the codex releases". Same as that second wound.

Strictly business.

We don't have any official data, but going by PA publications, the 6 codex compliant SM chapters average around double the number of players of another faction, then BA DA and SW each have around as many players as another average faction. CSM have slightly more players than the average faction.

If you run maintenance on the FW rules for loyalists, you score 5$ for each $ you would have scored on the same maintenance on CSM models.

GW has always gone SM first everyone else second.

Praetorians aren't core because they're triarch units; they don't get the <dynasty> keyword either, they operate outside the typical hierarchy and answer only to the Silent King. Praets and Stalkers not being core despite being our jump pack and walker units is an example of valuing lore over mechanics, for better or worse.

And this right here shows exactly how poorly thought out "CORE" is. So you want to play the fluff card? Fair enough. If we go by "fluff" and what units interact with the higher-ups, than EVERY unit in the marine book should have it. All of them. Every. Single. One.

That defeats the purpose though doesn't it? Now, let's ignore the piles and piles of fluff that say you're wrong about certain aspects of the assumptions you're making for Necrons in that post and just assume that you're right about why some units have core and some don't. Anyting answering directly to the Silent King should probably get "CORE" if he's in the army right? If it's about who answers to who, Destroyer cult units should probably get "Destroyer CCORE" if led by a Destroyer or Skorpek lord right? Your reasoning only makes sense if you refuse to look at almost everything else.

So you can't claim "fluff" because that's overwhelmingly, obviously not the answer. So let's look at why they made core. They made it so that Space Marine Captains aren't sitting on the backline babysitting tanks. That's it. Presumably, they also wanted a way to give infantry more "oomph" as well, but that's not what they said when they introduced the rule. So they succeeded on the tank buff deal. They failed everywhere else. Because once again, rather than just adjust the "problem unit/units" they made a blanket rule that hits all other armies/units needlessly. The Necron implementation is probably a lot closer to how it SHOULD be (with the exception that the non-core units should NOT be costed as though they have core), but since they are the lone book running that way (due to core never really being all that well thought out), they have been hamstrung, and the "Core" implementation has been haphazard and lazy as we go.

Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

I think the only thing you're missing is *actually* yelling "the sky is falling"

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

Are you going to do this for every. Single. New. Codex?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

Are you going to do this for every. Single. New. Codex?

This is what everyone should do.

Gonna be a long wait for CSM also man. You are just gonna quit soon. I beat a CSM player last Saturday with Necrons. He said theres nothing he can really do my army is just that much better. Necrons are terrible compared to Admech and SOB. You should be irate.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seabass wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

I think the only thing you're missing is *actually* yelling "the sky is falling"

The sky is falling in regards to 40k. The game is becoming unplayable. The power imbalance is incredibly bad and it's getting phenomenally worse. Did you see the CA - it doesn't even tough 95% of the units that need balancing and they come out with the 3 of the most OP consecutive codex within a few months...

Xeno, you don't have the best record with your predictions and opinions on what is busted and what isn't.

Maybe take a step back and wait for actual tournament data to come in before you cry wolf for the umpteenth time?

Getting crazy about every single release since lord knows which edition isn't good for your blood pressure.

Should I act as the straight man and come out and inform everyone that the new SB dex is mostly a nerf compared to the previous one? A side grade at most?

Yeah, Vahl is 30-35 points too cheap. Considering that she can't be spammed, I'd say that it doesn't break the dex.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

I do think Necrons will be in a slow decline going forward and end up in mid-to bottom-mid tier. The codex is good, but it's got a ceiling given how different the design approach is compared to the others. But what you have there is ... just a bit much really. lol

a_typical_hero wrote:
Xeno, you don't have the best record with your predictions and opinions on what is busted and what isn't.

Maybe take a step back and wait for actual tournament data to come in before you cry wolf for the umpteenth time?

Getting crazy about every single release since lord knows which edition isn't good for your blood pressure.

Nah man you are in denial. Or - just a meta chasing abuser yourself.

