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 think the following issues need to be addressed:
1. Marines need to be more durable, especially vs high rate of fire weapons with -1 AP. There are a number of ways to improve this, but I think my favorite would be to have all power armor units (not terminators or cents, but yes to bikes and primaris) reduce the AP of incoming damage by 1 vs 1d weapons. This makes them die just as easily to AP0, keeps cover as a relevant bonus, but makes them last longer against things like assault cannons and heavy bolters, but anything that actually packs damage still kills them pretty easily.
2. Marines need to be better in close combat. I think the easiest way to fix this is to give them all +1 attack (perhaps not to the characters).
2. Terminators need to be more durable against D2 weapons. I think the easiest way to fix this is to make Terminator armor reduce incoming damage by 1 to a minimum of 1. This targetedly reduces the effectiveness of D2 weapons, makes 1d3 D more relevant, and doesn't effect 1d or 3+d weapons.
3. Rhinos either need to be cheaper or have fire points back. Maybe both.
4. Non flying vehicles should not be so easy to shut down by locking them into combat. I think a good fix would be to simply have all vehicles be able to fall back and shoot, and let the mobility of flying vehicles be their main unique advantage. Having to move at all reduces most vehicles shooting abilities, so it's not like locking them in combat does nothing.
5. GK should have minor self buff powers that present them with a tool kit of sorts, and allow them to tailor their effectiveness to what they are fighting as the battle goes on, and these should not be effected by the normal 1 casting of a power per turn rule.
6. Units and weapons should be looked at again and adjusted so that they all have a useful role in this edition. Just because a unit has already been a certain way is not an excuse for mediocrity. Strike squads, Tacs, etc, don't have to be the best unit in the game, but they should be good at what they do for the points they cost, and so should every other unit in the game. GW should look at every gun, unit, and psychic power in the game and ask themselves questions like "what is cool about this?" "What is this thing good at?" "What role does this fill for it's faction?" "What makes this thing better or different at what it specifically does than the other options available to this or other factions?" "What would make this someone's favorite unit/weapon/power/army theme to play with or against?" "How does this unit stand out from and interact with other units?" And so on. Something like the GK incinerator never being picked, or IG units never taking grenade launchers, or SM grav being a worse version of plasma, or option x being cool and someones favorite unit but sadly just not as good a choice as option y so you either take it any way and suffer or take the good unit, are all actual and serious problems that deserve attention. So are things like assault Marines being terrible at assault and everything. Or interceptors not actually being effective enough with only 1 special weapon and 5 force wep attacks to actually want to shunt close to a target. Or flamers being bad at killing infantry but okay against fliers.
7. Force multiplier auras should be removed, since they encourage units to clump together for the buffs, and it's harder to calculate their value. I think the simple fix it to make them more like IG orders, with a limited number of units they can effect, and have any actual auras only do things that are not related to offensive ability such as increase Ld, give charge or advance rerolls, and so on.
8. Negative modifiers to hit need to go away. They are just too good at what they do, and overshadow nearly every other defensive buff in the game.
9. Ignore cover abilities should be rare, especially on weapons with high AP or long range. Cover effects the durability of different units in different ways (generally the better the save, the better cover is for you) so some units and armies depend on it more than others, making the ignore cover abilities either very strong or mostly useless.
10. Points should be adjusted accordingly. Points are important, and technically it should be possible to make no rules changes and still balance the game only through points changes. However, I think it would be better to change things first, making units, weapons, and playstyles effective, fun, and viable first, then change the points.
I agree with most of what you said in your post, I specially like your ideas for improving power armor and terminators. Bolter type weapons should sadly stay the way they are, just change grav and melee etc. The main problem when looking at the marines poor performance is Primaris; there was a recent post about this so I won't go further with this, just keep it in mind when discussing possible fixes.
About the Rhinos, they really need that buff. I mostly run Tacticals in Rhinos plus a single rhino/razorback with a captain, Lieutenant, and Ancient, and they can't withstand a single round of shooting against any decent gunline. If they gave them the fire ports back, a 1st turn Rhino push, supported with some long range shooting and/or Dreads could be viable.
I'm not so sure about the vehicles bit. As discussed a few says ago, flyers and ground vehicles need a change, but allowing all of them to shoot when falling back is not the way. Maybe on 6's or with a -1 and passing a moral check; that way vehicle's Ld would be relevant.
GK would need their cc and psk rules buffed plus the universal marine changes, for a proper cost in points. I'm not very knowledgeable on GK codex history, but maybe the benefits for going against deamons could be revised.
Some core rules must be changed too; mainly cover, LoS and negative modifiers, as you suggest. Yesterday I played a Bolt Action game (my fifth game, against a veteran player), and I had so much fun, maybe one of the best tabletop games I've played. I'm sure people have talked about the great Bolt Action rulebook vs 40k many times, and it's clear many rules are very interesting, but 40k is different so it shouldn't be directly applied. However, I really liked the LoS and cover rules. Do you want to check LoS? Take a laser and see where it goes through. 0 issues with modelling for advantage or the terrain. Something blocks LoS because it is X type of terrain and occuppies this space. End of the argument. Having real LoS in 40k is just stupid, even for 8th edition arcade rules.
