Switch Theme:

Problem with 40k Balance  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Tyel wrote:
but it looks like Retributors have taken a hit in the new Sisters Codex for instance.


Their strat is completely gone, right? I can't seem to find it.

Strat is gone, can't move and shoot (instead they get "ignores the benefits of cover").


Danke. I approve. Phew...hated those damn models. I haven't seen anything as potentially crazy as Ad Mech yet. What about Repentia?

   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

 Daedalus81 wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Tyel wrote:
but it looks like Retributors have taken a hit in the new Sisters Codex for instance.


Their strat is completely gone, right? I can't seem to find it.

Strat is gone, can't move and shoot (instead they get "ignores the benefits of cover").


Danke. I approve. Phew...hated those damn models. I haven't seen anything as potentially crazy as Ad Mech yet. What about Repentia?

Side-graded to getting their run and charge buff from the Repentia Superior.
   
Made in us
Exalted Beastlord




Its worth noting that its 9th edition. Retributors can absolutely move and shoot. And if its at something behind dense cover, it doesn't even matter.

And if they're Argent Shroud, it never matters, even if they advance. So if anyone wants to dump the whole hog on mobile Retributors, they absolutely can. And pick up a free reroll per unit as part of the bargain.

Its another unit that benefits heavily from detachments color-coded by role. Red for stabby things, Silver for shooty things.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/08 02:59:04


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

Voss wrote:
Its worth noting that its 9th edition. Retributors can absolutely move and shoot. And if its at something behind dense cover, it doesn't even matter.

And if they're Argent Shroud, it never matters, even if they advance. So if anyone wants to dump the whole hog on mobile Retributors, they absolutely can. And pick up a free reroll per unit as part of the bargain.

Its another unit that benefits heavily from detachments color-coded by role. Red for stabby things, Silver for shooty things.

They can move and shoot but at -1 unless they're Argent Shroud where they can sprint and shoot with no penalty (there are other ways as well, like Heavy Bolter Rets with the bolter minor trait that ignores penalties to hit, but Argent Shroud are the current favorite for people who like their Ret spam.

Honestly I'm more partial to OML but that's because I expect things to die a lot and want more miracle dice than is reasonable in the process.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 03:05:53


 
   
Made in ca
Nihilistic Necron Lord




The best State-Texas

Does the Argent shroud work with Retributors coming in from SR?

4000+
6000+ Order. Unity. Obedience.
Thousand Sons 4000+
:Necron: Necron Discord: https://discord.com/invite/AGtpeD4  
   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

 Sasori wrote:
Does the Argent shroud work with Retributors coming in from SR?

Argent Shroud count as being stationary until the end of the shooting phase, so yes.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




No, it doesn't, the recent FAQ carves out a special exception for anything arriving as reinforcements and says those never count as being stationary even if they have a rule that says they always do.

9th edition, folks! Ain't it great?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 04:40:05


 
   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

yukishiro1 wrote:
No, it doesn't, the recent FAQ carves out a special exception for anything arriving as reinforcements and says those never count as being stationary even if they have a rule that says they always do.

9th edition, folks! Ain't it great?

Ah, I missed that. I guess it's to sort out some abuses of some kind. Honestly if they're doing it to balance the game more I can live with it.
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut





You also can't use both cherubins in a single phase now.

I've got my sister's dex yesterday, and there are quite a few nerfs hidden here and there. (There are rules even in the glossary!)
Been trying to make some lists (Sacred Rose fan here), and there really is nothing obvious. Feels like the marine dex, where the only thing you know is that non suit vehicles should stay in the book.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 05:44:01


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






Spoletta wrote:
You also can't use both cherubins in a single phase now.

I've got my sister's dex yesterday, and there are quite a few nerfs hidden here and there. (There are rules even in the glossary!)
Been trying to make some lists (Sacred Rose fan here), and there really is nothing obvious. Feels like the marine dex, where the only thing you know is that non suit vehicles should stay in the book.


