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.

Threads are already up in the proposed rules forum.

SM in general: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/781101.page

IH in particular: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/781418.page

White Scars are almost as busted as IH and IF and Salamanders are going to be in the same ballpark as White Scars if not at or above IH level. UM and RG need nerfs and the best Successors need nerfs as well unless GW gets into a really stupidly high gear and produces rules for everyone that makes them comparable.

Feirros would be useless compared to Successors at 220, he's half the reason anyone would run actual IH and you're making him not only fair but actually overcosted considering you're also basically halving the amount he heals. Nothing should ever be increased by 100% in pts cost, it's absolutely absurd how undercosted he is, but it's not fair to hurt people that bought him this bad. He should still be a viable meta unit, increase his cost by 20 pts, that's still relatively huge for his current cost. Or make an emergency one-time nerf of 40 pts, but 110 pts for a model that's less than 150 is not okay. Is he the most undercosted unit ever? Probably, but he's also worth less than 250 pts, at the end of the day him alone doesn't an 80% win-rate faction make and invalidating people's brand new purchase is terribly unfair.

At the end of the day it's more important that people can play with their toys than everything is perfectly balanced, currently, the lack of balance makes me not want to put my toys up against IH, that's a problem, but a 100% increase in Feirros is too blunt a change.

Nobody is going to continue playing IH with your changes and there are powerful alternatives and in the future we'll see even more alternatives that might be even more powerful.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Yes, other factions have it, specifically those that are "in the lore" without psykers such as World Eaters and (formerly?) Black Templars.

That's a fair point. For armies where it's their only real psychic defense, having a strat to shut down a single power seems less of an issue. (Though there's nothing stopping those armies from souping at the moment, and for some factions like Sisters of Battle they actually are a very good Soup choice for CP batteries anyways.)

Well, it's a 75% shot with a re-roll, and if it's game-ending, you'll take the roll. Either way, a 50/50 chance at insta-winning against armies like GSC or Ravenguard or so is great value.

That's less of a fair point. The 75% uses up an extra command point, *and* it uses up your only reroll for the turn, so if you have other psychic defense you're potentially leaving yourself in the lurch if you roll low for a DTW check where you really needed to roll high.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Vecting a psychic power needs to go up to 2 or better 3 CP IMO.

It's as much a gg as the genuine agents of vect if they turn off a no-overwatch spell or something and the match is just over.

Keep in mind that, unlike Vecting, it's only a 50/50 shot. (And a bunch of other factions have this same strat.)

Well, it's a 75% shot with a re-roll, and if it's game-ending, you'll take the roll. Either way, a 50/50 chance at insta-winning against armies like GSC or Ravenguard or so is great value.

Yes, other factions have it, specifically those that are "in the lore" without psykers such as World Eaters and (formerly?) Black Templars.

Maybe too fidgety, but since Aeldari now have some strats with different costs for some sub-factions in Psychic Awakening, it'd ideally want to see it rolled into mono-faction bonuses: e.g. if you play mono-World Eaters or Graia, it's a 1 CP strat, but if you soup, it's a 3 CP strat, since it just becomes just another safety net in addition to your psykers, etc.. and just shuts down some armies way too hard IMO.

That 75% with the reroll is literally another CP to add. Your argument makes no sense.

Not turn waaaghpower, phase. Some posters don’t play that much I suspect...

Waaaghpower wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Yes, other factions have it, specifically those that are "in the lore" without psykers such as World Eaters and (formerly?) Black Templars.

That's a fair point. For armies where it's their only real psychic defense, having a strat to shut down a single power seems less of an issue. (Though there's nothing stopping those armies from souping at the moment, and for some factions like Sisters of Battle they actually are a very good Soup choice for CP batteries anyways.)

Well, it's a 75% shot with a re-roll, and if it's game-ending, you'll take the roll. Either way, a 50/50 chance at insta-winning against armies like GSC or Ravenguard or so is great value.