PS: forgive any writing mistakes
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/26 18:28:29
I definitely think that my "vehicles should be able to fall back and shoot" hypothesis is the weakest one I suggested. However, I think they should be able to do SOMETHING, especially when other armies have flying tanks that don't seem to pay a ton for flying and are insanely better due to having it. Things like DE or Harly transports ramming into tank gun lines to silence them does seem like a real issue.
-1 for vehicles, or some kind of nerf to flying vehicles ability to do so, or perhaps some kind of tank shock option, or some other solution could be better.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/26 18:33:09
Oh I'm sure I'm wrong about a lot of stuff. Playtesting and other people's input would be only way to make sure everything worked and whatnot. It's possible some ideas would work and others would be too good, etc. All I know is that right now there are a lot of problems, and these are just some ideas how to fix them.
I'd be interested in what you think more specifically about what I said, though, lol.
Yeah, people are not Supreme Court jutges, but they still discuss laws. We shouldn't be able to vote too, I guess. What's the point of this forum then? We discuss 40k stuff and learn from each other. Democracy in the 41st Millenium lol
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jcd386 wrote: I definitely think that my "vehicles should be able to fall back and shoot" hypothesis is the weakest one I suggested. However, I think they should be able to do SOMETHING, especially when other armies have flying tanks that don't seem to pay a ton for flying and are insanely better due to having it. Things like DE or Harly transports ramming into tank gun lines to silence them does seem like a real issue.
-1 for vehicles, or some kind of nerf to flying vehicles ability to do so, or perhaps some kind of tank shock option, or some other solution could be better.
I suggested a morale test to be able to shoot with a -1 or -2 after you fall back. And for many vehicles overall, maybe give them better WS or -1 for ramming etc. Still not reliable but at least more rewarding if you get a 16'667% dice
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/26 18:38:02
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: This is why most of you guys shouldn't be Rules Development people.
Oh I'm sure I'm wrong about a lot of stuff. Playtesting and other people's input would be only way to make sure everything worked and whatnot. It's possible some ideas would work and others would be too good, etc. All I know is that right now there are a lot of problems, and these are just some ideas how to fix them.
I'd be interested in what you think more specifically about what I said, though, lol.
Sure. I'll do everything point by point. Note that I'll ignore #10 as Point adjustments is always necessary after any fix for the most part.
1. That's more an issue with cover being hard to do for the most part. Old AP4 weapons doing jack diddly was one of the issues with 3rd onwards, and the new Rend system is an excellent idea. However, Marines need to be priced as such, or have a non broken way to ignore it. A simple Strategem where they surge their Power armor or something (can they do that?) where they bring down the AP of any weapon by -1 would be more sufficient and an analog to the Guard stratagem for the additional cover bonus.
I also had the thought that Salamanders should've had their Chapter Tactic akin to the AdMech Lucius one for people wanting something like that, but I'm unsure how well that would go.
2. Nah. Mostly anything doing D2 would be killing them last edition in the first place. We finally got them to actually be durable vs more weapons compared to before barring very specific examples (Autocannon and the Gauss Blaster being the most obvious examples). They don't NEED more durability. They need more killing power instead. Increasing the durability just makes them a waste of 200+ points that sits there and does nothing rather than the current iteration that sits there and does nothing and dies. We need to look at the most successful Terminators throughout the different editions, and the thing those ones all had in common was better offense. To make everything not scale terribly and to make more of the loadouts for Terminators effective, I'm wanting their WS/BS to be 2+ for all Terminators barring the Troop Grey Knight ones. This better shows their Vet status as a whole and makes them able to operate more independently without an HQ, and essentially does the things people want (old Relentless, easier to hit with Power Fists) while not actually ignoring the fact there's other loadouts and variants of Terminators out there. People are constantly forgetting this for some reason.
3. Fire Points should be enough for all transports for the most part. Dark Eldar only getting them is silly as all hell and probably my biggest complaint for the edition.
4. Not sure which Grey Knights vehicles have this problem, as you should be able to shut down a Razorback somewhat. Only thing I can think of is the Land Raider, which as we all know has a whole host of other problems to be honest before you even get to that. I'd rather some vehicles be able to shoot in melee at a decent penalty than fall back and shoot with little consequence, as melee problems exist as is. Imagine your Strike Squads got into combat with that Razorback finally to help out the rest of your list not get shot! Except it just goes back and then shoots them.
5. What you're suggesting is a retool of the Sanctic discipline. I'm for that.
6. Strike Squads are already okayish. I think a single point decrease or just the army getting back The Shrouding to some extent will help.
The Incinerator suffers as much as any other Flamer basically.
Interceptors are one of the only good units. Not sure what else you want done to them outside maybe, once again, the army getting Shrouding back. To some extent of course.