Where does it say you can only use them once per phase? The datasheet says they are once per battle for each one you have.

15k+
3k
Emperor's Spears 2k
Beastmen 9500
CoS: 3500

Reading/Writing LD, be kind!

https://maddpaint.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 waefre_1 wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 waefre_1 wrote:
Using Smoke Launchers was still a strategic choice when it was a piece of wargear, though - do I sacrifice a turn of shooting to protect my vehicle, or do I move/shoot normally?
That's a tactical choice, not a strategic one. It'd be strategic if you had planned it out ahead of time.
 waefre_1 wrote:
...it was great for protecting vehicles that were repositioning and either moved too fast to fire or couldn't fire effectively (out of range, under a to-hit malus, etc)...

I included that portion to cover both "Oh gak, I'm out of targets! Better book it to the other flank!" and stuff like APC rushes or covering for short-range assault vehicles where you plan to use the smoke launchers (eg. suicide Hellhouds/Heavy Flamer Sentinels that you know won't be in range T1). Also, that was the terminology Daedalus used, and I didn't feel like quibbling over that in the response.
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And it doesn't make sense that only one unit can use their smoke launchers at a time.

I agree. I think anything that is a piece of kit being used as intended shouldn't be a strat (in general, at least - throwing a single grenade has no business being a strat, but a strat to have a whole squad throw grenades at least has some argument in its favor), and both smoke launchers and flakk missiles fall squarely in that category.


Couldn't disagree more that smoke and Flakk should be CP using one unit a turn choices. Sure, keep them as choices to use for CP but why not make them options you can pay for as well. I'd much rather pay for them but not need to spend cp for one vehicle a turn to pop smoke, or one unit to fire at flyers. I'd rather waste the points sometimes than use more precious CP on making sure someone loaded their gear and guns for something that should be able to be plentiful.
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 AngryAngel80 wrote:
 waefre_1 wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 waefre_1 wrote:
Using Smoke Launchers was still a strategic choice when it was a piece of wargear, though - do I sacrifice a turn of shooting to protect my vehicle, or do I move/shoot normally?
That's a tactical choice, not a strategic one. It'd be strategic if you had planned it out ahead of time.
 waefre_1 wrote:
...it was great for protecting vehicles that were repositioning and either moved too fast to fire or couldn't fire effectively (out of range, under a to-hit malus, etc)...

I included that portion to cover both "Oh gak, I'm out of targets! Better book it to the other flank!" and stuff like APC rushes or covering for short-range assault vehicles where you plan to use the smoke launchers (eg. suicide Hellhouds/Heavy Flamer Sentinels that you know won't be in range T1). Also, that was the terminology Daedalus used, and I didn't feel like quibbling over that in the response.
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And it doesn't make sense that only one unit can use their smoke launchers at a time.

I agree. I think anything that is a piece of kit being used as intended shouldn't be a strat (in general, at least - throwing a single grenade has no business being a strat, but a strat to have a whole squad throw grenades at least has some argument in its favor), and both smoke launchers and flakk missiles fall squarely in that category.


Couldn't disagree more that smoke and Flakk should be CP using one unit a turn choices. Sure, keep them as choices to use for CP but why not make them options you can pay for as well. I'd much rather pay for them but not need to spend cp for one vehicle a turn to pop smoke, or one unit to fire at flyers. I'd rather waste the points sometimes than use more precious CP on making sure someone loaded their gear and guns for something that should be able to be plentiful.


I think mostly its just that current smoke is way way more functional than it used to be on everything that's not a rhino.

I actually use smoke launchers on my gak now. I practically auto-use it since I rarely take more than one vehicle with my deathwatch.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

My only guess on why they wanted to make it a strat is they got tired of seeing a mechanized Imperium army (usually Marines) move all their Rhinos up as far as they can in one turn and then popping smoke.