That's less of a fair point. The 75% uses up an extra command point, *and* it uses up your only reroll for the turn, so if you have other psychic defense you're potentially leaving yourself in the lurch if you roll low for a DTW check where you really needed to roll high.

Well, the strat is used only after your DTW has failed. And that's the issue: You have a DTW on top.

Again, the classic example is GSC vs. Iron Hands. They have to clear your screens. They have to deepstrike and spend 3 CP to get in closer. They probably have to spend another 3 CP to vect your Auspex Scan if you have any infantry as a Marine player. They still have to roll an insane charge with Repulsors being -2 to charge, likely sitting on terrain, etc.., etc.. . Probably spend more CP on that. And after that, they need a no-overwatch spell to even get their T3 bodies through a million of Marine-shots (on 5+ or 4+ for Iron Hands) with all the insane new Marine re-rolls, their spell gets vected on a 4+ for a measly 1 CP. And if they fail any of that, it's gg, game over.

It's the most extreme example, but again, it's an instant-game-winning strat invalidating entire Codexes. Eldar setting up their entire army to maybe having a shot at taking down a -1 damage Repulsor and losing doom. Etc.. Stuff like that shouldn't come at 1 CP IMO.

addnid wrote:
Not turn waaaghpower, phase. Some posters don’t play that much I suspect...

Ah, yes. I used the wrong term, but continued on referencing only the consequences in the psychic phase, so it must be that I don't play very much and not that I just misspoke.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Yes, other factions have it, specifically those that are "in the lore" without psykers such as World Eaters and (formerly?) Black Templars.

That's a fair point. For armies where it's their only real psychic defense, having a strat to shut down a single power seems less of an issue. (Though there's nothing stopping those armies from souping at the moment, and for some factions like Sisters of Battle they actually are a very good Soup choice for CP batteries anyways.)

Well, it's a 75% shot with a re-roll, and if it's game-ending, you'll take the roll. Either way, a 50/50 chance at insta-winning against armies like GSC or Ravenguard or so is great value.

That's less of a fair point. The 75% uses up an extra command point, *and* it uses up your only reroll for the turn, so if you have other psychic defense you're potentially leaving yourself in the lurch if you roll low for a DTW check where you really needed to roll high.

Well, the strat is used only after your DTW has failed. And that's the issue: You have a DTW on top.

Again, the classic example is GSC vs. Iron Hands. They have to clear your screens. They have to deepstrike and spend 3 CP to get in closer. They probably have to spend another 3 CP to vect your Auspex Scan if you have any infantry as a Marine player. They still have to roll an insane charge with Repulsors being -2 to charge, likely sitting on terrain, etc.., etc.. . Probably spend more CP on that. And after that, they need a no-overwatch spell to even get their T3 bodies through a million of Marine-shots (on 5+ or 4+ for Iron Hands) with all the insane new Marine re-rolls, their spell gets vected on a 4+ for a measly 1 CP. And if they fail any of that, it's gg, game over.

It's the most extreme example, but again, it's an instant-game-winning strat invalidating entire Codexes. Eldar setting up their entire army to maybe having a shot at taking down a -1 damage Repulsor and losing doom. Etc.. Stuff like that shouldn't come at 1 CP IMO.

There's a bigger flaw here:
If your army relies on passing with a single, specific psychic power in order to win, then your army kind of sucks anyways. You should be able to get by without psychic powers, because psychic powers are notoriously unreliable to begin with - they should be a force multiplier that helps, not a necessary part of your army.

Also, a clever GSC doesn't have to clear screens, they just have to use those screens for free mobility. A clever player can use screens as safe havens against shooting - carefully engage so that you don't have many attacks, then use consolidation movement to wrap the target so they can't fall back. Then, on the opponents turn, fall in and get a bunch of attacks and kill them. (Or bring in regular Genestealer allies with Kraken tactics and just fall back willy nilly.)

my thoughts.

first of all.

