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.

I'll save my 62+ points per 2k list and just use a command squad with banner and Lascannon or another squad with a plasma gun and heavy bolter. I never even used conscripts so I'm kind of pissed that my iconic Commissars I painted almost 20 years ago are now going on the shelf because they can cause MORE harm than good. GTFO if you try and tell me I was a bandwagon power gamer sad my conscripts are garbage now. Just give me D3 casualties for a failed morale test and I'm good. But the possibility of wiping a squad AFTER a guy is killed is obnoxious.

Well if you are not a "bandwagon power gamer", and those commissars you "painted almost 20 years ago" are so important to you...then use them! Put them in every list because you like using them and point efficiency and game-winning synergies are not the be-all, end-all. In fact they don't matter much at all unless you only play in tournaments and only play to win.

I've played with Old One Eye in my 'Nid army since his reappearance in 5th. He sucked like an airplane toilet!! But I still used him because I love everything about him. He almost certainly cost me wins and was nearly 10x the cost of a commissar. But screw it, he's fun!

I've played Guard since 4th and bought 2 Deathstrike Missiles as soon as they were released. They sucked! They still suck at 5x the cost of a commissar. I still use them cause it's fun!

Frankly if the loss of "62pts+ points per 2k" worth of efficiency and unit synergy causes you to shelve models...I don't know what to tell you. Stop playing cause you're clearly not enjoying yourself? Find something else to do that you do enjoy? I don't know.

In fact I think it'd be healthy for lots of the people on Dakka to do just that. Go on a 40k vacation. While you're gone, the rest of us (those who actually enjoy 40k and not just bitching about 40k) will see about getting political support to make this forum a Superfund site...maybe start cleaning up the toxic waste all over the place.

There's a difference between sucking and working agaisnt you.

fe40k wrote:
@MarNZ: Sorry Imperial factions no longer get a free pass on being overpowered this edition. They get to be balanced and re-balanced, just like every other faction. Also, you're deluding yourself if you think GW won't continue to balance the game, no matter what faction it is (say, Xenos) - as well as if you think the loss of Morale immune Conscripts [a mistake in the first place on a 3ppm model with those stats] will suddenly invalidate all the other top tier options AM has available.

I, for one, and glad Morale actually matters now - the only models that should even consider getting a free immunity would be extremely low (<5) model count, expensive, elite squads.

Morale kill should be a reasonable way of dealing with large, low priced, chaff models.

So Tyranids need to be reworked then.

Well, the only thing that bothers me is two of the best painted models I have are commissars. I don't have a problem fielding units that aren't very good (Chimeras) but I don't see why I'd want to spend 35 points for no reason. They're garbage now. The good news is, I love Inquisitors and now I don't have to explain why I use them. 55 points for a better LD buff and a psyker all in one. I'm also looking forward to all the cheap infantry I'm about to be able to buy off ebay!

Niiru wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

Niiru wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

nateprati wrote:Why didnt they adress missing wargear like demo charges and riugh riders. Or am i missing somthing? Im going to end up using the index over this

GW has already stated we can use the index for missing units/options. The codexes represent the current model range and the indexes cover the legacy units/models. Use the most recent points value for the unit and gear.

While this is true, I suspect it will be changed at some point, as it is starting to cause conflicts (and it will only get worse as more codices and FAQ's are released).

For example, the new codex Eldar Autarch has lost the ability to take any weapon options, so he has lost the reaper launcher, fusion pistol, mandiblaster and banshee mask as options. So, you say, just use the index version instead! However, the index Autarch banshee mask has a rule written in his datasheet. And the codex howling banshee masks have a -new rule-, that's completely different. So if you're using the Index Autarch, do you use his rule from the index, or the new banshees rule for their masks? Common sense says the new rule, but RAW... well, no idea.

Also, there's a new ability in the Codex for the Autarch to be able to snipe characters. Which is fine and not overpowered, because he only gets a pistol anyway. Except if you can use the Index Autarch, you can give him a 48" missile launcher instead. That can snipe characters. Which is clearly not intended.

This is just two examples I've come up with, from -one single model- in an army. There's bound to be more, especially as more books come out.

So I wouldn't be surprised if GW put an end to it by just saying Codex trumps Index. Though they may wait until all the codices come out, and then retire the indexes then. Just wanted to point out that, while you're meant to use the most recent points, there's no rule in place regarding gear options or rules options.

There is no conflict with the Autarch.