That or because of how many other armies don't have access to something like smoke launchers they wanted it to feel more special.

But that's just a guess, not something I know for sure.
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 ClockworkZion wrote:
My only guess on why they wanted to make it a strat is they got tired of seeing a mechanized Imperium army (usually Marines) move all their Rhinos up as far as they can in one turn and then popping smoke.

That or because of how many other armies don't have access to something like smoke launchers they wanted it to feel more special.

But that's just a guess, not something I know for sure.


Or, because they were just utterly worthless on vehicles that had ANY kind of guns, but it was too potent to allow it to just grant an army-wide once per game -1 to hit for..whatever, five points or something.

IDK, I think a defensive stratagem to punish an opposing army from concentrating fire on a single target is something basically every army should get. Transhuman+Smoke Launchers is great, Lurk in the Shadows+Lightning Reactions for Drukhari is great. Heck, I even like the combo GSC is working with at this point - any INFANTRY unit can pull a "nope you can only shoot me if im closest" and every vehicle can ignore AP-1/AP-2. Less universally useful, but tricksier, and when it does work it works really well.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 12:33:11


"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in nl
Longtime Dakkanaut





 the_scotsman wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
My only guess on why they wanted to make it a strat is they got tired of seeing a mechanized Imperium army (usually Marines) move all their Rhinos up as far as they can in one turn and then popping smoke.

That or because of how many other armies don't have access to something like smoke launchers they wanted it to feel more special.

But that's just a guess, not something I know for sure.


Or, because they were just utterly worthless on vehicles that had ANY kind of guns, but it was too potent to allow it to just grant an army-wide once per game -1 to hit for..whatever, five points or something.

IDK, I think a defensive stratagem to punish an opposing army from concentrating fire on a single target is something basically every army should get. Transhuman+Smoke Launchers is great, Lurk in the Shadows+Lightning Reactions for Drukhari is great. Heck, I even like the combo GSC is working with at this point - any INFANTRY unit can pull a "nope you can only shoot me if im closest" and every vehicle can ignore AP-1/AP-2. Less universally useful, but tricksier, and when it does work it works really well.
Pretty sure the GSC one requires the unit to be wholly within cover, which makes it massively less useful.
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

I absolutely LOVE that my tanks have their own In Midnight Clad to go along with my infantry now. No one used smoke launchers on anything that actually qualified as a tank, because you didn't want to give up a turn of using all those guns you paid for. Smokescreen is also a good way of increasing the survivability of vehicles in an edition where many are convinced that they are useless. Anything that can help is welcome.
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Ordana wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
My only guess on why they wanted to make it a strat is they got tired of seeing a mechanized Imperium army (usually Marines) move all their Rhinos up as far as they can in one turn and then popping smoke.

That or because of how many other armies don't have access to something like smoke launchers they wanted it to feel more special.

But that's just a guess, not something I know for sure.


Or, because they were just utterly worthless on vehicles that had ANY kind of guns, but it was too potent to allow it to just grant an army-wide once per game -1 to hit for..whatever, five points or something.

IDK, I think a defensive stratagem to punish an opposing army from concentrating fire on a single target is something basically every army should get. Transhuman+Smoke Launchers is great, Lurk in the Shadows+Lightning Reactions for Drukhari is great. Heck, I even like the combo GSC is working with at this point - any INFANTRY unit can pull a "nope you can only shoot me if im closest" and every vehicle can ignore AP-1/AP-2. Less universally useful, but tricksier, and when it does work it works really well.
Pretty sure the GSC one requires the unit to be wholly within cover, which makes it massively less useful.


yep, it does. I dont usually use it for the big huge unit that my opponent is definitely going to be trying to focus fire on, typically its not easy to get them away from being the closest anyway. Typically this gets used to keep a smaller unit that's doing an action or something like a 10-man who has just hopped from a transport and killed something from getting shot.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 ClockworkZion wrote:
Voss wrote:
Its worth noting that its 9th edition. Retributors can absolutely move and shoot. And if its at something behind dense cover, it doesn't even matter.