7. Honestly the way HQ dudes work now is one of the better parts of this edition, ad Captains aren't strictly being a beatstick and Chaplains aren't making a single unit braver (which was why they really weren't taken in the first place). Hard pass here.
8. The modifiers are fine. The only army really suffering some problem from it is Orks, who really should be ignoring everything after the first -1, and honestly it helps shut down pure gunline armies. If anything, I want more negative modifiers but for melee at least. There's enough shooting ones. I don't care your poor Manticores can't hit some Rangers or Raven Guard.
9. Ignore Cover is already rare compared to last edition. Not sure what the complaint here is.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
jcd386 wrote: 3. Rhinos either need to be cheaper or have fire points back. Maybe both.
Repressors (aka rhinos with firepoints) are north of 100pts and not a single SoB player thought it odd that they were price-hiked in chapter approved.
I wonder how much of this is the lingering expectations brought on by gladius and similar freebies from past editions.
Its just hard to afford razorbacks and rhinos in a grey knights codex. They are prices alright (although the twin assault cannon (and subsequently the twin psycannon) should be un-nerfed... that was a Gulliman issue, not a grey knight one.
To be fair, sisters have some nice synergy w/ their transport vehicles and their dominion squads. Sisters to mounted mechanized infantry the best. A unit of 5 dominions w/ 4 stormbolters is 58 points (about 40% of the cost of a strike squad) and can cause their repressor/immolator/rhino to move up. Combine them with n immolator and they have a strong unit that can target a wide variety of targets.
I wouldn't be upset at the price of sister's vehicles since their infantry units are appropriately priced, have synergy, and perform their battelfield roles very well.
Grey knights lack synergy between units besides the obligatory "reroll 1s" commander aura and don't have the points available to use vehicles. Each rhino is points not being spent on required stormbolter shots and units that can get into combat.
"Glory in our suffering, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not disappoint"
-Paul of Tarsus
If my post seems goofy, assume I am posting from my phone and the autocorrect elf in my phone is drunk again
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: This is why most of you guys shouldn't be Rules Development people.
Oh I'm sure I'm wrong about a lot of stuff. Playtesting and other people's input would be only way to make sure everything worked and whatnot. It's possible some ideas would work and others would be too good, etc. All I know is that right now there are a lot of problems, and these are just some ideas how to fix them.
I'd be interested in what you think more specifically about what I said, though, lol.
Sure. I'll do everything point by point. Note that I'll ignore #10 as Point adjustments is always necessary after any fix for the most part.
1. That's more an issue with cover being hard to do for the most part. Old AP4 weapons doing jack diddly was one of the issues with 3rd onwards, and the new Rend system is an excellent idea. However, Marines need to be priced as such, or have a non broken way to ignore it. A simple Strategem where they surge their Power armor or something (can they do that?) where they bring down the AP of any weapon by -1 would be more sufficient and an analog to the Guard stratagem for the additional cover bonus.
I also had the thought that Salamanders should've had their Chapter Tactic akin to the AdMech Lucius one for people wanting something like that, but I'm unsure how well that would go.
2. Nah. Mostly anything doing D2 would be killing them last edition in the first place. We finally got them to actually be durable vs more weapons compared to before barring very specific examples (Autocannon and the Gauss Blaster being the most obvious examples). They don't NEED more durability. They need more killing power instead. Increasing the durability just makes them a waste of 200+ points that sits there and does nothing rather than the current iteration that sits there and does nothing and dies. We need to look at the most successful Terminators throughout the different editions, and the thing those ones all had in common was better offense. To make everything not scale terribly and to make more of the loadouts for Terminators effective, I'm wanting their WS/BS to be 2+ for all Terminators barring the Troop Grey Knight ones. This better shows their Vet status as a whole and makes them able to operate more independently without an HQ, and essentially does the things people want (old Relentless, easier to hit with Power Fists) while not actually ignoring the fact there's other loadouts and variants of Terminators out there. People are constantly forgetting this for some reason.
3. Fire Points should be enough for all transports for the most part. Dark Eldar only getting them is silly as all hell and probably my biggest complaint for the edition.
4. Not sure which Grey Knights vehicles have this problem, as you should be able to shut down a Razorback somewhat. Only thing I can think of is the Land Raider, which as we all know has a whole host of other problems to be honest before you even get to that. I'd rather some vehicles be able to shoot in melee at a decent penalty than fall back and shoot with little consequence, as melee problems exist as is. Imagine your Strike Squads got into combat with that Razorback finally to help out the rest of your list not get shot! Except it just goes back and then shoots them.
5. What you're suggesting is a retool of the Sanctic discipline. I'm for that.
6. Strike Squads are already okayish. I think a single point decrease or just the army getting back The Shrouding to some extent will help.
The Incinerator suffers as much as any other Flamer basically.
Interceptors are one of the only good units. Not sure what else you want done to them outside maybe, once again, the army getting Shrouding back. To some extent of course.