-Remove the over watch on 5-6 chapter trait. there is no reason why Ironhands should get 3 traits and everyone else gets 2. especially given that a 6 FNP and the tanks do not degrade trait are both pretty good. I think GW was concerned about Ironhands infantry only getting one trait in this, but the does not degrade trait is a sucessor trait so clearly they're not. and if they really are they concerned, make the overwatch on 5-6 an infantry only thing.

-make the re-roll 1s thing only when stationary. I do like this.

-Bump Ferrios up to 200 points. (they can always raise him up further if he's still too good for his points)

- Ironstone: Allow it to work once per turn.

There's a bigger flaw here:
If your army relies on passing with a single, specific psychic power in order to win, then your army kind of sucks anyways. You should be able to get by without psychic powers, because psychic powers are notoriously unreliable to begin with - they should be a force multiplier that helps, not a necessary part of your army.

Csm dex 2.0 didn't quite get the Memo.
What should someone do there?
"oh you wanted to warptime that discordant? Nope" is not a fun situation period. Especially now with the massive discrepancies of propper updates again.

Not Online!!! wrote:

There's a bigger flaw here:
If your army relies on passing with a single, specific psychic power in order to win, then your army kind of sucks anyways. You should be able to get by without psychic powers, because psychic powers are notoriously unreliable to begin with - they should be a force multiplier that helps, not a necessary part of your army.

Csm dex 2.0 didn't quite get the Memo.
What should someone do there?
"oh you wanted to warptime that discordant? Nope" is not a fun situation period. Especially now with the massive discrepancies of propper updates again.

I will say, this is one of the few things I think 7th edition got better than 8th - Having the option to supercharge certain powers at the cost of not being able to cast others was an interesting and useful mechanic that made necessary powers more acceptable.
Everything else about the psychic phase was crap, but that particular mechanic was nice.

BrianDavion wrote:
my thoughts.

first of all.

-Remove the over watch on 5-6 chapter trait. there is no reason why Ironhands should get 3 traits and everyone else gets 2. especially given that a 6 FNP and the tanks do not degrade trait are both pretty good. I think GW was concerned about Ironhands infantry only getting one trait in this, but the does not degrade trait is a sucessor trait so clearly they're not. and if they really are they concerned, make the overwatch on 5-6 an infantry only thing.

-make the re-roll 1s thing only when stationary. I do like this.

-Bump Ferrios up to 200 points. (they can always raise him up further if he's still too good for his points)

- Ironstone: Allow it to work once per turn.

Anyone thinking Ferrios should be the same price or higher than Calgar is not thinking straight whatsoever.

I don't think you're seeing the bigger picture. You're comparing apples to oranges. Calgar and Feirros are not the same type of character.

Feirros is a better HQ than Calgar, not in a vacuum but as part of the Iron Hands army.

Yes, Calgar hit harder and has a re roll aura. Those things are not as useful as whar Feirros provides.

It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

 NurglesR0T wrote:
It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

I was going to criticize you for not actually having anything ironic in your statement, but I guess Dakkadakka being correct is pretty ironic.






(Just in case that was too subtle, dakka was right, they were garbage in need of buffs. They received those buffs and were good. Then received more buffs and were TOO good. At no point in this process was dakka wrong about any of that. For once.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ishagu wrote:
I don't think you're seeing the bigger picture. You're comparing apples to oranges. Calgar and Feirros are not the same type of character.

Feirros is a better HQ than Calgar, not in a vacuum but as part of the Iron Hands army.

Yes, Calgar hit harder and has a re roll aura. Those things are not as useful as whar Feirros provides.

He just does too much at once. The invul aura alone would make him worth 110 ponts for just about any ironhands build. Even my gimmick list with 3 stormtalons and 9 landspeeders uses him to survive going second, despite him being largely useless after that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:
my thoughts.

first of all.