This is the most idiotic stuff I've ever seen. It can be difficult to tell which overpowered free rules are going to be better than others at times...like with DA. There is no question though that the rules DA have are unquestionably better than space marine ones for no additional cost (See definition of OP). There is a question of how to implement those overpowered rules to winning the game. Compared to space marine terminators and characters - DA are unquestionably OP. Just turns out an OP DA terminator isn't a dominating force compared to the other OP stuff like quinns/DE/ and now Admech and SOB.

With each codex upping the ceiling - it makes the previous OP codex look tame. This will be the end of the line. Good for GW though - they are gonna have record sales. Bad for you guys - Just like in MTG your deck needs to be remade every 3-6 months.

Meanwhile, the game is so broken and the new dexes are on such a huge disparity to the old ones, that a good player with a list of one of the worst factions in the game, with an old 8th edition dex, can ride it to 7-0 in a major (facing pre nerf Drukhari 3 times).

Terrible times. Truly.

Spoletta wrote:
Should I act as the straight man and come out and inform everyone that the new SB dex is mostly a nerf compared to the previous one? A side grade at most?

Yeah, Vahl is 30-35 points too cheap. Considering that she can't be spammed, I'd say that it doesn't break the dex.

I'm just saying...If I could take gman with the chapter tactic of my choice and for 100 points less. I'd consider that pretty freaking broken. How this even gets passed the rough draft stage is mind boggling.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
Meanwhile, the game is so broken and the new dexes are on such a huge disparity to the old ones, that a good player with a list of one of the worst factions in the game, with an old 8th edition dex, can ride it to 7-0 in a major (facing pre nerf Drukhari 3 times).

Terrible times. Truly.

What army is that? What major?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

Are you going to do this for every. Single. New. Codex?

Not for the ones he plays himself. But outside, yes. He has pretty much been doing this for the last five years.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Should I act as the straight man and come out and inform everyone that the new SB dex is mostly a nerf compared to the previous one? A side grade at most?

Yeah, Vahl is 30-35 points too cheap. Considering that she can't be spammed, I'd say that it doesn't break the dex.

I'm just saying...If I could take gman with the chapter tactic of my choice and for 100 points less. I'd consider that pretty freaking broken. How this even gets passed the rough draft stage is mind boggling.

Because she isn't Gman? I've got to check her again, maybe I missed the part where she gives 3 bonus CPs? Maybe I also missed the part where she gives everyone bonuses to charge and advance? Did she do that at range 12"? I can't really remember! Oh and clearly she gives full rerolls to everyone, not just one unit, right?

Gman and Vahl are VERY different models, it is hard to compare them one to one.
They have different defensive profiles, different buffs and different offensive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

What army is that? What major?

Tau.

7-0 at Atlantic City open, 255 players.

It finally got knocked down in the semifinals and ended at 7-1.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

Are you going to do this for every. Single. New. Codex?

This is what everyone should do.

Gonna be a long wait for CSM also man. You are just gonna quit soon. I beat a CSM player last Saturday with Necrons. He said theres nothing he can really do my army is just that much better. Necrons are terrible compared to Admech and SOB. You should be irate.

If the last three garbage codexes they've stuck CSM with haven't made me quit a few T5 Orks and the recently nerfed SoB aren't going to. I've been playing Night Lords for two decades. I'm used to being the underdog. It's the Legions "thing". I'm getting by with a few fw units with 9th edition rules, a handful of strategems and warlord traits from PA, and a codex that's currently tied with GKs for the oldest in the game. You've actually got some armies with 9th edition rules and your freaking out with every new codex. Suck. It. Up. Good thing you don't roll Chaos. You'd never make it.

Spoletta wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Should I act as the straight man and come out and inform everyone that the new SB dex is mostly a nerf compared to the previous one? A side grade at most?

Yeah, Vahl is 30-35 points too cheap. Considering that she can't be spammed, I'd say that it doesn't break the dex.