7. Honestly the way HQ dudes work now is one of the better parts of this edition, ad Captains aren't strictly being a beatstick and Chaplains aren't making a single unit braver (which was why they really weren't taken in the first place). Hard pass here.
8. The modifiers are fine. The only army really suffering some problem from it is Orks, who really should be ignoring everything after the first -1, and honestly it helps shut down pure gunline armies. If anything, I want more negative modifiers but for melee at least. There's enough shooting ones. I don't care your poor Manticores can't hit some Rangers or Raven Guard.
9. Ignore Cover is already rare compared to last edition. Not sure what the complaint here is.
Thanks, I appreciate the response.
I think i mostly agree with your points, with some exceptions / alternate solutions.
1. I think if rhinos were worth taking, then the current marine stat-line might be okay as is, though a points reduction would be welcome, and a stratagem like you suggest seems fitting.
2. I should have mentioned I also want them to be WS/BS2+. I do think they could be more durable, but perhaps the issue is less with them and more with plasma/other spammable D2 weapons. One or the other would have to change, i think, and i don't see D2 weapons going away.
3. I would probably add fire-points back and then see if they need a price adjustment.
4. Again i don't know exactly the best way to fix this, but i think vehicles should be able to do SOMETHING. Shooting in CC but not falling back seems okay too. I also see no reason why the fly keyword should be tied to being able to shoot after you fall back. Fly already gives plenty of other mobility advantages it doesn't need another one as far as i can tell.
7. To me the main issue here is Roboute and similar HQs with buffs so powerful they make people clump up, and seems really hard to balance as we have seem from him being nerfed so many times. Normal captains and Lts aren't nearly as bad, and even the reroll to hit from chapter masters isn't terrible. So yes maybe my suggestion is going too far, though i don't see it not working, it's just very different.
8. My opinion on this is that there are some things you shouldn't able to effect on your enemy en mass, especially when it arbitrarily effects some units better than others. For example, a -1 to hit reduces a 3+ BS army's shooting by 25%, but a 4+ shooting army by 33%, and i can't see any good reason for it doing that. I'd much rather have the whole army have something like a 6+ or 5+ FNP, which would evenly increase it's durability across the board by 16% or 33%, or some similar sort of defensive buff like always counting as in cover, etc, that effects your units durability, but not your enemy's attack power. Hopefully that makes sense.
9. I don't think it's a big issue, but i think that entire factions having it is silly (IF, etc) because it just removes cover from that game. Also some medium/long range guns have it (specifically the Tau smart missile systems). Again probably a bit of a non issue but a pet peeve.
jcd386 wrote: 3. Rhinos either need to be cheaper or have fire points back. Maybe both.
Repressors (aka rhinos with firepoints) are north of 100pts and not a single SoB player thought it odd that they were price-hiked in chapter approved.
I wonder how much of this is the lingering expectations brought on by gladius and similar freebies from past editions.
The repressor is quite a bit better than the rhino ever was. 12W, a Heavy Flamer, Storm Bolter, six firing ports, and WS 5+ and 9 close combat attacks at full wounds. If space marines could use those instead of rhinos, I'd pay 100+ for them. Can you imagine how good deathwatch would be in those?
Rhinos are/would be 10W, a storm bolter, and only 2 fire ports. So maybe the current price with 2 fire points would be a good place to start like i said above, but i still feel like that closer to the 60s is closer to where they belong. I actually hated the idea of free transports in 7th for no reason. I want to pay for every unit in my army, i just want them all to be useful and effective.
jcd386 wrote: 3. Rhinos either need to be cheaper or have fire points back. Maybe both.
Repressors (aka rhinos with firepoints) are north of 100pts and not a single SoB player thought it odd that they were price-hiked in chapter approved.
I wonder how much of this is the lingering expectations brought on by gladius and similar freebies from past editions.
Its just hard to afford razorbacks and rhinos in a grey knights codex. They are prices alright (although the twin assault cannon (and subsequently the twin psycannon) should be un-nerfed... that was a Gulliman issue, not a grey knight one.
To be fair, sisters have some nice synergy w/ their transport vehicles and their dominion squads. Sisters to mounted mechanized infantry the best. A unit of 5 dominions w/ 4 stormbolters is 58 points (about 40% of the cost of a strike squad) and can cause their repressor/immolator/rhino to move up. Combine them with n immolator and they have a strong unit that can target a wide variety of targets.
I wouldn't be upset at the price of sister's vehicles since their infantry units are appropriately priced, have synergy, and perform their battelfield roles very well.
Grey knights lack synergy between units besides the obligatory "reroll 1s" commander aura and don't have the points available to use vehicles. Each rhino is points not being spent on required stormbolter shots and units that can get into combat.
I think the synergy point is a good one. You can tell that the repressor is designed with SoB units in mind. 6 fire points is amazing for them, and it's a no wonder that tank is worth taking.