And if they're Argent Shroud, it never matters, even if they advance. So if anyone wants to dump the whole hog on mobile Retributors, they absolutely can. And pick up a free reroll per unit as part of the bargain.

Its another unit that benefits heavily from detachments color-coded by role. Red for stabby things, Silver for shooty things.

They can move and shoot but at -1 unless they're Argent Shroud where they can sprint and shoot with no penalty (there are other ways as well, like Heavy Bolter Rets with the bolter minor trait that ignores penalties to hit, but Argent Shroud are the current favorite for people who like their Ret spam.

Honestly I'm more partial to OML but that's because I expect things to die a lot and want more miracle dice than is reasonable in the process.


Yea I don't mind them moving and shooting. Just so long as they need to move and I can put their desired target in a place that gets them out of cover.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Amishprn86 wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
You also can't use both cherubins in a single phase now.

I've got my sister's dex yesterday, and there are quite a few nerfs hidden here and there. (There are rules even in the glossary!)
Been trying to make some lists (Sacred Rose fan here), and there really is nothing obvious. Feels like the marine dex, where the only thing you know is that non suit vehicles should stay in the book.


Where does it say you can only use them once per phase? The datasheet says they are once per battle for each one you have.



Mmm, yea, I can't see where that limit is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nice. Penitent Engines are 2x5 instead of 3x5 now.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/08 13:34:47


   
Made in us
Hardened Veteran Guardsman





 AngryAngel80 wrote:
 waefre_1 wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 waefre_1 wrote:
Using Smoke Launchers was still a strategic choice when it was a piece of wargear, though - do I sacrifice a turn of shooting to protect my vehicle, or do I move/shoot normally?
That's a tactical choice, not a strategic one. It'd be strategic if you had planned it out ahead of time.
 waefre_1 wrote:
...it was great for protecting vehicles that were repositioning and either moved too fast to fire or couldn't fire effectively (out of range, under a to-hit malus, etc)...

I included that portion to cover both "Oh gak, I'm out of targets! Better book it to the other flank!" and stuff like APC rushes or covering for short-range assault vehicles where you plan to use the smoke launchers (eg. suicide Hellhouds/Heavy Flamer Sentinels that you know won't be in range T1). Also, that was the terminology Daedalus used, and I didn't feel like quibbling over that in the response.
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And it doesn't make sense that only one unit can use their smoke launchers at a time.

I agree. I think anything that is a piece of kit being used as intended shouldn't be a strat (in general, at least - throwing a single grenade has no business being a strat, but a strat to have a whole squad throw grenades at least has some argument in its favor), and both smoke launchers and flakk missiles fall squarely in that category.


Couldn't disagree more that smoke and Flakk should be CP using one unit a turn choices. Sure, keep them as choices to use for CP but why not make them options you can pay for as well. I'd much rather pay for them but not need to spend cp for one vehicle a turn to pop smoke, or one unit to fire at flyers. I'd rather waste the points sometimes than use more precious CP on making sure someone loaded their gear and guns for something that should be able to be plentiful.

That's what I said (or intended to say - apologies if that was unclear). Note the close paren.

Also, I'm genuinely confused how Smoke is better now that its a strat - did some FAQ somewhere change how it worked? Isn't it still "once per game, trade the ability to shoot for enemy fire taking a -1 to hit"?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 16:01:16


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 waefre_1 wrote:
Also, I'm genuinely confused how Smoke is better now that its a strat - did some FAQ somewhere change how it worked? Isn't it still "once per game, trade the ability to shoot for enemy fire taking a -1 to hit"?


It is not. You may use it multiple times on the same unit over the course of a game. You still get to shoot.


   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
You also can't use both cherubins in a single phase now.

