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.

 Galef wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Leviathan, as-in Nids? Yeah if you have 3+ save Monsters having Cover turn 1 regardless of actually being in cover would be pretty amazing. But that fits my earily comment about armies with lots of Tanks
Gribblies, not so much. Having a 6+ turn into a 5+ is pretty meh, especially whin many armies have loads of AP -1 or -2.

I play Eldar, and this strat really helps me if I don't get first turn, but at the same time, it takes away 2CPs that are crucial for other things. My list only ever have 9-10CPs and what these changes guarantee is that I will never use the Webway strat ever again.

-

So IGs having a 5+ save all this time was perfectly fine and all those whining was for nothing? 5+ on gribblies is huge.

It certainly helps against some armies, but Armies like Eldar and Necrons, whose basic weaponry have some form of AP, cover doesn't really do much for Hordes.
Where it help is on things that already have decent saves (3+ or better) that cannot easily hide (so vehicles and monsters), however those same armies (Eldar and Necrons) have Ap-4 and AP-5 that they are already using against those targets.
And 8+ save going to a 7+ is still no save at all. All this really does is make more potential for 6+ saves. Is that worth 2Cps? Maybe, maybe not

It's a good strat, but I really don't see it shifting the meta enough away from gunlines, especially since it also helps gunlines
The issue with Guard having 5+ is that they are super cheap and hard to shift due their being so, so many bodies.

-

Depends on the meaning that you give to gunline. If you mean the canonic gunline which never moves and abuses long range, then yes the meta will move away from it. If by that you mean lists with a lot of shooting then no, it will not. The name of the game will be beta strike now.

Spoletta wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Leviathan, as-in Nids? Yeah if you have 3+ save Monsters having Cover turn 1 regardless of actually being in cover would be pretty amazing. But that fits my earily comment about armies with lots of Tanks
Gribblies, not so much. Having a 6+ turn into a 5+ is pretty meh, especially whin many armies have loads of AP -1 or -2.

I play Eldar, and this strat really helps me if I don't get first turn, but at the same time, it takes away 2CPs that are crucial for other things. My list only ever have 9-10CPs and what these changes guarantee is that I will never use the Webway strat ever again.

-

So IGs having a 5+ save all this time was perfectly fine and all those whining was for nothing? 5+ on gribblies is huge.

It certainly helps against some armies, but Armies like Eldar and Necrons, whose basic weaponry have some form of AP, cover doesn't really do much for Hordes.
Where it help is on things that already have decent saves (3+ or better) that cannot easily hide (so vehicles and monsters), however those same armies (Eldar and Necrons) have Ap-4 and AP-5 that they are already using against those targets.
And 8+ save going to a 7+ is still no save at all. All this really does is make more potential for 6+ saves. Is that worth 2Cps? Maybe, maybe not

It's a good strat, but I really don't see it shifting the meta enough away from gunlines, especially since it also helps gunlines
The issue with Guard having 5+ is that they are super cheap and hard to shift due their being so, so many bodies.

-

Depends on the meaning that you give to gunline. If you mean the canonic gunline which never moves and abuses long range, then yes the meta will move away from it. If by that you mean lists with a lot of shooting then no, it will not. The name of the game will be beta strike now.

40k has always had a lot of shooting. It's kind of a defining feature that seperated/s it from WFB and AoS: almost everyone has a gun.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It was one of a number of problems that we had in the game.

YES, it hurts Assault Marines, but seeing as they sucked even with the ability to hop units with variants of them being seen as barely any better, something needs to be done to the game other than leaving in a rule that was heavily abused in ways that weren't intended.

Ok, lets say that something like a slam captin was abuse. Now it gets removed. How does the person whose codex is based around the use of the said captin, jump pack units etc is suppose to play. Because it seems to me, and I could be wrong though, that the person would be playing a worse version of a vanila marine lists.

It is also strange how the FAQ seems to fix only some things. Nothing about the eldar gunlines was nerfed to the degree BAs got nerfed.

The plus changes seem to help horde armies the most. The +1sv thing for example. Great if you have the CP, and a lot of models to get buffed by it. But if your army is 15-18 models, then the avarge shoting army cripples you turn 1 +1 to save or not. , if you decide to sit in full LoS.