Rhinos used to be designed with marines (who frequently have 2 or so special weapons and don't footslog well, hello purifiers!) in mind, and then changed to no longer be effective due (presumably) to abuse of the free tanks rule of 7th (which is GWs fault for implementing in the first place, duh), which should never have had any standing on 8th edition at all. At least the IG chimera got a lasgun array...rhinos got nothing and SoB got a wondertank.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/05/26 19:33:51
jcd386 wrote: If space marines could use those instead of rhinos, I'd pay 100+ for them.
Exactly.
It was the 'maybe both' suggestion of the post was the bit that caught my attention. Rhinos with firepoints are quite a thing.
Smotejob wrote: Each rhino is points not being spent on required stormbolter shots and units that can get into combat.
True, but not a reason for the GK to have discounted vehicles.
At best it's a reason for the minor GK units to be less capable and therefore less expensive. Such as the suggested force weapon change.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/26 19:39:03
jcd386 wrote: If space marines could use those instead of rhinos, I'd pay 100+ for them.
Exactly.
It was the 'maybe both' suggestion of the post was the bit that caught my attention. Rhinos with firepoints are quite a thing.
Smotejob wrote: Each rhino is points not being spent on required stormbolter shots and units that can get into combat.
True, but not a reason for the GK to have discounted vehicles.
At best it's a reason for the minor GK units to be less capable and therefore less expensive. Such as the suggested force weapon change.
Or more effective a similar price, so that they are worth the price of the transport.
I like the force weapon changes idea.
Personally I think it would be fine if they had 2 attacks base (I think all marines need this), and the force weapons were just power weapons like they were in 5th. Then one of the powers that all GK knew could be "Activate Force Weapon" which would make their weapons D2. Then you could choose to use that power vs big stuff, and something like hammer hand or other powers vs other stuff. And this and all GK powers like it could be used by as many units as needed. Almost like a melee version of the deathwatch ammo, triggered by a series of psychic powers. We can dream.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/26 20:03:23
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: This is why most of you guys shouldn't be Rules Development people.
Oh I'm sure I'm wrong about a lot of stuff. Playtesting and other people's input would be only way to make sure everything worked and whatnot. It's possible some ideas would work and others would be too good, etc. All I know is that right now there are a lot of problems, and these are just some ideas how to fix them.
I'd be interested in what you think more specifically about what I said, though, lol.
Sure. I'll do everything point by point. Note that I'll ignore #10 as Point adjustments is always necessary after any fix for the most part.
1. That's more an issue with cover being hard to do for the most part. Old AP4 weapons doing jack diddly was one of the issues with 3rd onwards, and the new Rend system is an excellent idea. However, Marines need to be priced as such, or have a non broken way to ignore it. A simple Strategem where they surge their Power armor or something (can they do that?) where they bring down the AP of any weapon by -1 would be more sufficient and an analog to the Guard stratagem for the additional cover bonus.
I also had the thought that Salamanders should've had their Chapter Tactic akin to the AdMech Lucius one for people wanting something like that, but I'm unsure how well that would go.
2. Nah. Mostly anything doing D2 would be killing them last edition in the first place. We finally got them to actually be durable vs more weapons compared to before barring very specific examples (Autocannon and the Gauss Blaster being the most obvious examples). They don't NEED more durability. They need more killing power instead. Increasing the durability just makes them a waste of 200+ points that sits there and does nothing rather than the current iteration that sits there and does nothing and dies. We need to look at the most successful Terminators throughout the different editions, and the thing those ones all had in common was better offense. To make everything not scale terribly and to make more of the loadouts for Terminators effective, I'm wanting their WS/BS to be 2+ for all Terminators barring the Troop Grey Knight ones. This better shows their Vet status as a whole and makes them able to operate more independently without an HQ, and essentially does the things people want (old Relentless, easier to hit with Power Fists) while not actually ignoring the fact there's other loadouts and variants of Terminators out there. People are constantly forgetting this for some reason.
3. Fire Points should be enough for all transports for the most part. Dark Eldar only getting them is silly as all hell and probably my biggest complaint for the edition.
4. Not sure which Grey Knights vehicles have this problem, as you should be able to shut down a Razorback somewhat. Only thing I can think of is the Land Raider, which as we all know has a whole host of other problems to be honest before you even get to that. I'd rather some vehicles be able to shoot in melee at a decent penalty than fall back and shoot with little consequence, as melee problems exist as is. Imagine your Strike Squads got into combat with that Razorback finally to help out the rest of your list not get shot! Except it just goes back and then shoots them.
5. What you're suggesting is a retool of the Sanctic discipline. I'm for that.
6. Strike Squads are already okayish. I think a single point decrease or just the army getting back The Shrouding to some extent will help.
The Incinerator suffers as much as any other Flamer basically.
Interceptors are one of the only good units. Not sure what else you want done to them outside maybe, once again, the army getting Shrouding back. To some extent of course.
7. Honestly the way HQ dudes work now is one of the better parts of this edition, ad Captains aren't strictly being a beatstick and Chaplains aren't making a single unit braver (which was why they really weren't taken in the first place). Hard pass here.