I've got my sister's dex yesterday, and there are quite a few nerfs hidden here and there. (There are rules even in the glossary!)
Been trying to make some lists (Sacred Rose fan here), and there really is nothing obvious. Feels like the marine dex, where the only thing you know is that non suit vehicles should stay in the book.


Where does it say you can only use them once per phase? The datasheet says they are once per battle for each one you have.



Mmm, yea, I can't see where that limit is.


Hmm, reading it again you may be right.
   
Made in us
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus




 AnomanderRake wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
...The gap between what is bad and what is good isn't the same as previous editions.


It's often much worse now. In older editions I could bring bad models and still play a game (i.e. move models around, throw dice, kill things, and get the general impression I was meaningfully contributing to something), in 8th/9th if you bring bad models you do nothing and then get tabled. The durability gap and the damage gap between bad things and good things is horrendous.


Man I don't know. I've been as critical of 9th (more the missions than the rules honestly) as anybody, but I do feel like if I bring the worst army I can possibly bring (even one of my armies that doesn't have a 9th codex) I still have a better chance in 9th than I did with some of my strongest armies in 6th/7th.

That was by far the worst. Playing Taudar? The game could be determined by a look-up chart - "Did YOU bring Taudar? if "yes" then see who rolls the dice better. If "no" then go ahead and conceed now because your boned." lol

They weren't the only example but there were so many things that just acted as hard counters to the wrong list. I don't ever feel like there's 0 chance in 9th. I DID feel that way at times in 6th/7th.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 18:33:37


Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







Tycho wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
...The gap between what is bad and what is good isn't the same as previous editions.


It's often much worse now. In older editions I could bring bad models and still play a game (i.e. move models around, throw dice, kill things, and get the general impression I was meaningfully contributing to something), in 8th/9th if you bring bad models you do nothing and then get tabled. The durability gap and the damage gap between bad things and good things is horrendous.


Man I don't know. I've been as critical of 9th (more the missions than the rules honestly) as anybody, but I do feel like if I bring the worst army I can possibly bring (even one of my armies that doesn't have a 9th codex) I still have a better chance in 9th than I did with some of my strongest armies in 6th/7th.

That was by far the worst. Playing Taudar? The game could be determined by a look-up chart - "Did YOU bring Taudar? if "yes" then see who rolls the dice better. If "no" then go ahead and conceed now because your boned." lol

They weren't the only example but there were so many things that just acted as hard counters to the wrong list. I don't ever feel like there's 0 chance in 9th. I DID feel that way at times in 6th/7th.


I mean, sure, it sounds like you've managed to have a different experience than I have, but in 8th and 9th every game I've played has been pretty purely decided by the matchup lookup chart (usually either a "play army X -> you lose" or "play matchup Y -> you lose", not even "who rolled dice better?" )

The bit of the lookup chart I particularly hate is "use Forge World models -> lose"; I like Forge World models.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/08 18:45:53


Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in us
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus




 AnomanderRake wrote:
Tycho wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
...The gap between what is bad and what is good isn't the same as previous editions.


It's often much worse now. In older editions I could bring bad models and still play a game (i.e. move models around, throw dice, kill things, and get the general impression I was meaningfully contributing to something), in 8th/9th if you bring bad models you do nothing and then get tabled. The durability gap and the damage gap between bad things and good things is horrendous.


Man I don't know. I've been as critical of 9th (more the missions than the rules honestly) as anybody, but I do feel like if I bring the worst army I can possibly bring (even one of my armies that doesn't have a 9th codex) I still have a better chance in 9th than I did with some of my strongest armies in 6th/7th.

That was by far the worst. Playing Taudar? The game could be determined by a look-up chart - "Did YOU bring Taudar? if "yes" then see who rolls the dice better. If "no" then go ahead and conceed now because your boned." lol

They weren't the only example but there were so many things that just acted as hard counters to the wrong list. I don't ever feel like there's 0 chance in 9th. I DID feel that way at times in 6th/7th.