-Remove the over watch on 5-6 chapter trait. there is no reason why Ironhands should get 3 traits and everyone else gets 2. especially given that a 6 FNP and the tanks do not degrade trait are both pretty good. I think GW was concerned about Ironhands infantry only getting one trait in this, but the does not degrade trait is a sucessor trait so clearly they're not. and if they really are they concerned, make the overwatch on 5-6 an infantry only thing.

-make the re-roll 1s thing only when stationary. I do like this.

-Bump Ferrios up to 200 points. (they can always raise him up further if he's still too good for his points)

- Ironstone: Allow it to work once per turn.

I play ironhands. My space marine army has been paired down to exclusively dreadnoughts and troop choices at this point so that's my background when I say this:

1. I agree. I thought that was total overkill when I first read it.
2. I agree and it make sense. You shouldn't be able to blast across the board, shoot without penalty AND get a captains reroll for free.
3. I would say 150 to start. If you nerf the ironstone as well(which you should) Feirros is nerfed by proxy.
4. I would nerf it to only affect 1 unit per phase, selected at the start of the phase. That way it's still really good but can't make triple repulsor executioners invincible.

Opening post has too many debuffs in one hit. Need to be selective about it.

My preference would be to remove overwatch bonus and adjust or even remove doctrine reroll 1s.

People are saying removing rerolls makes it worse than UM doctrine but it needs to be looked at a faction as a whole. Strictly speaking IH allows it to remain in Devastator doctrine the whole time and from T1 so it is still super strong compared to UM. This also keeps the OG flavour that GW had intended.

Iron Stone stopping 1 vehicle is fine too. Sure it wont help that much early game but late game when your onto your last vehcile and you've removed some threats, its going to make that last vehicle pretty durable. In fact I would even allow it nominate 1 vehicle and the stone be attached to said vehicle.

Ferrios is probably the 150-180 point range. Removing the reroll in the doctrine will also mean you need to invest in a captain and theres no reason why IH doesnt fight without captains.

regarding point 2. I think it's worth comparing the Ironhands doctrine trait to the Ultramarines doctrine trait. Ironhands ignore the -1 penalty for firing heavy weapons, and get to re-roll 1s. Ultramarines may treat a unit that has moved as if it didn't. if iron hands get a "eaither or" they are going to be a bit weaker then Ultramarines in the super doctrine. but I think over all the re-roll 1s when stationary is still gonna make up for it.

But IH gets its super doctrine from T1, that alone is a huge buff IMO.

Ishagu wrote:The fact that I can stack the following onto an IH Repulsor looks comical when you write it down:

-Profile doesn't degrade
-Always hit on a 2+

Please explain how an IH vehicle with 1 wound remaining doesnt degrade ? And please explain how an IH vehicle always hits on 2+. What rule allows them to auto hit on 2+ ??

Aenar wrote:- IH Chapter tactic: take away Overwatch on 5s and 6s

How can IH hit on overwatch when they dont hit on 6s ?? You want to remove their overwatch ??

 p5freak wrote:

Ishagu wrote:The fact that I can stack the following onto an IH Repulsor looks comical when you write it down:

-Profile doesn't degrade
-Always hit on a 2+

Please explain how an IH vehicle with 1 wound remaining doesnt degrade ? And please explain how an IH vehicle always hits on 2+. What rule allows them to auto hit on 2+ ??

Aenar wrote:- IH Chapter tactic: take away Overwatch on 5s and 6s

How can IH hit on overwatch when they dont hit on 6s ?? You want to remove their overwatch ??

He's referring to Ferrios buff Signum Array.

The other stuff i think you can use your brain to figure out what he meant.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Also, a clever GSC doesn't have to clear screens, they just have to use those screens for free mobility. A clever player can use screens as safe havens against shooting - carefully engage so that you don't have many attacks, then use consolidation movement to wrap the target so they can't fall back. Then, on the opponents turn, fall in and get a bunch of attacks and kill them. (Or bring in regular Genestealer allies with Kraken tactics and just fall back willy nilly.)

Sure. A clever player can. And a clever Iron Hands player can again do some clever positioning around that. Etc...

That's not the point. The armies need to be balanced, including between two first-time 40K players playing their first game ever, one playing Iron Hands and one GSC.

If the requirement for one army is "just play smarter" to overcome a basic discrepancy in math and ease of stratagem-use, it just means the armies aren't balanced and should be re-balanced.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Also, a clever GSC doesn't have to clear screens, they just have to use those screens for free mobility. A clever player can use screens as safe havens against shooting - carefully engage so that you don't have many attacks, then use consolidation movement to wrap the target so they can't fall back. Then, on the opponents turn, fall in and get a bunch of attacks and kill them. (Or bring in regular Genestealer allies with Kraken tactics and just fall back willy nilly.)

Sure. A clever player can. And a clever Iron Hands player can again do some clever positioning around that. Etc...

That's not the point. The armies need to be balanced, including between two first-time 40K players playing their first game ever, one playing Iron Hands and one GSC.

If the requirement for one army is "just play smarter" to overcome a basic discrepancy in math and ease of stratagem-use, it just means the armies aren't balanced and should be re-balanced.

You can't make every list and faction equally hard to master or have the same skill ceiling, an IH player is going to start seeing a decline in how much better he gets after ten games, a GSC player maybe 50 games. The game needs to be somewhat balanced at as many levels of the game as possible, putting a higher priority on higher levels of play. I don't think it's unreasonable to have factions that are hard to learn and play well, that might very well be a selling point, even to someone that isn't a veteran but just likes complicated mechanics and a challenging learning curve. Even if IH were balanced for competitive play they'd still be unbalanced for casual play and if you balanced GSC for casual play they'd be unbeatable in competitive. Teach the reps about how difficult each army is to learn and master so they can educate potential buyers and you should be fine, just another piece in the puzzle of finding the right army for a buyer. When IH are better for top tier competitive play than GSC we have a problem, not when IH are better for a first game, you just can't balance the game entirely around a first game experience. Instead you might want to engineer a balanced first game experience with a boxed set like DG vs UM. If the game becomes less and less balanced as you learn and play against more advanced players then the game wouldn't be very fun.

Sunny Side Up wrote:


That's not the point. The armies need to be balanced, including between two first-time 40K players playing their first game ever, one playing Iron Hands and one GSC.

If the requirement for one army is "just play smarter" to overcome a basic discrepancy in math and ease of stratagem-use, it just means the armies aren't balanced and should be re-balanced.

This has to be one of the silliest comments. Two first time 40k players taking genuine random armies would have no major issue with IH rules. There are many ways to build IH and not make it unbearable, its just human nature for people to google and look up comp lists and make it the norm.

Warhammer will never be a balanced game when it comes to competition. Its not GW's intent when writing rules. They are making a tonne of money from this marine release.

 Smirrors wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:


That's not the point. The armies need to be balanced, including between two first-time 40K players playing their first game ever, one playing Iron Hands and one GSC.

If the requirement for one army is "just play smarter" to overcome a basic discrepancy in math and ease of stratagem-use, it just means the armies aren't balanced and should be re-balanced.

This has to be one of the silliest comments. Two first time 40k players taking genuine random armies would have no major issue with IH rules. There are many ways to build IH and not make it unbearable, its just human nature for people to google and look up comp lists and make it the norm.

Warhammer will never be a balanced game when it comes to competition. Its not GW's intent when writing rules. They are making a tonne of money from this marine release.

Just like they made a tonne of money in 7th edition by power creeping every codex and turning more and more players away? Having an accessible and fair ruleset sells models, it's not that a balanced SM release wouldn't sell more in the long run, it'd just be too much effort or some stupid exec gave the development too little time to write this. If you know you have limited time you should probably err on the side of caution, but if an exec said #1 make them competitive and #2 don't spend 6 weeks testing it to make sure it doesn't break competitive balance entirely then I can see how this mess was made.

I do not play IH, but i feel at this point they need unique points on everything in the army. Pointed specifically to what they have access to as an army.