8. The modifiers are fine. The only army really suffering some problem from it is Orks, who really should be ignoring everything after the first -1, and honestly it helps shut down pure gunline armies. If anything, I want more negative modifiers but for melee at least. There's enough shooting ones. I don't care your poor Manticores can't hit some Rangers or Raven Guard.
9. Ignore Cover is already rare compared to last edition. Not sure what the complaint here is.
Thanks, I appreciate the response.
I think i mostly agree with your points, with some exceptions / alternate solutions.
1. I think if rhinos were worth taking, then the current marine stat-line might be okay as is, though a points reduction would be welcome, and a stratagem like you suggest seems fitting.
2. I should have mentioned I also want them to be WS/BS2+. I do think they could be more durable, but perhaps the issue is less with them and more with plasma/other spammable D2 weapons. One or the other would have to change, i think, and i don't see D2 weapons going away.
3. I would probably add fire-points back and then see if they need a price adjustment.
4. Again i don't know exactly the best way to fix this, but i think vehicles should be able to do SOMETHING. Shooting in CC but not falling back seems okay too. I also see no reason why the fly keyword should be tied to being able to shoot after you fall back. Fly already gives plenty of other mobility advantages it doesn't need another one as far as i can tell.
7. To me the main issue here is Roboute and similar HQs with buffs so powerful they make people clump up, and seems really hard to balance as we have seem from him being nerfed so many times. Normal captains and Lts aren't nearly as bad, and even the reroll to hit from chapter masters isn't terrible. So yes maybe my suggestion is going too far, though i don't see it not working, it's just very different.
8. My opinion on this is that there are some things you shouldn't able to effect on your enemy en mass, especially when it arbitrarily effects some units better than others. For example, a -1 to hit reduces a 3+ BS army's shooting by 25%, but a 4+ shooting army by 33%, and i can't see any good reason for it doing that. I'd much rather have the whole army have something like a 6+ or 5+ FNP, which would evenly increase it's durability across the board by 16% or 33%, or some similar sort of defensive buff like always counting as in cover, etc, that effects your units durability, but not your enemy's attack power. Hopefully that makes sense.
9. I don't think it's a big issue, but i think that entire factions having it is silly (IF, etc) because it just removes cover from that game. Also some medium/long range guns have it (specifically the Tau smart missile systems). Again probably a bit of a non issue but a pet peeve.
jcd386 wrote: 3. Rhinos either need to be cheaper or have fire points back. Maybe both.
Repressors (aka rhinos with firepoints) are north of 100pts and not a single SoB player thought it odd that they were price-hiked in chapter approved.
I wonder how much of this is the lingering expectations brought on by gladius and similar freebies from past editions.
The repressor is quite a bit better than the rhino ever was. 12W, a Heavy Flamer, Storm Bolter, six firing ports, and WS 5+ and 9 close combat attacks at full wounds. If space marines could use those instead of rhinos, I'd pay 100+ for them. Can you imagine how good deathwatch would be in those?
Rhinos are/would be 10W, a storm bolter, and only 2 fire ports. So maybe the current price with 2 fire points would be a good place to start like i said above, but i still feel like that closer to the 60s is closer to where they belong. I actually hated the idea of free transports in 7th for no reason. I want to pay for every unit in my army, i just want them all to be useful and effective.
jcd386 wrote: 3. Rhinos either need to be cheaper or have fire points back. Maybe both.
Repressors (aka rhinos with firepoints) are north of 100pts and not a single SoB player thought it odd that they were price-hiked in chapter approved.
I wonder how much of this is the lingering expectations brought on by gladius and similar freebies from past editions.
Its just hard to afford razorbacks and rhinos in a grey knights codex. They are prices alright (although the twin assault cannon (and subsequently the twin psycannon) should be un-nerfed... that was a Gulliman issue, not a grey knight one.
To be fair, sisters have some nice synergy w/ their transport vehicles and their dominion squads. Sisters to mounted mechanized infantry the best. A unit of 5 dominions w/ 4 stormbolters is 58 points (about 40% of the cost of a strike squad) and can cause their repressor/immolator/rhino to move up. Combine them with n immolator and they have a strong unit that can target a wide variety of targets.
I wouldn't be upset at the price of sister's vehicles since their infantry units are appropriately priced, have synergy, and perform their battelfield roles very well.
Grey knights lack synergy between units besides the obligatory "reroll 1s" commander aura and don't have the points available to use vehicles. Each rhino is points not being spent on required stormbolter shots and units that can get into combat.
I think the synergy point is a good one. You can tell that the repressor is designed with SoB units in mind. 6 fire points is amazing for them, and it's a no wonder that tank is worth taking.
Rhinos used to be designed with marines (who frequently have 2 or so special weapons and don't footslog well, hello purifiers!) in mind, and then changed to no longer be effective due (presumably) to abuse of the free tanks rule of 7th (which is GWs fault for implementing in the first place, duh), which should never have had any standing on 8th edition at all. At least the IG chimera got a lasgun array...rhinos got nothing and SoB got a wondertank.