I mean, sure, it sounds like you've managed to have a different experience than I have, but in 8th and 9th every game I've played has been pretty purely decided by the matchup lookup chart (usually either a "play army X -> you lose" or "play matchup Y -> you lose", not even "who rolled dice better?" )

The bit of the lookup chart I particularly hate is "use Forge World models -> lose"; I like Forge World models.


That's interesting. I wonder what the difference is?

Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







Tycho wrote:
...That's interesting. I wonder what the difference is?


I suspect the difference between me and the people who like 8th/9th better is that I tend to gravitate towards weird edge-case things that nobody at GW HQ has or likes, so they forget they exist and they get no support, and I'm left feeling like I have to sacrifice my creativity and build a netlist if I want to participate. In 7th and before the rules didn't fluctuate wildly on an annual basis and stats/rules/points were often more consistent, so if I had something that had sensible rules once the inertia let it remain functional, while the 8e Indexes didn't provide a stable foundation on which to build in the same way that the older rules did. (I did try building a Primaris army at the beginning of 9th in hopes that GW wouldn't just nerf them immediately, but I made the mistake of picking Deathwatch, so GW almost immediately decided that I needed a slightly more complicated way of playing the game with no Chapter Tactics instead of actual rules.)

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 AnomanderRake wrote:
Tycho wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
...The gap between what is bad and what is good isn't the same as previous editions.


It's often much worse now. In older editions I could bring bad models and still play a game (i.e. move models around, throw dice, kill things, and get the general impression I was meaningfully contributing to something), in 8th/9th if you bring bad models you do nothing and then get tabled. The durability gap and the damage gap between bad things and good things is horrendous.


Man I don't know. I've been as critical of 9th (more the missions than the rules honestly) as anybody, but I do feel like if I bring the worst army I can possibly bring (even one of my armies that doesn't have a 9th codex) I still have a better chance in 9th than I did with some of my strongest armies in 6th/7th.

That was by far the worst. Playing Taudar? The game could be determined by a look-up chart - "Did YOU bring Taudar? if "yes" then see who rolls the dice better. If "no" then go ahead and conceed now because your boned." lol

They weren't the only example but there were so many things that just acted as hard counters to the wrong list. I don't ever feel like there's 0 chance in 9th. I DID feel that way at times in 6th/7th.


I mean, sure, it sounds like you've managed to have a different experience than I have, but in 8th and 9th every game I've played has been pretty purely decided by the matchup lookup chart (usually either a "play army X -> you lose" or "play matchup Y -> you lose", not even "who rolled dice better?" )

The bit of the lookup chart I particularly hate is "use Forge World models -> lose"; I like Forge World models.


...which is pretty weird, given just how many forgeworld models are currently staples of competitive tournament play.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







 the_scotsman wrote:
...which is pretty weird, given just how many forgeworld models are currently staples of competitive tournament play.


They're very careful to make sure nothing I own is ever a staple of competitive play. The 30k SM units are either unplayable or don't have rules (for some reason (*cough*nokitnorules*coughcough*) loyalists are allowed to use their Cataphractii and Chaos isn't), the resin Knights are paying a huge tax for being resin, and the Mechanicum stuff straight-up has no rules. What FW models are staples of competitive play?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 19:15:01


Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 AnomanderRake wrote:
Tycho wrote:
...That's interesting. I wonder what the difference is?


I suspect the difference between me and the people who like 8th/9th better is that I tend to gravitate towards weird edge-case things that nobody at GW HQ has or likes, so they forget they exist and they get no support, and I'm left feeling like I have to sacrifice my creativity and build a netlist if I want to participate. In 7th and before the rules didn't fluctuate wildly on an annual basis and stats/rules/points were often more consistent, so if I had something that had sensible rules once the inertia let it remain functional, while the 8e Indexes didn't provide a stable foundation on which to build in the same way that the older rules did. (I did try building a Primaris army at the beginning of 9th in hopes that GW wouldn't just nerf them immediately, but I made the mistake of picking Deathwatch, so GW almost immediately decided that I needed a slightly more complicated way of playing the game with no Chapter Tactics instead of actual rules.)