If GW wants to stack rules like this, they have to know they cannot just have points the same across the board.

Apple fox wrote:
I do not play IH, but i feel at this point they need unique points on everything in the army. Pointed specifically to what they have access to as an army.

If GW wants to stack rules like this, they have to know they cannot just have points the same across the board.

Well, obviously not going to happen, but from a game-design perspective, obviously that would've been ideal (especially as they did print separate supplements where a page with point could've been included).

If Ultramarine Aggressors are better than non-Ultramarine Aggressors, they should be more expensive in the UM book to be balanced vs. non-Ultramarine Aggressors.
If White Scars Assault Centurions are better than non-White Scars Assault Centurions, they should be more expensive in the Whtie Scars book to be balanced vs. non-White Scars Assault Centurions
If Ravenguard Snipers are better than non-Ravenguard Snipers, they should be more expensive in the Ravenguard book to be balanced vs. non-Ravenguard Snipers.
Etc...,
Etc...,

If i was designer i would go first on this things:
1. Full reroll aura on subpar characters is to strong.
The ability to give captains full rerolls should be 3 CP and for phase. All characters having this ability should be priced around 200 pts. It just make your army to efficient in any format and the captain can increase the aura to 9 inches with the relic.
2. The deployment on the entire board by units like scouts should be removed. This ability is to strong in any format, because it deny your opponent movement, could stop them from scoring and give you extra points. It give you positioning advantage for free. You should be allowd to redeploy maximum 9 inches from your zone or only in your zone. Remember aeldar rangers could have deepstike only in their zone and that was removed. The other option is all units with this treat to get points increase.
3. Leithenants should give rerolls only in the fight phase. That will make G-Man not replacable by 160-180 pts characters.

 p5freak wrote:
[

Aenar wrote:- IH Chapter tactic: take away Overwatch on 5s and 6s

How can IH hit on overwatch when they dont hit on 6s ?? You want to remove their overwatch ??

If I find myself running a close combat oriented army against them, then yes, yes I do.

 p5freak wrote:

Aenar wrote:- IH Chapter tactic: take away Overwatch on 5s and 6s

How can IH hit on overwatch when they dont hit on 6s ?? You want to remove their overwatch ??

I don't know if you're being serious or not Anyway, I'd take away the Overwatch on 5s and let them do it on 6s like everyone else (5s using their Optimal Repulsion Doctrines stratagem).

A lot of the IH abilities are great for alpha strike protection. The Ironstone bearer being a weak link is mitigated by Cogitated Martyrdom.

I don't want to lose that. But I also don't want it to apply for the whole game. Having the Ironstone apply only once a game would render it exactly as powerful as the rest of the relics available to IH, in my estimation.

The second issue is the doctrine bonus. They outright remove the one 8th edition trade-off marine vehicles have had to contend with: accuracy vs mobility vs cost. You sometimes only get to pick two, and even then it isn't always the best trade. I honestly felt like that moving and firing without penalty on marine vehicles should have been baseline, and the platforms priced accordingly, rather than it being an IH only benefit. That ship has sailed, but this bonus needs to be adjusted a bit.

But how do you alter this? Limit their time in Devastator doctrine by forcing a change? Then every IH player just builds a list knowing that 1 CP goes to rolling back the doctrine. Do we apply it only to Infantry? That could work.

I think changing it would be the best option. Either so it applies only to infantry, or changing the rule entirely so stationary units re-roll 1s with heavy weapons.

At this stage, and if the IF and Salamanders turn out to be very strong too, we could take the nuclear option and ban all the SM supplements.

More seriously, the real problem with IH is the almost endless list of interlocking buffs and bonuses they get. That makes altering things a bit tricky because you have so many different levers to pull. I like limiting the re-roll 1s to hit to stationary stuff only and increasing Ferrios to around 160-180 would be a good start too. The re-rolls in particular is annopying, because it does what GW often does and has unintended side effects, like making IH Land Speeders better than White Scars ones.