Well at least I found one good thing about the FAQ the interceptors move as if they had fly, but they don't really have it, so it seems like they are going to be able to fly through terrain and models just like before the FAQ. Unless of course that got changed somewhere outside of the GK FAQ.

40k has always had a lot of shooting. It's kind of a defining feature that seperated/s it from WFB and AoS: almost everyone has a gun.

Ok, but why is there such a huge difference in the shoting quality of armies, when the point upgrades to melee weapons are super high cost, but GW makes it harder and harder to reach melee. They cost GK nemezis force weapons as if all GK had at least 16" movment.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Pandabeer wrote:
It's not because it doesn't make any sense whatsoever and needlessly overcomplicates things. I, and I think with me most players, assumed you can only HI if one of your own units within HI distance gets charged. Which would be perfectly in line with the rule name. Heroic commander comes to the aid of his subjects that get charged and are threatened to be brutally slaughtered by the hated enemy. HI as you describe it is just a silly and complicated way to prevent overwatch and create no-go zones for the enemy. Abuseable by high level players, unuseable by casuals who just want to play a game and don't bother so much with inchmongering. On the other hand, disallowing fly in the charge phase hits casual players with assault armies like a sledgehammer.

It was one of a number of problems that we had in the game.

YES, it hurts Assault Marines, but seeing as they sucked even with the ability to hop units with variants of them being seen as barely any better, something needs to be done to the game other than leaving in a rule that was heavily abused in ways that weren't intended.

I'd much rather have the "0 inch charge" problem solved the logical way: force charges to be measured base-to-base, even from different floors in buildings. If you stand exactly 1 floor above a model you want to charge, you need to make a 3" charge. Problem solved. If you find your screens being constantly jump-charged over, screen smarter. Second problem solved. Hell, you could even impose a 1" charge distance penalty if the charging unit needs to jump over a screen. Would make sense too because you need to spend energy gaining enough height to make the jump. In fact, that has just given me a brilliant idea to solve both issues:

Charging towards higher terrain or jump-charging over obstacles (edit: this is in addition to making charges base-to-base by the way): "For every 3" of height the charging unit needs to cover upwards (measured from the charging units' base), the charging unit incurs a 1" penalty to their charge roll, up to a maximum of a 3" penalty. Obstacles more than 9" higher than the charging unit cannot be jumped over during a charge. Units count as 3" of height. Monsters and Vehicles count as 6" of height, and Titanic units cannot be jump-charged over at all. Descending during a charge does not incur penalties, even if there are other units at a lower altitude between you and the target unit."

"so rather then nerf guard CP batteries we just nerfed the things they where powering, to the mono codex players, feth you"

Karol wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It was one of a number of problems that we had in the game.

YES, it hurts Assault Marines, but seeing as they sucked even with the ability to hop units with variants of them being seen as barely any better, something needs to be done to the game other than leaving in a rule that was heavily abused in ways that weren't intended.

Ok, lets say that something like a slam captin was abuse. Now it gets removed. How does the person whose codex is based around the use of the said captin, jump pack units etc is suppose to play. Because it seems to me, and I could be wrong though, that the person would be playing a worse version of a vanila marine lists.

It is also strange how the FAQ seems to fix only some things. Nothing about the eldar gunlines was nerfed to the degree BAs got nerfed.

The plus changes seem to help horde armies the most. The +1sv thing for example. Great if you have the CP, and a lot of models to get buffed by it. But if your army is 15-18 models, then the avarge shoting army cripples you turn 1 +1 to save or not. , if you decide to sit in full LoS.

Well at least I found one good thing about the FAQ the interceptors move as if they had fly, but they don't really have it, so it seems like they are going to be able to fly through terrain and models just like before the FAQ. Unless of course that got changed somewhere outside of the GK FAQ.

Blood Angels are still better than Vanilla unless you're playing a successor (like Flesh Tearers) and lose access to all your toys.