What do you try running if you don't mind me asking?

   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







 Daedalus81 wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
Tycho wrote:
...That's interesting. I wonder what the difference is?


I suspect the difference between me and the people who like 8th/9th better is that I tend to gravitate towards weird edge-case things that nobody at GW HQ has or likes, so they forget they exist and they get no support, and I'm left feeling like I have to sacrifice my creativity and build a netlist if I want to participate. In 7th and before the rules didn't fluctuate wildly on an annual basis and stats/rules/points were often more consistent, so if I had something that had sensible rules once the inertia let it remain functional, while the 8e Indexes didn't provide a stable foundation on which to build in the same way that the older rules did. (I did try building a Primaris army at the beginning of 9th in hopes that GW wouldn't just nerf them immediately, but I made the mistake of picking Deathwatch, so GW almost immediately decided that I needed a slightly more complicated way of playing the game with no Chapter Tactics instead of actual rules.)


What do you try running if you don't mind me asking?


I've sold a lot of this off because I couldn't do what I wanted to with it, but over the course of 8th/9th I've had a Corsairs army (soft-squatted in 8th and hard-squatted in 9th), an Ordo Malleus army (the Inquisition stuff is just useless at this point, so it's half a GK army I can't really use because I want to use the PAGK instead of playing whatever the one Paladin deathstar/Dreadknights netlist GW decided to make actually work is, and half a Guard army I couldn't really use because I refuse to buy a whole new army of Guard vehicles), a Mechanicum/Knights army (which I can't really use without buying a whole new army because GW's decided to fix the army by adding new horrendously expensive kits instead of fixing what was already there, and because the FW Mechanicum stuff never got 8e rules), an Alpha Legion army (which was supposed to be 30k/40k dual-purpose, which isn't possible anymore given how bad the CSM book is if you aren't searching out Daemon-based combo builds), a Thousand Sons army (same), a Deathwatch army (selling that off was more of a ragequit because I hate their 9e supplement), and a Custodes army (which wasn't unplayable, just incredibly random/boring to play).

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in nl
Longtime Dakkanaut





 the_scotsman wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
Tycho wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
...The gap between what is bad and what is good isn't the same as previous editions.


It's often much worse now. In older editions I could bring bad models and still play a game (i.e. move models around, throw dice, kill things, and get the general impression I was meaningfully contributing to something), in 8th/9th if you bring bad models you do nothing and then get tabled. The durability gap and the damage gap between bad things and good things is horrendous.


Man I don't know. I've been as critical of 9th (more the missions than the rules honestly) as anybody, but I do feel like if I bring the worst army I can possibly bring (even one of my armies that doesn't have a 9th codex) I still have a better chance in 9th than I did with some of my strongest armies in 6th/7th.

That was by far the worst. Playing Taudar? The game could be determined by a look-up chart - "Did YOU bring Taudar? if "yes" then see who rolls the dice better. If "no" then go ahead and conceed now because your boned." lol

They weren't the only example but there were so many things that just acted as hard counters to the wrong list. I don't ever feel like there's 0 chance in 9th. I DID feel that way at times in 6th/7th.


I mean, sure, it sounds like you've managed to have a different experience than I have, but in 8th and 9th every game I've played has been pretty purely decided by the matchup lookup chart (usually either a "play army X -> you lose" or "play matchup Y -> you lose", not even "who rolled dice better?" )

The bit of the lookup chart I particularly hate is "use Forge World models -> lose"; I like Forge World models.


...which is pretty weird, given just how many forgeworld models are currently staples of competitive tournament play.
There are a select few FW things that are good. Everything else tends to be utter crap.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: