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.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I'm curious what was the issue in 5th?

Very powerful vehicle armies, tournaments often just had razorback spam and rifledreads and it was basically two armies just shooting at each other with cheap attack vehicles.

Unless you were one of the ones without such things, like orks who before IG came out with their S10 missles and vendetta had Nob Biker spam, CSM were forced to make due with plague marines and DP's and oblits (yeah not much has changed there, just add heldrakes). IG had chimera spam, Nids were just screwed.

Hey, at least you could get a game done in well under 4 hours in 5th... hell, set-up in 6th edition always takes at least an hour...

Oh that's very true, I'm just pointing out the issues as he asked about.

Take this with a grain of salt, but 7th is my favorite edition yet. I don't seem to have an issue with time. I recently played in a tournament at a local FLGS and it was 1850. We had 2 hour time limits (not counting deployment), and I had no trouble finishing every game through the 6th turn (if applicable). Maybe that's because it was a tournament setting and people tend to have lean lists. I could see where some of the demon summoning lists could be very time consuming, but I guess those lists don't make it to the tournament meta... or at least not yet.

As far as the SW Codex... I am not traditionally a SW player, but this codex has inspired me to become one. I have a couple of really cool builds in my head that I am going to start collecting. I think there is a lot of good stuff coming out of this book, as well as from the supplement. I think they did a good job on bringing sub-par units up to snuff (thunderwolves), and bringing some of the undercosted units back into alignment (grey hunters). Jury is still out on the Dreadnoughts, as I'm just not confident in them yet, but I really didn't see anything that was off-putting. This is coming from a perspective of someone who doesn't have an invalidated build though, so I can understand the disappointment.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Jayden63 wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Am I the only one massively amused by the idea that if an HQ, even at T5, isn't an Eternal Warrior, it's just not good enough?

Yeah... in my case it's annoying because I tooled up my Wolf Lord as a character assassin, but now he can't go toe-to-toe with the best of them. I'm thinking now he'll be a heavy infantry killer with a squad of Termies, with Arjac soaking up challenges. I'm thinking Runic or Terminator Armour + Black Death + Storm Shield + Wulfen Stone. That's 210pts with up to 9 S7 AP2 attacks on the charge.

How is he still not a character assassin. I can count the number of guys on one hand that can kill a T5 4 wound model at initiative. Let alone one with a 2+/3++ save. And once your talking S10, unwieldy AP2 weapons that number drops to 2.

I find that people are just too afraid of instagibbing. T5 is a real game changer when it comes to what one should be afraid to field.

If I ran my lord on a Thunderwolf, then I would not be afraid of ID, but I don't (simply because I've had the model since 3rd edition). I have to worry more about artillery, stray lascannons, etc and now powerfists and MCs. That said, I'm somewhat sad about this, but I'm totally going to adapt.

I will likely run my TWC a lot more now though.

Davor wrote:
A lot of people have it easy playing SW and yet some people are complaining the loss of Eternal Warrior? After all, there are a few codices that don't have Eternal Warrior at all, and have a harder time playing.

Try playing Tyranids

Hey, I play Nids as well, and I definitely feel the pain. Stupid, stupid, stupid Codex...

Does anyone here is aware of the nerf to eternal warrior? you only need two wounds to instagid a eternalwarrior, so the wolves dindt have such a big lose here, in the past codex i always gave EW to my thunderw lord, but now that i am thinking about it i never make use of that, even fighting against necrons and theirs tachion arrows, thats why you give two wolf pets to the lord, this also shows why he is better to stay with a unit

Huh? What are you talking about? There is NO SUCH nerf to EW. None. Made up./

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Huh? What are you talking about? There is NO SUCH nerf to EW. None. Made up./

Helfrost is a pretty big nerf to eternal warrior.

 Yonan wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Huh? What are you talking about? There is NO SUCH nerf to EW. None. Made up./

Helfrost is a pretty big nerf to eternal warrior.

This had nothing to do with helfrost, just saying "you only need two wounds to instagib an EW" - which veen if from Helfrost isnt true. You only need one, and some luck.

Helfrost is not really a nerf to EW.

There are lot fewer models with EW these days than previous editions.

A model has to be hit, wounded, fail its save, fail FnP if it has it, as well as any rerolls it may have to those then has to fail a strength test.

so lets just assume you get to the part where the model has failed everything up to the strength test.

if you are strength 3 you fail on a 4,5,6
if you are strength 4 you fail on a 5,6
if you are strength 5 or higher you fail on a 6

most models with EW are at least strength 4, so on average you will not fail the helfrost until the model has already suffered 3 wounds. Many models that have EW and strength 4 are 3-4 wounds models so either you either were dieing anyways, or you lost out on a wound.

Of course Helfrost can get lucky and gib a model on the first fail, and it can also get "lucky" and never go off.

There are other items like this in the game, like hexrifles. Most people do not seem to fear them or even acknowledge they exist. Those have sniper and can be ap 2 and allocate their hits to a model in the unit via percision shot.

Honestly I would be more concerned about the strength/ap of helfrost being used against your units, and people trying for lucky removal of big MCs, than the chance it can end an EW model early.

TBH I find Hellfrost a bit underwhelming and I would never choose a Hellfrost weapon over another just because of that rule.
Like blaktoof says, the odds of it taking out a character are slim.
Perhaps I'd feel differently if there were MCs in my local meta... but there aren't