And I see a lot of melee oriented players stuck on this idea that we have actual gunline armies in this edition and that said gunlines are somehow dominant. You kids are adorable and don't seem to be using terms properly. No, gunlines aren't the thing you see where someone has a lot of shooting in a mobile army list. That's just a balanced list that relies on shooting to do damage. A gunline is a static, long ranged army, that relies on heavy firepower and a lot of ablative wounds to screen their static tanks. Nothing moves ever and your main source of winning is to shoot your opponent off the table so they can't claim any objective that you're not already sitting on.

Only those armies were nerfed by how AP doesn't work as well as it used to, blast markers went away and it's harder to use cover to protect your tanks in a gunline since you can't claim cover just by being partially obscured by an intervening unit.

If you're sitting on 15-18 models for an army, you're either playing a small game, or playing a Jetbike Custodes list. In the first I say: play bigger games, the second I say: play a more balanced list.

But gunlines are there, the fact that they can now actually move very fast and redeploy makes the matters worse not better.
If I knew that an eldar or IG player has to sit there for 3 turns killing 2/3 of my army till I get in to melee and then the dice decide who wins it would be ok. Right now my GK can't reach melee or shoting fast enough. And I doubt having rhinos or land raiders would change much.

Sometimes it gets even more extrem. My friend fields a lot of reapers, some of the DE flyers and s spears behind them. If I try to shot them, they out shot me. If I try assault they counter charge me with jetbikes and kill my dudes after shoting most of them dead. If I try to go for objectives, my army doesn't have the shoting to cripple his when am not doing melee, but I still have to pay the points for nemezis weapons I almost never get to use. It also doesn't have the resiliance to stay on objectives for 4-5 turns till the game ends.

A GK paladin costs more then a jebike custodes, and all guides for GK say I should be using them as they are better then termintors. They also have more wounds. And I play 2000pts games.

GK don't work ATM. So they are a bad benchmark.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Danny slag wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Danny slag wrote:
A gunline that balls up around an aura and slowly walks forward a few inches is still a gunline.

By your definition any army that relies on shooting is a gunline regardless of how it actually plays. You're watering down a term to be next to meaningless just so you can claim to be right.

Funny then that you don't ever address any of my actual arguments about the balance and only argue semantics.

You don't have an arguement, you have a massive bias about balance and will twist definitions to suit your arguments instead of tailoring your argument to suit the definitions. RULE #1 IS NOT OPTIONAL

Seriously, you're arguing that an all Primaris army is somehow breaking the game because it relies on shooting. That is the epitome of reaching just so you can claim to be right.

REMOVED BY BROOKM - RULE #1
You're the one with a bias here who seems to thinks it's unfair for combat units to be able to get into combat.
Apparently to you a gunline is only a gunline if no unit in it ever moves. What an asinine argument, especially because nothing I said is dependent on if gunline includes things that move zero inches or 6 inches per game. Regardless of if you move zero inches or six, the idea that comcast units are horribly OP seems "unfair" because sometimes they can actually do what they're designed to do is stupid.

Sorry I don't understand what benchmark means, and my polish translator doesn't help me much with regards to table top gaming.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Karol wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It was one of a number of problems that we had in the game.

YES, it hurts Assault Marines, but seeing as they sucked even with the ability to hop units with variants of them being seen as barely any better, something needs to be done to the game other than leaving in a rule that was heavily abused in ways that weren't intended.

Ok, lets say that something like a slam captin was abuse. Now it gets removed. How does the person whose codex is based around the use of the said captin, jump pack units etc is suppose to play. Because it seems to me, and I could be wrong though, that the person would be playing a worse version of a vanila marine lists.

It is also strange how the FAQ seems to fix only some things. Nothing about the eldar gunlines was nerfed to the degree BAs got nerfed.

The plus changes seem to help horde armies the most. The +1sv thing for example. Great if you have the CP, and a lot of models to get buffed by it. But if your army is 15-18 models, then the avarge shoting army cripples you turn 1 +1 to save or not. , if you decide to sit in full LoS.

Well at least I found one good thing about the FAQ the interceptors move as if they had fly, but they don't really have it, so it seems like they are going to be able to fly through terrain and models just like before the FAQ. Unless of course that got changed somewhere outside of the GK FAQ.

Blood Angels are still better than Vanilla unless you're playing a successor (like Flesh Tearers) and lose access to all your toys.

And I see a lot of melee oriented players stuck on this idea that we have actual gunline armies in this edition and that said gunlines are somehow dominant. You kids are adorable and don't seem to be using terms properly. No, gunlines aren't the thing you see where someone has a lot of shooting in a mobile army list. That's just a balanced list that relies on shooting to do damage. A gunline is a static, long ranged army, that relies on heavy firepower and a lot of ablative wounds to screen their static tanks. Nothing moves ever and your main source of winning is to shoot your opponent off the table so they can't claim any objective that you're not already sitting on.

Only those armies were nerfed by how AP doesn't work as well as it used to, blast markers went away and it's harder to use cover to protect your tanks in a gunline since you can't claim cover just by being partially obscured by an intervening unit.

If you're sitting on 15-18 models for an army, you're either playing a small game, or playing a Jetbike Custodes list. In the first I say: play bigger games, the second I say: play a more balanced list.

In a more casual environment gunline/ very shooty is the meta. Why? It's easy to pick up and use and hard to punish for your average club or FLGS player that has no interest in playing competitively at tournaments. Also, you're guaranteed to blow something up, which is most of the fun in a casual game anyway. I really don't care that much if I win or lose, as long as I can cause some carnage. At the moment however I can't with a not-super-optimized CC focused army because I'm shot off the board before I can hit anything.

Then GW comes in, nerfs assault armies that don't use a bunch of high-level tricks to the ground and with that buffs gunlines. Oh sure, it will force the top competitive players to adapt, but I'm sure they'll find something else to abuse. In the meanwhile, GW makes it nearly impossible for casual players to play a non-gunline/ shooty army because getting into CC is becoming more and more impossible after each FAQ.

Karol wrote:
But gunlines are there, the fact that they can now actually move very fast and redeploy makes the matters worse not better.
If I knew that an eldar or IG player has to sit there for 3 turns killing 2/3 of my army till I get in to melee and then the dice decide who wins it would be ok. Right now my GK can't reach melee or shoting fast enough. And I doubt having rhinos or land raiders would change much.

Sometimes it gets even more extrem. My friend fields a lot of reapers, some of the DE flyers and s spears behind them. If I try to shot them, they out shot me. If I try assault they counter charge me with jetbikes and kill my dudes after shoting most of them dead. If I try to go for objectives, my army doesn't have the shoting to cripple his when am not doing melee, but I still have to pay the points for nemezis weapons I almost never get to use. It also doesn't have the resiliance to stay on objectives for 4-5 turns till the game ends.

A GK paladin costs more then a jebike custodes, and all guides for GK say I should be using them as they are better then termintors. They also have more wounds. And I play 2000pts games.

Claiming any army that is heavy on shooting in a game based on almost every army has the ability to shoot is a gunline is watering down the term to being meaningless. It's a specific term for a specific type of army and your (and other people's use of it) makes any arguement based on that misused of the term undermine any arguement you're trying to make.

The gunlines of ol' don't dominate anything anymore. Leave them behind as a ruler of how shooting armies need to function and do function.

And you can't use GK as a ruler for anything, they're so misbalanced to the point that they win less games than vanilla space Marines (who win less than 40% of their games in high level play and GK win less games than that). Yes, they're Marines +1 but they're charged like Custodes +1 for most of their models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Danny slag wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Danny slag wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Danny slag wrote:
A gunline that balls up around an aura and slowly walks forward a few inches is still a gunline.

By your definition any army that relies on shooting is a gunline regardless of how it actually plays. You're watering down a term to be next to meaningless just so you can claim to be right.

Funny then that you don't ever address any of my actual arguments about the balance and only argue semantics.

You don't have an arguement, you have a massive bias about balance and will twist definitions to suit your arguments instead of tailoring your argument to suit the definitions. Basically you're barely above a 4chan poster in terms of argumentative skill and it's embarrassing to have to read your posts to reply to them.

Seriously, you're arguing that an all Primaris army is somehow breaking the game because it relies on shooting. That is the epitome of reaching just so you can claim to be right.