[/spoiler]
1. Most statlines don't need adjusting for Marines. Most of my fixes have tried to avoid that (Bolt weapons getting a special rule, Tactical Marines getting a total of 3 weapons in a full man squad and maybe 2 at a 6-7 man squad) whereas other adjustments happen at baseline due to being unable to really gives rules that make sense (Tactical Marines getting +1LD, Sternguard get BS2+ and Vanguard get WS2+, Terminator variants getting both).
2. And you hit the nail on the head. Weapons are surprisingly slightly more prolific this edition. The issue with previous editions in terms of durability was easy to obtain weapons and death to small arms. The latter part was actually fixed.
3. Most transports wouldn't NEED adjusting as long as fire points came back.
4. I'm fine with certain vehicles getting Baneblade Lite, but not all of them. Fly needs to have a -1 Penalty to hit, which is all about I can think up before completely butchering the rule.
7. Roboute was already doing that when introduced. It seems your issue is with the Primarchs, who are already kinda near the correct price.
8. It makes sense but it isn't the way to go. I also don't care how much the firepower is cut by as much as I care about the math. Orks get their firepower cut in half by a -1 To Hit, but when you calculate the numbers you see the penalty is not actually much different to the usual results. That's why they just need nothing cut after the first penalty to keep balance, as obviously army wide abilities shouldn't just be negated by an entire army because, yet you can't make Orks never be hitting, which does lead to:
9. I'm not actually a fan of the Army Traits that lead to additional cover, as they get simply hard countered by Iron Warriors and Imperial Fists. It's gotta be one or the other that goes. I'd prefer the Ignoring Cover stay and the others go, but I'm open to suggestions as to what to do for Imperial Fists and Iron Warriors. I know I don't have ideas for Jormun and Sacea, at least.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Hi guys. I am a new player, and just started with grey knights. I have been struggling a bit in games vs my friends, although we are all new, and we all kind of a get beaten by the same army.
I have a question about the name of the topic, as I haven't read all the 8 pages of the topic.
Is the GK codex considered bad, because it has one good build or is it considered bad, because everything in it is bad?
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Karol wrote: Hi guys. I am a new player, and just started with grey knights. I have been struggling a bit in games vs my friends, although we are all new, and we all kind of a get beaten by the same army.
I have a question about the name of the topic, as I haven't read all the 8 pages of the topic.
Is the GK codex considered bad, because it has one good build or is it considered bad, because everything in it is bad?
Originally the former. Now about half or a little more than half say the latter.
Ok, not happy about it, but I already bought them Any words on their 8th ed codex, because the index is really bland.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
What units do you already have? Perhaps consider soup, and mix in elements from other factions to make your units work better (at least to an acceptable level) for you.
Porphyrius wrote: What units do you already have? Perhaps consider soup, and mix in elements from other factions to make your units work better (at least to an acceptable level) for you.
That's the same as telling someone to get over it and start using a different army.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Porphyrius wrote: What units do you already have? Perhaps consider soup, and mix in elements from other factions to make your units work better (at least to an acceptable level) for you.
That's the same as telling someone to get over it and start using a different army.
I mean, he said he's already bought some of the army, and he's not happy that they're considered to be sub-par (to put it gently). Am I wrong in saying that if he wants his Grey Knights to be competitive, then he needs to add in elements from other armies? If he wants them to be less bad, what are his other options?
I wish that they were more viable as a mono-faction army, and I think that GW needs to majorly overhaul the entire faction, but that doesn't change the reality of the current situation.
jcd386 wrote: If space marines could use those instead of rhinos, I'd pay 100+ for them.
Exactly.
It was the 'maybe both' suggestion of the post was the bit that caught my attention. Rhinos with firepoints are quite a thing.
Smotejob wrote: Each rhino is points not being spent on required stormbolter shots and units that can get into combat.
True, but not a reason for the GK to have discounted vehicles.
At best it's a reason for the minor GK units to be less capable and therefore less expensive. Such as the suggested force weapon change.
Or more effective a similar price, so that they are worth the price of the transport.
I like the force weapon changes idea.
Personally I think it would be fine if they had 2 attacks base (I think all marines need this), and the force weapons were just power weapons like they were in 5th. Then one of the powers that all GK knew could be "Activate Force Weapon" which would make their weapons D2. Then you could choose to use that power vs big stuff, and something like hammer hand or other powers vs other stuff. And this and all GK powers like it could be used by as many units as needed. Almost like a melee version of the deathwatch ammo, triggered by a series of psychic powers. We can dream.
I don't understand. The way to make GK more useful is nerfing them again?
Force weapons aren't so good as they should, but making them a psychic power will nerf GK again.
The only change should be: force weapons ignore armour (but deal only 1 D)
jcd386 wrote: If space marines could use those instead of rhinos, I'd pay 100+ for them.