The codex Autarch is the rules for Autarch-you can't use the index one.
Especially not mix the index wargear with the codex special abilities. you might as well been using 5th S10 broadsides in 7th.
You use index rules only for units that have NO codex rules, not if you want wargear that is no longer there.

Now see Boomwolf, I actually agree with you. I think the intention is to only use index rules for models with no Codex datasheet, such as Chaos Lords on Juggernauts.

However, you'll find lots of people (like earlier) who say that actually you can use the Index version of the model even for wargear options that are missing. I've had people on dakka saying they will be using axes on their sergeants, even though the new IG codex only has power swords now. There's a lot of other examples too.

I agree with you, that it's only for models/units with whole datasheets missing. But we seem to be the only ones. My post was an effort to point out the problems this could cause.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Niiru wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

nateprati wrote:Why didnt they adress missing wargear like demo charges and riugh riders. Or am i missing somthing? Im going to end up using the index over this

GW has already stated we can use the index for missing units/options. The codexes represent the current model range and the indexes cover the legacy units/models. Use the most recent points value for the unit and gear.

While this is true, I suspect it will be changed at some point, as it is starting to cause conflicts (and it will only get worse as more codices and FAQ's are released).

For example, the new codex Eldar Autarch has lost the ability to take any weapon options, so he has lost the reaper launcher, fusion pistol, mandiblaster and banshee mask as options. So, you say, just use the index version instead! However, the index Autarch banshee mask has a rule written in his datasheet. And the codex howling banshee masks have a -new rule-, that's completely different. So if you're using the Index Autarch, do you use his rule from the index, or the new banshees rule for their masks? Common sense says the new rule, but RAW... well, no idea.

Also, there's a new ability in the Codex for the Autarch to be able to snipe characters. Which is fine and not overpowered, because he only gets a pistol anyway. Except if you can use the Index Autarch, you can give him a 48" missile launcher instead. That can snipe characters. Which is clearly not intended.

This is just two examples I've come up with, from -one single model- in an army. There's bound to be more, especially as more books come out.

So I wouldn't be surprised if GW put an end to it by just saying Codex trumps Index. Though they may wait until all the codices come out, and then retire the indexes then. Just wanted to point out that, while you're meant to use the most recent points, there's no rule in place regarding gear options or rules options.

There is no conflict with the Autarch.

The codex Autarch is the rules for Autarch-you can't use the index one.
Especially not mix the index wargear with the codex special abilities. you might as well been using 5th S10 broadsides in 7th.
You use index rules only for units that have NO codex rules, not if you want wargear that is no longer there.

Well, unfortunately for both of you, you will find that GW has told us that this is not the case, and that wargear is a go:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

"There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?

While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army."

Bolded the relevant parts. If you would like to continue to debate the point with regards to datasheets vs wargear, may I remind you that the mention of Dreadnought weapons is significant, as the majority of Dreadnought Weapons are not selected from datasheets, but instead selected from the Dreadnought Heavy Weapon List included on the Wargear page of both the Index and the Codex. A side by side comparison of the index vs the codex reveals that the wargear list in the codex is missing three options available in the index, and the datasheet in the codex only omits mention of a single weapon found in the index version.

Any way you slice it, it seems that your interpretation of GWs ruling would thus be undeniably and undebatably incorrect.

The silver lining for those disappointed in the Commissar nerf is that they can always reverse it; the AM codex has been out for only a few weeks and they ended up going in and "fixing" it after the community complained about it enough.

Well on the plus side Mordians & Catachans just got better since their +1 leadership buff will be more important now, right guys!? All joking aside, yeah I don't see myself taking commissars after this change. The mandatory re-roll is overkill. I'll just mass 10 man squads.

I don't have a problem with the conscript nerf that results from the Commissar nerf. That's fine.

I am kinda sad that there's no reason to take the Commissar except in a purely fluff capacity, but I'll live. Plenty of other things to use the points/PL for and I can always use my favourite Commissar model as an officer if I really feel the need.

I am pleased overall that we for a bit of a nerf. Hopefully it'll lower the overall salt content a bit (or more likely, refocus it on something else).

In other news, I'm happy to see the Earthshaker Platform's AP got boosted to -3 to keep it in line with the Earthshaker Cannon on the Basilisk.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Well, unfortunately for both of you, you will find that GW has told us that this is not the case, and that wargear is a go:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

"There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?

While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army."

Bolded the relevant parts. If you would like to continue to debate the point with regards to datasheets vs wargear, may I remind you that the mention of Dreadnought weapons is significant, as the majority of Dreadnought Weapons are not selected from datasheets, but instead selected from the Dreadnought Heavy Weapon List included on the Wargear page of both the Index and the Codex. A side by side comparison of the index vs the codex reveals that the wargear list in the codex is missing three options available in the index, and the datasheet in the codex only omits mention of a single weapon found in the index version.

Any way you slice it, it seems that your interpretation of GWs ruling would thus be undeniably and undebatably incorrect.

Which means that, going from that route, Autarchs can still take Banshee Masks (but no idea if its the old or new version, as old is on Autarch dataslate but new is the update (but only on the Banshees page)).

Also means I can take an Autarch with a Reaper Launcher, and fire rockets at 48" range at any character I like on the board.

I doubt I will, cos it feels super cheesy, but someone's gonna do it.

I broke my Conscript squads down to mass 10-man units after the codex anyway so this doesn't even effect me, but the amount of salt over this is exactly why I can't take most people on this forum seriously.

It never made sense to make conscripts completely immune to morale by shooting one in the back of the head, and never should have. Shame some people were shortsighted enough to build entire armies around that. Not like there isn't a multitude of other options to make conscripts totally immune or hardly impacted by morale anyway. Two stratagems, a psychic power, the Mk.45, and being Valhallan work pretty well.

 Stus67 wrote:
I broke my Conscript squads down to mass 10-man units after the codex anyway so this doesn't even effect me, but the amount of salt over this is exactly why I can't take most people on this forum seriously.

It never made sense to make conscripts completely immune to morale by shooting one in the back of the head, and never should have. Shame some people were shortsighted enough to build entire armies around that. Not like there isn't a multitude of other options to make conscripts totally immune or hardly impacted by morale anyway. Two stratagems, a psychic power, the Mk.45, and being Valhallan work pretty well.

I haven’t seen any salty conscript users, just us normal ig players annoyed they essentially deleted commissars from usage.

The problem unit is conscripts. That’s the unit that should be nerfed. Not commissars.

Niiru wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Well, unfortunately for both of you, you will find that GW has told us that this is not the case, and that wargear is a go:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

"There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?

While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army."

Bolded the relevant parts. If you would like to continue to debate the point with regards to datasheets vs wargear, may I remind you that the mention of Dreadnought weapons is significant, as the majority of Dreadnought Weapons are not selected from datasheets, but instead selected from the Dreadnought Heavy Weapon List included on the Wargear page of both the Index and the Codex. A side by side comparison of the index vs the codex reveals that the wargear list in the codex is missing three options available in the index, and the datasheet in the codex only omits mention of a single weapon found in the index version.

Any way you slice it, it seems that your interpretation of GWs ruling would thus be undeniably and undebatably incorrect.

Which means that, going from that route, Autarchs can still take Banshee Masks (but no idea if its the old or new version, as old is on Autarch dataslate but new is the update (but only on the Banshees page)).

Also means I can take an Autarch with a Reaper Launcher, and fire rockets at 48" range at any character I like on the board.

I doubt I will, cos it feels super cheesy, but someone's gonna do it.

Thats the hole that GW dug for itself with their decision. They can always reverse it, though I am of the opinion that there was a more elegant workaround/solution to the issue in the first place when it came to "legacy options" that would not have resulted in old versions of the rules essentially remaining valid in perpetuity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

I haven’t seen any salty conscript users, just us normal ig players annoyed they essentially deleted commissars from usage.

The problem unit is conscripts. That’s the unit that should be nerfed. Not commissars.

This. I play Militarum Tempestus, I don't even use conscripts, yet I'm essentially being screwed over by the Commissar nerf the hardest.

 Stus67 wrote:
Shame some people were shortsighted enough to build entire armies around that.

Is there anyone here really actually talking about having done that?

The salt is mostly over Summary Execution having been nerfed into pointlessness, which is not an exaggeration. That ability simply no longer offers any meaningful value, yeah you get a reroll, but then you're liable to do even worse in circumstances where you'd really have bought the character for that ability in the first place. That's what people are irked about.

If your Commissar is blasting a person from a 10 man unit that's being effected by his aura then that unit was already as close to being dead as it can get.

That one last Scion or Guardsman is literally not going to make a difference.

 Stus67 wrote:
If your Commissar is blasting a person from a 10 man unit that's being effected by his aura then that unit was already as close to being dead as it can get.

That one last Scion or Guardsman is literally not going to make a difference.

"Affected." The word you're looking for is "affected".

The point of an infantry squad is that not all members of the infantry squad are created equal. The purpose of the commissar protecting the 10 man squad was to salvage the special/heavy weapon and maybe the sarge. Generally speaking, when you can choose casualties, the last model left in a unit is the only one that matters. The list here was literally designed around the concept: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/10/16/the-grand-tournament-heat-1-the-roundup/

 daedalus wrote:

 Stus67 wrote:
If your Commissar is blasting a person from a 10 man unit that's being effected by his aura then that unit was already as close to being dead as it can get.

That one last Scion or Guardsman is literally not going to make a difference.

"Affected." The word you're looking for is "affected".

The point of an infantry squad is that not all members of the infantry squad are created equal. The purpose of the commissar protecting the 10 man squad was to salvage the special/heavy weapon and maybe the sarge. Generally speaking, when you can choose casualties, the last model left in a unit is the only one that matters. The list here was literally designed around the concept: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/10/16/the-grand-tournament-heat-1-the-roundup/

Absolutely. 5 man Scion squads just became an even better option than they already were.

 Stus67 wrote:
If your Commissar is blasting a person from a 10 man unit that's being effected by his aura then that unit was already as close to being dead as it can get.

That one last Scion or Guardsman is literally not going to make a difference.

If you're running a Scion squad that's been blasted to half health (not an uncommon occurrence) with say, 4 plasma guns remaining (and still a potent source of firepower), rolling on a Commissar's Ld8, the Summary Execution difference, especially if the reroll is boffed, is going to be keenly felt.

Is it the end of the world? Hardly. Are there lots of people howling about how their armies are no longer functional? No. Does the risk/reward aspect of that ability balance such that it can no longer be expected to add value? Yes.

I think what the take away from all this is that GW has no earthly idea how to balance the IG codex. Which isn't entirely surprising given the last 3 codex's have basically been copy/paste of the previous codex with less options. It also demonstrates they pay more attention to concern trolls than people actually playing the game. What did they hope to accomplish with these changes? I can tell you whats going to happen in the meta, which took me about .5 seconds to figure out.

* Commissars are done, conscripts are done.
* You just freed up hundreds of points, which will instead be used on mass 10 man squads. Higher BS unit, Leadership a non-issue.
* Valhallans obsolete. Absolutely no reason to take them after send in the next wave nerf. Thank the emperor those power gaming Valhallan players that account for not even a fraction of a 1% of the playerbase were dealt with. We might have seen a Valhallan army played once in our life.

 Commissar Benny wrote:
I think what the take away from all this is that GW has no earthly idea how to balance the IG codex. Which isn't entirely surprising given the last 3 codex's have basically been copy/paste of the previous codex with less options. It also demonstrates they pay more attention to concern trolls than people actually playing the game. What did they hope to accomplish with these changes? I can tell you whats going to happen in the meta, which took me about .5 seconds to figure out.

* Commissars are done, conscripts are done.
* You just freed up hundreds of points, which will instead be used on mass 10 man squads. Higher BS unit, Leadership a non-issue.
* Valhallans obsolete. Absolutely no reason to take them after send in the next wave nerf. Thank the emperor those power gaming Valhallan players that account for not even a fraction of a 1% of the playerbase were dealt with. We might have seen a Valhallan army played once in our life.

How dare you raise concern against the Holy Imperial mission to dilute the power of the Emperor's most fierce of warriors, the CONSCRIPTS OF DOOM! The community has spoken, but if you actually play IG then shhhh yourself.

I thought the issue was conscripts, not commisars. Why do the rest of the IG playerbase have to suffer because of Guilliman Parking lot tournament soup BS. A lot of the salt against this is because now my commisars suck, and they were one of the models that made me want to play IG. Lets not forget that tournament players whined about immovable hordes of conscripts, so commisars got nerfed into complete uselessness for EVERYTHING now, 3 weeks after the codex came out? WTF alarms are a little strong with the heavy nerf bat here.

Also agree on the Valhallan issue, if they have to pay points, dont make them pay CP too, or vise versa...just not both, thats ridiculous.

 Stus67 wrote:
If your Commissar is blasting a person from a 10 man unit that's being effected by his aura then that unit was already as close to being dead as it can get.