REMOVED BY BROOKM - RULE #1
You're the one with a bias here who seems to thinks it's unfair for combat units to be able to get into combat.
Apparently to you a gunline is only a gunline if no unit in it ever moves. What an asinine argument, especially because nothing I said is dependent on if gunline includes things that move zero inches or 6 inches per game. Regardless of if you move zero inches or six, the idea that comcast units are horribly OP seems "unfair" because sometimes they can actually do what they're designed to do is stupid.

A gunline is a gunline if most or none of the army moves and it relies on long range, devastating shooting. It's an army build that died when we lost templates which could miss their target and scatter into new targets.

Karol wrote:
Sorry I don't understand what benchmark means, and my polish translator doesn't help me much with regards to table top gaming.

He means that you can't measure stuff using GK as a basis.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
I honestly see the situation much brigther now for CC armies.

If i go first no problem, i will have to weather only one turn of firing then it will be my turn 2 and the enemy is out of shooting phases.

If i go second, i will weather one shooting phase with a bonus and his screens will not be protected.

A big improvement. Surely it rewards the mid/close range armies which do not bank on having first turn.

I think you over estimate what +1 save can really do. Most armies already know how to utilize cover as-is, so this Strat doesn't really do much except help armies that have lots of hard-to-hide tanks and Flyers, which are typically part of gunline armies.
Don't get me wrong, I like the strat, but it helps gunline armies a bit more than melee armies.

-

It helps hordes who can't fit their units into cover easilly as well. And it helps transports a lot which were basically neglected.

make me an example of assaulting hordes which can benefit from that stratagem pls.

If it does majority shoting it is gunline, if it is majority melee it is melee. Is this some historical naming thing from past editions. I haven't seen or played against any ol gunlines. I play less then a year.

And if GK are so miss balanced, and it is not like a new thing that happened over night, why isn't GW fixing them? They could have done it in the CA, could have done it with the march FAQ or now they didn't do it. Even now when they hurt the GSC army, they at least aknowladge the problem and tell the players, they see it and that they are going to have a new codex that fixs it. GK get nothing, in fact they are running on a 2017 FAQ right now.

What is worse everyone is telling me that there is no garente that the next CA is going to fix them. So maybe next year a new codex will come out, but then 8th ed is hiting the 2 year mark and GW seems to start a new edition every 2 years. So GK will either be another first bad codex or worse get a transition one with rules neither working in 8th or 9th ed.

Danny slag wrote:
Then why do close combat units, and even mostly close combat armies even exist if you're not supposed to be able to do anything with them?

Because it looks cool as hell to have a chainsaw sword/axe/baseball bat/boot.

All melee builds are an intentional negation of an entire phase (shooting). This means you reduce your total possible damage output. Ideally (to me at least) you should mix melee and shooting to be able to do damage in multiple phases.

Spoletta wrote:

Karol wrote:
Sorry I don't understand what benchmark means, and my polish translator doesn't help me much with regards to table top gaming.

He means that you can't measure stuff using GK as a basis.

Ah ok. thanks for explaining

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Karol wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It was one of a number of problems that we had in the game.

YES, it hurts Assault Marines, but seeing as they sucked even with the ability to hop units with variants of them being seen as barely any better, something needs to be done to the game other than leaving in a rule that was heavily abused in ways that weren't intended.

Ok, lets say that something like a slam captin was abuse. Now it gets removed. How does the person whose codex is based around the use of the said captin, jump pack units etc is suppose to play. Because it seems to me, and I could be wrong though, that the person would be playing a worse version of a vanila marine lists.

It is also strange how the FAQ seems to fix only some things. Nothing about the eldar gunlines was nerfed to the degree BAs got nerfed.

The plus changes seem to help horde armies the most. The +1sv thing for example. Great if you have the CP, and a lot of models to get buffed by it. But if your army is 15-18 models, then the avarge shoting army cripples you turn 1 +1 to save or not. , if you decide to sit in full LoS.

Well at least I found one good thing about the FAQ the interceptors move as if they had fly, but they don't really have it, so it seems like they are going to be able to fly through terrain and models just like before the FAQ. Unless of course that got changed somewhere outside of the GK FAQ.

Blood Angels are still better than Vanilla unless you're playing a successor (like Flesh Tearers) and lose access to all your toys.