I'm just saying...If I could take gman with the chapter tactic of my choice and for 100 points less. I'd consider that pretty freaking broken. How this even gets passed the rough draft stage is mind boggling.

Because she isn't Gman? I've got to check her again, maybe I missed the part where she gives 3 bonus CPs? Maybe I also missed the part where she gives everyone bonuses to charge and advance? Did she do that at range 12"? I can't really remember! Oh and clearly she gives full rerolls to everyone, not just one unit, right?

Gman and Vahl are VERY different models, it is hard to compare them one to one.
They have different defensive profiles, different buffs and different offensive.

Did you see the part where she can give 1 unit reroll all hits and wounds. and has a reroll 1's to hit and wounds aura? That is pretty comparable. She shoots better / she melees about the same except can attack twice for free 1 turn (so shes actually better) / takes half damage so she is actually more durable too. Maybe you also missed the part where st cathrine gives a +1 to hit aura...so reroll 1's to hit is all you need to hit 35/36.

Oh no! The bonus CPS!!! You think thats worth nearly 100 points? LOL.

Spoletta wrote:
Meanwhile, the game is so broken and the new dexes are on such a huge disparity to the old ones, that a good player with a list of one of the worst factions in the game, with an old 8th edition dex, can ride it to 7-0 in a major (facing pre nerf Drukhari 3 times).

Terrible times. Truly.

Exactly. Remember, balance has never been worse than it is RIGHT NOW, and this is a perfect exa ... oh wait ...

Tycho wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Meanwhile, the game is so broken and the new dexes are on such a huge disparity to the old ones, that a good player with a list of one of the worst factions in the game, with an old 8th edition dex, can ride it to 7-0 in a major (facing pre nerf Drukhari 3 times).

Terrible times. Truly.

Exactly. Remember, balance has never been worse than it is RIGHT NOW, and this is a perfect exa ... oh wait ...

TBF, I don't think it's exactly insane that Siegler did as well as he did; a) he's Richard Siegler, and b) Tau can quite easily throw out a ton of mid-S, low-AP shooting that is most efficient against DE. Now, that doesn't mean Tau isn't a subpar army or anything, but it's a meta shift that benefited them (and likely will continue to benefit against Admech).

I don't agree with Xeno's point here but I don't think this is a slam dunk refutation.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Tycho wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Meanwhile, the game is so broken and the new dexes are on such a huge disparity to the old ones, that a good player with a list of one of the worst factions in the game, with an old 8th edition dex, can ride it to 7-0 in a major (facing pre nerf Drukhari 3 times).

Terrible times. Truly.

Exactly. Remember, balance has never been worse than it is RIGHT NOW, and this is a perfect exa ... oh wait ...

TBF, I don't think it's exactly insane that Siegler did as well as he did; a) he's Richard Siegler, and b) Tau can quite easily throw out a ton of mid-S, low-AP shooting that is most efficient against DE. Now, that doesn't mean Tau isn't a subpar army or anything, but it's a meta shift that benefited them (and likely will continue to benefit against Admech).

I don't agree with Xeno's point here but I don't think this is a slam dunk refutation.

Yes, Tau were clearly under favorable conditions in that event. But if all it takes for one of the worse faction in the game to raise to the top is a favourable meta, then the top and bottom of the competitive range can't be that far apart. And this is with pre nerf DE. Sure, Siegler is a good player, but he wasn't the only good player in there.

My test on Codex to Codex balance for Necrons vs Sisters would be:
Can you run the Massacre of Sanctuary 101?
That was an actual game, played at the studio, that made it into lore.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Should I act as the straight man and come out and inform everyone that the new SB dex is mostly a nerf compared to the previous one? A side grade at most?

Yeah, Vahl is 30-35 points too cheap. Considering that she can't be spammed, I'd say that it doesn't break the dex.

I'm just saying...If I could take gman with the chapter tactic of my choice and for 100 points less. I'd consider that pretty freaking broken. How this even gets passed the rough draft stage is mind boggling.

Because she isn't Gman? I've got to check her again, maybe I missed the part where she gives 3 bonus CPs? Maybe I also missed the part where she gives everyone bonuses to charge and advance? Did she do that at range 12"? I can't really remember! Oh and clearly she gives full rerolls to everyone, not just one unit, right?

Gman and Vahl are VERY different models, it is hard to compare them one to one.
They have different defensive profiles, different buffs and different offensive.

Did you see the part where she can give 1 unit reroll all hits and wounds. and has a reroll 1's to hit and wounds aura? That is pretty comparable. She shoots better / she melees about the same except can attack twice for free 1 turn (so shes actually better) / takes half damage so she is actually more durable too. Maybe you also missed the part where st cathrine gives a +1 to hit aura...so reroll 1's to hit is all you need to hit 35/36.

Oh no! The bonus CPS!!! You think thats worth nearly 100 points? LOL.

3 bonus CP are worth quite a bit.

And as I said, they have different defensive and offensive profiles and different buffs, so comparing them directly is hard. Since you didn't get the message though, I will actually compare them.

Defensive profiles:
Vahl halves incoming damage, but Gman has a 3++, one more T one more Wound and comes back to life on a 4+. I have a very clear idea who is the hardest to take down, but let's be generous with Vahl and consider this a wash.

Offensive profiles:
Vahl hits with 5 attacks on S8 -3 3, with 1 MW on a 6. Gman hits with 7 attacks, at S8 -4 3 and inflicts d3 MW on a 6. In short, Gman inflicts around 50% more damage on any target compared to Vahl. Vahl can double fight once per game if she survives the fight round. From this you can clearly see that Gman is a better fighter. Vahl is slightly better though if you take in consideration the WLTs.

Shooting:
Quite different profiles here, especially considering that Gman benefits from Doctrines. Both of them don't really shine in terms of ranged firepower, but I'd give this one to Vahl.

Buff:
Apples and oranges, but let's try.
Vahl gives RR1s 6" inches around her to CORE and full RRs to one CORE in 6". She shines when coupled with a big CORE unit.
Gman gives, reroll morale, rr1 to hit and +1 advance and charge to every (even non-CORE) unit within 12". Gives rr1 to wound to any Ultramarine CORE within 6" and full RR hit to one Ultramarine CORE within 6". If we consider WLTs, he also gives heroic intervention to all Ultramarine Infantry and Bikers within 6".

Gman's buffs are clearly much more powerful for the army (and can even be souped). He offers just so much.
Mobility, power, tricks... he provides it all, for everyone and at a huge range. Yes, Vahl provides full RR wounds on one unit... but she simply can't hold a candle to the staggering amount of buffs Gman provides.
On the buff side, Gman wins by a landslide.

All in all, Vahl is a bit better on the offensive than Gman, but she doesn't provide 3 bonus CP and her buffs are a pale imitation to those provided by Gman.
Does this justify being 95 points less? No. As I said I would like to see her costing 30-35 more, because at that cost she is a bit too good.

Spoletta wrote:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Tycho wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Meanwhile, the game is so broken and the new dexes are on such a huge disparity to the old ones, that a good player with a list of one of the worst factions in the game, with an old 8th edition dex, can ride it to 7-0 in a major (facing pre nerf Drukhari 3 times).

Terrible times. Truly.

Exactly. Remember, balance has never been worse than it is RIGHT NOW, and this is a perfect exa ... oh wait ...

TBF, I don't think it's exactly insane that Siegler did as well as he did; a) he's Richard Siegler, and b) Tau can quite easily throw out a ton of mid-S, low-AP shooting that is most efficient against DE. Now, that doesn't mean Tau isn't a subpar army or anything, but it's a meta shift that benefited them (and likely will continue to benefit against Admech).

I don't agree with Xeno's point here but I don't think this is a slam dunk refutation.