That one last Scion or Guardsman is literally not going to make a difference.

That last guardsman is almost always a special or heavy weapon, it actually makes a pretty huge difference in the long run. That's the whole point of keeping your men around this edition, otherwise IG players wouldn't bother. Being able to choose casualties means that your opponent has to kill the entire squad to shut down it's most powerful weapons. Anything that screws with that leadership, or worse, could kill an additional model or two, is a big deal for anyone running 10 man squads.

 Commissar Benny wrote:
I think what the take away from all this is that GW has no earthly idea how to balance the IG codex. Which isn't entirely surprising given the last 3 codex's have basically been copy/paste of the previous codex with less options. It also demonstrates they pay more attention to concern trolls than people actually playing the game. What did they hope to accomplish with these changes? I can tell you whats going to happen in the meta, which took me about .5 seconds to figure out.

* Commissars are done, conscripts are done.
* You just freed up hundreds of points, which will instead be used on mass 10 man squads. Higher BS unit, Leadership a non-issue.
* Valhallans obsolete. Absolutely no reason to take them after send in the next wave nerf. Thank the emperor those power gaming Valhallan players that account for not even a fraction of a 1% of the playerbase were dealt with. We might have seen a Valhallan army played once in our life.

Conscripts aren't done. You can use Mental Fortitude off of even an astropath with 50% chance of success on one unit, either of 2 strategems (one costing 2 cp the other costing 1 cp), and if you want to get real cheesy bring an inquisitor who can cast a totally different version of mental fortitude on someone else. And if you're bringing a patrol detachment of conscripts for your soup army, I'm willing to bet my ass you're bringing them as valhallans, so there goes half your casualties from the start.

This is just a stupid poorly thought out nerf to the wrong unit, when they should have just been fixing conscripts. But no lets just keep nerfing the whole rest of the army.

Niiru wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Well, unfortunately for both of you, you will find that GW has told us that this is not the case, and that wargear is a go:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

"There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?

While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army."

Bolded the relevant parts. If you would like to continue to debate the point with regards to datasheets vs wargear, may I remind you that the mention of Dreadnought weapons is significant, as the majority of Dreadnought Weapons are not selected from datasheets, but instead selected from the Dreadnought Heavy Weapon List included on the Wargear page of both the Index and the Codex. A side by side comparison of the index vs the codex reveals that the wargear list in the codex is missing three options available in the index, and the datasheet in the codex only omits mention of a single weapon found in the index version.

Any way you slice it, it seems that your interpretation of GWs ruling would thus be undeniably and undebatably incorrect.

Which means that, going from that route, Autarchs can still take Banshee Masks (but no idea if its the old or new version, as old is on Autarch dataslate but new is the update (but only on the Banshees page)).

Also means I can take an Autarch with a Reaper Launcher, and fire rockets at 48" range at any character I like on the board.

I doubt I will, cos it feels super cheesy, but someone's gonna do it.

There's currently a thread on this in YMDC. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/742181.page

So I play catachan, as I understand it, as I only use normal infantry squads are commissar now not worth it for me as I get ld8 as default?

Let's just calculate the point effectiveness of a comissar. for ld purposes.

The guardsmen squad gets ld8. So, they start testing LD when they suffer 3 casualties up from 2 casualties. But htan they loose 1 more because he gets blammed. But he only gets blammed if they fail ld 8 in the first place. So, it's a very marginal increase in ld effectiveness.

Conscripts do benefit from ld8 more than guardsmen. Going from testing ld at 3 casualties from 1 and loosing less models at low casualties is pretty good for them. An unbuffed conscript blob will statistically loose 1-2 more after suffering just one casualty. Which makes them very vulnerable with free split fire that everyone gets now. Even if the enemy doesn't really need to wittle down a blob of conscripts yet, he can fire a couple bolters at costcripts and kill a couple extra with morale. Comissar forces this numbers up. You will statistically loose 1-2 conscripts after around 4 casualties. This forces the opponent to allocate more fire to them.

It's not much but saving 9 pts here and there will eventually pay off. The best way to use a comissar is surrounded by 3*20 conscripts. They do drop like flies when the opponent focuses them down. But the opponent DOES need to focus them down now. Another thing to consider are small specialist squads that benefit from ld greatly. Like ratlings. Or min ogryn squads.

Seems that you'll just have to embrace ld and try to mitigate issues instead of simply ignoring them. There are still ways to make conscript blobs function. A relic, Warlord trait, command points. Conscripts are still dirt cheap. 3 ppm and they're still quite functional as bauble wrap. Much worse than they've used to be before the comissar nerf but still one of the best in the game. Comissar is still mildly useful for min-sized conscript blobs, ratlings and ogryns. Besides, a comissar can shoot his weapon at marine effectiveness. He can occasionally throw a grenade or shoot a bolt/plazma pistol.

I also think GW will fix the mandatory re-roll thing which will make the comissar more effective.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:
Somewhat off-topic: I liked the old Commissar rule from way back where he would execute the commanding officer of the unit he was attached to in order to get a re-roll on a Leadership test, but if the second test also failed the unit would kill the Commissar and then break and run anyway.

I'm not saying it was the best rule in terms of gameplay and I'm not saying that it should be ported over to 8th, just that I think it was amusing and flavorful.

Of course this basically means nearly automatic death of commisar. Okay I roll a dice...5. I fail and lose 11 guys. Blam. I reroll. I roll 1 and...Lose 7 guys and commisar gets wiped out.

The rule worked because it was actually possible to pass the test. Here it's basically just altering scale of the failure.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stus67 wrote:
I broke my Conscript squads down to mass 10-man units after the codex anyway so this doesn't even effect me, but the amount of salt over this is exactly why I can't take most people on this forum seriously.

It never made sense to make conscripts completely immune to morale by shooting one in the back of the head, and never should have. Shame some people were shortsighted enough to build entire armies around that. Not like there isn't a multitude of other options to make conscripts totally immune or hardly impacted by morale anyway. Two stratagems, a psychic power, the Mk.45, and being Valhallan work pretty well.

There's huge difference between reasonable change and "blam commisars are actually more hurtful than good".

As it is commisars basically degrade conscript's morale. You would morale wise be better of NOT having commisar near conscript. Pretty weird that.

This is the funniest thread to read. The same people who told me to shut up and told me I was a power gamer for suggesting the ig codex is unbalanced are the same people having heart attacks and calling gw out as the worst company ever for at least tempting to do some kind of balance. The very fact so many of these people are angry means gw is on the right path for once!

For those being like "b-but marines get a free reroll!" - well marines don't cost 3 or 4 pts per model. You get 30 guardsmen for every 1 squad of 10 marines. You'll likely kill 3 per turn which is more than they can do back.

"B-but orks get 30 leadership!" - To get 30 leadership after taking damage you need a min of 2 squads at 360 points min (90 guardsmen worth). And they only get a 6+ save. With your 90 guardsmen you're likely to do 24 wounds to a squad making them basically useless and then next turn you can moral the other squad out of existence.

And none of these took i to the account rerolling guard get! Face it, for 30 pts getting auto moral pass on an already cheap and efficient army was really messing witht the balance of the game. Maybe this nerf is too far but it at lesst shows gw is listening for once... now remove commissars or keep them, regardless your army is still effective and efficient so enjoy your 10 seconds of fame like every other faction does because orks haven't had one in a long long time....

 Red_Five wrote:

fe40k wrote:
@MarNZ: Sorry Imperial factions no longer get a free pass on being overpowered this edition. They get to be balanced and re-balanced, just like every other faction. Also, you're deluding yourself if you think GW won't continue to balance the game, no matter what faction it is (say, Xenos) - as well as if you think the loss of Morale immune Conscripts [a mistake in the first place on a 3ppm model with those stats] will suddenly invalidate all the other top tier options AM has available.

I, for one, and glad Morale actually matters now - the only models that should even consider getting a free immunity would be extremely low (<5) model count, expensive, elite squads.

Morale kill should be a reasonable way of dealing with large, low priced, chaff models.

So Tyranids need to be reworked then.

ALL horde armys needs to be reworked.
horde units casualty should IMO be 30-40% raw dmg, 60-70% failed morale checks.

I'm struggling to find the logic behind how you reach the conclusion that ld4 is superior to ld8 with potential blam.

At the very WORST, you save 3 conscripts from running.

There is no "what if the reroll is worse", it cancels itself out by the equal odd of it being better, and that's without the possibility of actually turning a fail to a success.


Jesus the levels of irrational cries here.

I liked the FAQ, can't wait for the ELDAR FAQ, because the reviews I've seen = POWER CREEPER Deluxe codex.

Buffing a hilariously underpowered index=/=power creep.