And I see a lot of melee oriented players stuck on this idea that we have actual gunline armies in this edition and that said gunlines are somehow dominant. You kids are adorable and don't seem to be using terms properly. No, gunlines aren't the thing you see where someone has a lot of shooting in a mobile army list. That's just a balanced list that relies on shooting to do damage. A gunline is a static, long ranged army, that relies on heavy firepower and a lot of ablative wounds to screen their static tanks. Nothing moves ever and your main source of winning is to shoot your opponent off the table so they can't claim any objective that you're not already sitting on.

Only those armies were nerfed by how AP doesn't work as well as it used to, blast markers went away and it's harder to use cover to protect your tanks in a gunline since you can't claim cover just by being partially obscured by an intervening unit.

If you're sitting on 15-18 models for an army, you're either playing a small game, or playing a Jetbike Custodes list. In the first I say: play bigger games, the second I say: play a more balanced list.

Just make leaving combat an opposed roll and the problem will even out. There is absolutely no reason why this couldn't be done. Roll off, winner decides. It's simple, fast and easy to use.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Danny slag wrote:
Then why do close combat units, and even mostly close combat armies even exist if you're not supposed to be able to do anything with them?

Because it looks cool as hell to have a chainsaw sword/axe/baseball bat/boot.

All melee builds are an intentional negation of an entire phase (shooting). This means you reduce your total possible damage output. Ideally (to me at least) you should mix melee and shooting to be able to do damage in multiple phases.

yeah but that means the only good melee army is something like eldar, where the shoting is godly and they can just run one or two super efficient super fast melee units to kill or tie up stuff, and maybe claim objectives end game, if the units seem to survive. A melee army that has to pay for melee upgrades on each of its models would never achive that level of point efficiency, unless of course GW decided to give them some 100-150pts undercosted model or unit. If NDKs suddenly got jump packs and costed 150pts with a full melee load out, I could imagine GK working.

Karol wrote:
If it does majority shoting it is gunline, if it is majority melee it is melee. Is this some historical naming thing from past editions. I haven't seen or played against any ol gunlines. I play less then a year.

Just because you don't know what a gunline actually is like doesn't give you an excuse to keep using the term wrong when it's pointed out.

Karol wrote:
And if GK are so miss balanced, and it is not like a new thing that happened over night, why isn't GW fixing them? They could have done it in the CA, could have done it with the march FAQ or now they didn't do it. Even now when they hurt the GSC army, they at least aknowladge the problem and tell the players, they see it and that they are going to have a new codex that fixs it. GK get nothing, in fact they are running on a 2017 FAQ right now.

There are two problems for GK: EVERY problem that Marines have + bad points costing. The second at least could see fixing in CA. The first is more a ? on when they'll fix it.

Karol wrote:
What is worse everyone is telling me that there is no garente that the next CA is going to fix them. So maybe next year a new codex will come out, but then 8th ed is hiting the 2 year mark and GW seems to start a new edition every 2 years. So GK will either be another first bad codex or worse get a transition one with rules neither working in 8th or 9th ed.

If rumors of 8th are to believed we'll be seeing updates overtime which means we're not waiting for 9th to see an update, but rather just waiting to see if CA does it or not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Danny slag wrote:
Then why do close combat units, and even mostly close combat armies even exist if you're not supposed to be able to do anything with them?

Because it looks cool as hell to have a chainsaw sword/axe/baseball bat/boot.

All melee builds are an intentional negation of an entire phase (shooting). This means you reduce your total possible damage output. Ideally (to me at least) you should mix melee and shooting to be able to do damage in multiple phases.

yeah but that means the only good melee army is something like eldar, where the shoting is godly and they can just run one or two super efficient super fast melee units to kill or tie up stuff, and maybe claim objectives end game, if the units seem to survive. A melee army that has to pay for melee upgrades on each of its models would never achive that level of point efficiency, unless of course GW decided to give them some 100-150pts undercosted model or unit. If NDKs suddenly got jump packs and costed 150pts with a full melee load out, I could imagine GK working.