Exactly.
It was the 'maybe both' suggestion of the post was the bit that caught my attention. Rhinos with firepoints are quite a thing.
Smotejob wrote: Each rhino is points not being spent on required stormbolter shots and units that can get into combat.
True, but not a reason for the GK to have discounted vehicles.
At best it's a reason for the minor GK units to be less capable and therefore less expensive. Such as the suggested force weapon change.
Or more effective a similar price, so that they are worth the price of the transport.
I like the force weapon changes idea.
Personally I think it would be fine if they had 2 attacks base (I think all marines need this), and the force weapons were just power weapons like they were in 5th. Then one of the powers that all GK knew could be "Activate Force Weapon" which would make their weapons D2. Then you could choose to use that power vs big stuff, and something like hammer hand or other powers vs other stuff. And this and all GK powers like it could be used by as many units as needed. Almost like a melee version of the deathwatch ammo, triggered by a series of psychic powers. We can dream.
I don't understand. The way to make GK more useful is nerfing them again?
Force weapons aren't so good as they should, but making them a psychic power will nerf GK again.
The only change should be: force weapons ignore armour (but deal only 1 D)
I think the argument is that right now they are paying for a D3 damage weapon, but their 1 attack makes that fairly terrible. Buffing the number of attacks they have and making the available powers tweak them to be good at one thing or another just send cool to me I guess.
Martel732 wrote: I'm not doubly wrong. I could beat grav stars and white scar bikers with wily play. Eldar and tau rolled over them. BA very much resembled marines with no formations. Eldar didn't need formations; they had undercosted units.
My point is that the base marine has been a failure for a long time now. Since 5th, imo. And gk now just exemplify the same problems, only worse.
Ah so if you aren't as good as 7th ed Eldar, you aren't a real army.
Well that's a rational standard of measure.
When playing large numbers of games against Eldar, it becomes rather true.
Martel732 wrote: I'm not doubly wrong. I could beat grav stars and white scar bikers with wily play. Eldar and tau rolled over them. BA very much resembled marines with no formations. Eldar didn't need formations; they had undercosted units.
My point is that the base marine has been a failure for a long time now. Since 5th, imo. And gk now just exemplify the same problems, only worse.
Ah so if you aren't as good as 7th ed Eldar, you aren't a real army.
Well that's a rational standard of measure.
When playing large numbers of games against Eldar, it becomes rather true.
literally the entire game was significantly weaker than Eldar, thats just a bad unit of measure. SM was actually one of the better non Eldar dexes. Complaining about SM here is just ridiculous. You had an advantage on most of the armies in the game, but because your dex wasn't literally the strongest, most OP thing out there, it was terrible?
It's statements like this that make it really hard to defend SM players when people say they whine too much. What even is this.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2018/05/27 01:44:44
P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it.
This is largely immaterial at this point. Bottom line is that 13 ppm is too much for a bolter goon, and every unit dervied from this unit, inlcuding GK suffer as a result. Their "fix" was the intercessor, which has been systematically nerfed indirectly by every Xeno codex this year.
I don't need your defense. And really don't care what you think about "whining". Math is math. Your opinion doesn't invalidate it.
"It's statements like this that make it really hard to defend SM players when people say they whine too much. What even is this."
Gladius was GW admitting that marines needed to be spotted 400 pts in a game where tactical marines were being used.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/05/27 01:47:30
Martel732 wrote: This is largely immaterial at this point. Bottom line is that 13 ppm is too much for a bolter goon, and every unit dervied from this unit, inlcuding GK suffer as a result.
I don't need your defense. And really don't care what you think about "whining". Math is math. Your opinion doesn't invalidate it.
"Math is math" excuse doesnt work when you are saying 6th and 7th SM isn't even a real army, in a meta where they were one of the strongest. The math is against you here, so I guess what you said is just a crappy opinion. When it came to GK I agreed they were too weak, never once disagreed there.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/27 01:47:44
P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it.
Obviously they were a real army. Just not a very good one w/o invisible death star super friends or Gladius. Take away Eldar formations and you had.... Eldar.
Even skyhammer was easily neutered by savvy Xenos. Hell, I could beat skyhammer with a lot of BA lists.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/05/27 01:51:14
Martel732 wrote: Obviously they were a real army. Just not a very good one w/o invisible death star super friends or Gladius. Take away Eldar formations and you had.... Eldar.
I feel like this circular argument revolves around you continually saying this, getting an answer that disproves it, changing the subject, and then circling back around to it.
I'm just gonna go ahead and chalk it up to you being a sub-par player, there's zero other logic happening here atm.
P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it.
I was kinda trying to steer it that way. There's been a TON of discussion on here about the woes of the 13 ppm bolter goon. It mostly starts and ends there. Well, then there's marines' lousy 8th ed vehicles, but if the infantry were good, the vehicles could be ignored.
Any words on their 8th ed codex, because the index is really bland.
2500 pts Raven Guard, painted 
