Crazy Jay wrote:
What’s with GW
decision to have have 3 model units with with forced mixed weapons? As a DA
, Nid, IK player it’s never really come up but I picked up the Indomitus box and decided to keep the Necrons. The units I’m specifically talking about are the Skorpehk Destroys and the Ophydian destroyers. I’m not sure if other boxes/armies are doing it, but I can’t say I’m a fan.
It makes some tactical sense, and also removes some of the player-choices that almost* make less sense(*in the grand scheme of huge wars). So having a 1-in-3 model with the stronger weapon means that the unit can handle bigger threats while the other 2 can handle more varied enemies. The Player Choice issues are the vast numbers of lists with noting more than basic guns on Minimum sized troops units(The "troop tax"); troops should be the core of your army outside of some specific missions(as in, a pitched battle would be troops, spec ops would be elite/fast attack, etc.) and if they can take heavy/special weapons, they should(Squad support weapons are a real thing for a reason).
also seems to be sort of all over the place in this regard: Primaris units must all take the same weapons in every unit(Eradicators and Eliminators are the rare exceptions); I would rather have a single Flamestorm Aggressor in my Boltstorm aggressors unit(in 8th at least), Or an Intercessor squad with 1-3 Stalker bolt rifles and the rest with regular or Auto.
Forcing the options with fairly balanced weapons and the same cost/model(2 extra Lower-strength, but still deadly attacks per 3 models) is fine.