There are several good melee focused armies, but there are no armies that do well being ONLY melee. 40k is best played with some semblance of balance between the two. Or just play Tau who try to stay out of combat as much as possible.

 blackmage wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
I honestly see the situation much brigther now for CC armies.

If i go first no problem, i will have to weather only one turn of firing then it will be my turn 2 and the enemy is out of shooting phases.

If i go second, i will weather one shooting phase with a bonus and his screens will not be protected.

A big improvement. Surely it rewards the mid/close range armies which do not bank on having first turn.

I think you over estimate what +1 save can really do. Most armies already know how to utilize cover as-is, so this Strat doesn't really do much except help armies that have lots of hard-to-hide tanks and Flyers, which are typically part of gunline armies.
Don't get me wrong, I like the strat, but it helps gunline armies a bit more than melee armies.

-

It helps hordes who can't fit their units into cover easilly as well. And it helps transports a lot which were basically neglected.

make me an example of assaulting hordes which can benefit from that stratagem pls.

Despite all my anger towards GW about nerfing general assault armies I have to say this stratagem looks great on Orks.

Tyranids with multiple carnifexs, could like it too, But I am no expert on tyranids. I know that no tyranid player is going to cry about his flying tyrants having bonus save turn 1.

Just because you don't know what a gunline actually is like doesn't give you an excuse to keep using the term wrong when it's pointed out.

Well am using a translator and it says it is either a line of infantry or APC/tanks, or artilery. And tanks and APC do move. So a gunline can move too. But all translations can be wrong I guess.

The only assault armies who aren't really going to be excited are Assault Marine based, but that's more because of the problems with Assault Marines.

Karol wrote:
Tyranids with multiple carnifexs, could like it too, But I am no expert on tyranids. I know that no tyranid player is going to cry about his flying tyrants having bonus save turn 1.

carnifex with 4+ to hit in melee they sucks and and we are talking about assault HORDES.

 blackmage wrote:

Karol wrote:
Tyranids with multiple carnifexs, could like it too, But I am no expert on tyranids. I know that no tyranid player is going to cry about his flying tyrants having bonus save turn 1.

carnifex with 4+ to hit in melee they sucks and and we are talking about assault HORDES.

'Fexes get +1 to hit on the charge IIRC.

Pandabeer wrote:

 blackmage wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
I honestly see the situation much brigther now for CC armies.

If i go first no problem, i will have to weather only one turn of firing then it will be my turn 2 and the enemy is out of shooting phases.

If i go second, i will weather one shooting phase with a bonus and his screens will not be protected.

A big improvement. Surely it rewards the mid/close range armies which do not bank on having first turn.

I think you over estimate what +1 save can really do. Most armies already know how to utilize cover as-is, so this Strat doesn't really do much except help armies that have lots of hard-to-hide tanks and Flyers, which are typically part of gunline armies.
Don't get me wrong, I like the strat, but it helps gunline armies a bit more than melee armies.

-

It helps hordes who can't fit their units into cover easilly as well. And it helps transports a lot which were basically neglected.

make me an example of assaulting hordes which can benefit from that stratagem pls.

Despite all my anger towards GW about nerfing general assault armies I have to say this stratagem looks great on Orks.

so you really think have a 5+ save helps you so much? saving average 20 orks? wow good luck with it
the only one which really benefit of that +1 are those which are already strong right now, you ll see at first major events...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pandabeer wrote:

 blackmage wrote:

Karol wrote:
Tyranids with multiple carnifexs, could like it too, But I am no expert on tyranids. I know that no tyranid player is going to cry about his flying tyrants having bonus save turn 1.

carnifex with 4+ to hit in melee they sucks and and we are talking about assault HORDES.

'Fexes get +1 to hit on the charge IIRC.

they can get +1 but 4+ to hit with no re rolls makes them sucks melee units must have or a 3+ to hit and/or a way to re roll 1's or you must pray to be lucky, no one play melee carnifex i guess will be a reason... oh i forgot here 90% play garagehammer so yee there anything works great...
btw im going off topic i will drop this.

 blackmage wrote:

Pandabeer wrote:

 blackmage wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
I honestly see the situation much brigther now for CC armies.

If i go first no problem, i will have to weather only one turn of firing then it will be my turn 2 and the enemy is out of shooting phases.