Yes, Tau were clearly under favorable conditions in that event. But if all it takes for one of the worse faction in the game to raise to the top is a favourable meta, then the top and bottom of the competitive range can't be that far apart. And this is with pre nerf DE. Sure, Siegler is a good player, but he wasn't the only good player in there.

you have to understand first why tau struggle. In terms of ability to kill things. Tau are top end and they are incredibly resilient to anti tank shooting (drones are OP). Their PA book was also extremely OP (no one knows it though because covid.) They struggle because they don't have a single good melee unit in a game you need to stand and hold points. They can easily table an army. I'd imagine one of the better players in the game can win with an army like that where plenty of people cant.

... I'll let someone else pick you apart for what you just said... I don't have the strenght anymore.

Spoletta wrote:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Tycho wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Meanwhile, the game is so broken and the new dexes are on such a huge disparity to the old ones, that a good player with a list of one of the worst factions in the game, with an old 8th edition dex, can ride it to 7-0 in a major (facing pre nerf Drukhari 3 times).

Terrible times. Truly.

Exactly. Remember, balance has never been worse than it is RIGHT NOW, and this is a perfect exa ... oh wait ...

TBF, I don't think it's exactly insane that Siegler did as well as he did; a) he's Richard Siegler, and b) Tau can quite easily throw out a ton of mid-S, low-AP shooting that is most efficient against DE. Now, that doesn't mean Tau isn't a subpar army or anything, but it's a meta shift that benefited them (and likely will continue to benefit against Admech).

I don't agree with Xeno's point here but I don't think this is a slam dunk refutation.

Yes, Tau were clearly under favorable conditions in that event. But if all it takes for one of the worse faction in the game to raise to the top is a favourable meta, then the top and bottom of the competitive range can't be that far apart. And this is with pre nerf DE. Sure, Siegler is a good player, but he wasn't the only good player in there.

This. Honestly. I've been saying it in multiple threads lately, but even with all its faults, I feel like my worst armies still have a better chance in 9th than some of my BEST armies did in 7th (where bringing the wrong army was often auto-lose in certain circumstances).

Admittedly it took a highly skilled player to do it, but I don't think anything he did was something that REQUIRED someone of his skill to do. He just had the confidence to try it. I think it's a pretty solid example of why balance is a lot better than it has been in a while.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

If you think SoB are broken then please for your own health and safety do not read the Admech codex without supervision from a doctor.

How do you get GMan doing only one more wound than Vahl against pretty much any target?

He has more attacks with more AP and more mortals. Against a Knight, he does 10-12 damage.
Vahl does 6-7.

 Ordana wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

If you think SoB are broken then please for your own health and safety do not read the Admech codex without supervision from a doctor.

What's funny about this is that the majority of opinions from people who actually run the army, or have played against it a few times is that it's actually pretty balanced. Will probably shake out to be about the same power level of the old one (plus or minus some high-end outliers) once the dust settles. Some of the things in it appear OP, and in a vacuum, they might be. But you have to put A LOT of resources into those things to get them to work so it generally balances out.

 JNAProductions wrote:
How do you get GMan doing only one more wound than Vahl against pretty much any target?

He has more attacks with more AP and more mortals. Against a Knight, he does 10-12 damage.
Vahl does 6-7.

1 more successful wound roll.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ordana wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just had the misfortune of looking through the sisters of battle codex.

Necrons are going to keep losing. SOB has some of the most amazing units I've ever seen. Most the characters are extremely undercosted. The new supreme commander IMO is superior to guilliman for 95 points less plus can be taken with ANY ORDER. St cathrine is extremely busted. This game really has no chance. DOA.

If you think SoB are broken then please for your own health and safety do not read the Admech codex without supervision from a doctor.

Oh agreed - ad mech seems worse. Legit broken strats. SOB are more OP in the sense that DE are OP. Their characters are way too strong for their price.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
How do you get GMan doing only one more wound than Vahl against pretty much any target?

He has more attacks with more AP and more mortals. Against a Knight, he does 10-12 damage.
Vahl does 6-7.

Also that math seems very off. Do you realize her warlord trait is reroll all hits and wounds?