If i go second, i will weather one shooting phase with a bonus and his screens will not be protected.

A big improvement. Surely it rewards the mid/close range armies which do not bank on having first turn.

I think you over estimate what +1 save can really do. Most armies already know how to utilize cover as-is, so this Strat doesn't really do much except help armies that have lots of hard-to-hide tanks and Flyers, which are typically part of gunline armies.
Don't get me wrong, I like the strat, but it helps gunline armies a bit more than melee armies.

-

It helps hordes who can't fit their units into cover easilly as well. And it helps transports a lot which were basically neglected.

make me an example of assaulting hordes which can benefit from that stratagem pls.

Despite all my anger towards GW about nerfing general assault armies I have to say this stratagem looks great on Orks.

so you really think have a 5+ save helps you so much? saving average 20 orks? wow good luck with it
the only one which really benefit of that +1 are those which are already strong right now, you ll see at first major events...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pandabeer wrote:

 blackmage wrote:

Karol wrote:
Tyranids with multiple carnifexs, could like it too, But I am no expert on tyranids. I know that no tyranid player is going to cry about his flying tyrants having bonus save turn 1.

carnifex with 4+ to hit in melee they sucks and and we are talking about assault HORDES.

'Fexes get +1 to hit on the charge IIRC.

they can get +1 but 4+ to hit with no re rolls makes them sucks melee units must have or a 3+ to hit and/or a way to re roll 1's or you must prey to be lucky, no one play melee carnifex i guess will be a reason... oh i forgot here 90% play garagehammer so yee there anything works great...

5+ save is better than a 6+ save. So yeah, it's good. Also Orks are about to get a codex so the meta will be shifting soon anyways.

good luck...

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Also so...the Castellan didn't get nerfed LOLOLOLOL.

They nerfed the CP that allowed it to have 4-5 turns of being basically unkillable. That fixed it quite a bit.

Even that change nerfed all ultramarines charictors, while not addressing Astra Millicheese and now effectively making them even more mandatory.

But pure knights got hit with The raven strategum being increased to 3CP, oath breaking going to 3 CP.
Ironically that now means their is no point in bringing more than 2 misslies in a knights list as you can't have enough CP to snipe with them.

 blackmage wrote:

Pandabeer wrote:

 blackmage wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
I honestly see the situation much brigther now for CC armies.

If i go first no problem, i will have to weather only one turn of firing then it will be my turn 2 and the enemy is out of shooting phases.

If i go second, i will weather one shooting phase with a bonus and his screens will not be protected.

A big improvement. Surely it rewards the mid/close range armies which do not bank on having first turn.

I think you over estimate what +1 save can really do. Most armies already know how to utilize cover as-is, so this Strat doesn't really do much except help armies that have lots of hard-to-hide tanks and Flyers, which are typically part of gunline armies.
Don't get me wrong, I like the strat, but it helps gunline armies a bit more than melee armies.

-

It helps hordes who can't fit their units into cover easilly as well. And it helps transports a lot which were basically neglected.

make me an example of assaulting hordes which can benefit from that stratagem pls.

Despite all my anger towards GW about nerfing general assault armies I have to say this stratagem looks great on Orks.

so you really think have a 5+ save helps you so much? saving average 20 orks? wow good luck with it
the only one which really benefit of that +1 are those which are already strong right now, you ll see at first major events...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pandabeer wrote:

 blackmage wrote:

Karol wrote:
Tyranids with multiple carnifexs, could like it too, But I am no expert on tyranids. I know that no tyranid player is going to cry about his flying tyrants having bonus save turn 1.

carnifex with 4+ to hit in melee they sucks and and we are talking about assault HORDES.

'Fexes get +1 to hit on the charge IIRC.

they can get +1 but 4+ to hit with no re rolls makes them sucks melee units must have or a 3+ to hit and/or a way to re roll 1's or you must pray to be lucky, no one play melee carnifex i guess will be a reason... oh i forgot here 90% play garagehammer so yee there anything works great...
btw im going off topic i will drop this.

Well, if I save 20 Boyz for 2 CP I'm a very happy camper, because that's about 80 potential extra choppa attacks when I do reach CC.