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.
yeah, i ran the flails as AP-2, theyre actually AP-1. I'll rerun those.
They are AP-2 to with the relic.
...Grave Lotus Toxin is S+1, D+1, AP-1? i thought it was just S+1 D+1.
In which case 7.77 dead GEQ is 14A, hitting on 2s, wounding on 3s, 7.77 dead guard.
Dark Lotus Toxin is just +1 Strength & + 1 Damage. It doesn't change AP on the weapon it's used on.
Incidentally, do you (or anybody else in need) need a copy of Charadon? I have the code spare from a hardback copy if it's useful (I'm not a huge fan of the app, so don't have any intention to redeem it). PM me I guess to save thread clutter?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/28 19:11:03
yukishiro1 wrote: GW has been taking longer and longer to put FAQs out ever since 9th launched. For example, the death guard one took a month to come out too - DG released Jan 23, "two-week FAQ" released February 22.
Someone can go back and run the exact dates for all of them, but it's not a two-week FAQ at this point, it's more like a four-week FAQ. Dark Angels was more like seven weeks - release early February, FAQ the very end of March, which is quite astounding. If that pattern holds, we could be waiting three more weeks, and by summer we'll be talking about the "ten-week FAQ."
Pretty sure they announced that new release faqs are releasing after a month instead of 2 weeks. Couldnt find the source but Im sure Ive seen it
Umbros wrote: Pretty sure they announced that new release faqs are releasing after a month instead of 2 weeks. Couldnt find the source but Im sure Ive seen it
I don't recall that, but I did stumble on this while looking for it. Shows how far off target we are for releases.
Spoiler:
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/28 20:13:39
Sunny Side Up wrote: If anything, the situation is inverse. Drukhari are currently dominating a meta already shooting for them, while Marines at the time took the "Jim-Vesal"-Poxwalkers-Nanavati-Aberrants-&-Richard-Siegler-Tau-Meta by storm.
How exactly is the meta already gunning for DE?
Because it's been impossible to go better than 3-2 maybe for the last 6 months (if you could go to an event) if you couldn't kill 5-7 Starweavers, ObSec Troupes falling out with melta-pistols and and Skyweavers running amok. Which isn't so different from Raiders, Wyches and Hellions (just less efficient and reliable than DT Liquifiers instead of Fusion, etc..). Or trade your way through a bunch of T3 Repentia/Zephyrim charging you from 30" away.
Uhh...somehow this guy gets it...
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Sunny Side Up wrote: If anything, the situation is inverse. Drukhari are currently dominating a meta already shooting for them, while Marines at the time took the "Jim-Vesal"-Poxwalkers-Nanavati-Aberrants-&-Richard-Siegler-Tau-Meta by storm.
How exactly is the meta already gunning for DE?
Because it's been impossible to go better than 3-2 maybe for the last 6 months (if you could go to an event) if you couldn't kill 5-7 Starweavers, ObSec Troupes falling out with melta-pistols and and Skyweavers running amok. Which isn't so different from Raiders, Wyches and Hellions (just less efficient and reliable than DT Liquifiers instead of Fusion, etc..). Or trade your way through a bunch of T3 Repentia/Zephyrim charging you from 30" away.
Uhh...somehow this guy gets it...
I don't think so. Harlequins are positively rare - being only slightly more common than DW. Their presence in the meta against their reputation is massively overstated and they haven't been taking as many wins of late.
I would wager you can not find many lists geared to take on just sisters or harlies, because in reality the lists are really diverse.
How are they rare if they are in every top 8, and if it is not pure harlis then it is some sort of harli and CWE soup.
GK in top 8 are rare, or something like SW. If there is a tournament with more then 16 people you can more or less be sure there will be a harli players in its top score part.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Where I am at harlies have always been popular with a fair representation. I bet there are some areas of the country, or some countries where they are rare and have no representation at tournaments.
If you were in an area where harlies were common in local tournaments, then yes you have already been teching against this kind of list for most of 9th. If you were going to very large tournaments you were probably also taking this into account. Smaller tournaments or regional tournaments where harlies aren't common may have been taken by surprise by DE.
Also in my experience, things that tech against harlies aren't working against DE. But where I am at DE are generally high toughness, higher than many marines. Players that prefer wyches still are taking toughness drugs on their hellions, so you are facing a bunch of T5 hellions or T6 raiders. Players that tech more heavily into covens have T4(5 with haemy) wracks, T5/6 grots, T6 Raiders, T7 talos/cronos. If you tech into harlies you are expecting to fight T3, T4 on the bikes with a few hard to hit T5 models. If you go up against drukhari you are mostly facing T5 through T7, at least in the early turns.
Edit: Thinking about this more, even against marine builds you have been OK just taking T4/T5 mostly into account. And with things like transhuman you have been punished for taking too much high strength. Meltas have been OK at knocking out the few vehicles/monsters/redemptors you face, but generally loading up on S4/5 has been very efficient. Mass s5 1 d like necrons is good against both marines and death guard. But mass S4 or S5 just doesn't work against an army that is mostly presenting T6 targets.
Perhaps marines need to start fielding like 9 suppressors? High volume high strength shots is what is needed, because their army wide invulns are a great counter to low volume high strength fire like is found in meltas.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/04/28 21:40:22
Its getting a bit dated now - but using the Goonhammer stats collected up to Mid March after the FAQ, Marines represented 30% of all lists played - Harlequins represented 2.5%. Sisters were 4%.
Everyone's local meta will be different - and some tournaments see a higher proportion of these armies. But I'm not sure in aggregate these numbers are that far off.
I mean I can't be bothered to check every list (so soup may lurk within) - but if you do a quick run down of the Motor City Mayhem with its 109 players - you get 1 Harlequins player, who came 3rd. You got 5 Sisters lists - two of which came 10th and 11th. The power is clearly there - but the players are seemingly not.
There are by contrast.
5 Ultramarines, 5 Dark Angels, 4 Blood Angels, 2 Deathwatch, 1 Iron Hands, 2 Salamanders, 3 White Scars, 3 Space Wolves and 1 Raven Guard. So 26 out 109 players.
I mean this might be indicative of the "death" of the Marine Meta - you'd have expected there to be 32 lists if they made up 30%. But odds are high you'll be playing at least one Marine list in a 5 game tournament - quite probably more - and potentially no Sisters or that one Harlequins player unless you have a knock out final. So I'm not convinced the tailoring is going that way.
Karol wrote: How are they rare if they are in every top 8, and if it is not pure harlis then it is some sort of harli and CWE soup.
GK in top 8 are rare, or something like SW. If there is a tournament with more then 16 people you can more or less be sure there will be a harli players in its top score part.
Rarity would be talking about their total playrate, not their total top 8 placements.
Karol wrote: How are they rare if they are in every top 8, and if it is not pure harlis then it is some sort of harli and CWE soup.
GK in top 8 are rare, or something like SW. If there is a tournament with more then 16 people you can more or less be sure there will be a harli players in its top score part.
That's literally impossible considering they had 30 games out of over 1,700 this past weekend. You shouldn't make things up to support your argument.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RandomHeretic wrote: Perhaps marines need to start fielding like 9 suppressors? High volume high strength shots is what is needed, because their army wide invulns are a great counter to low volume high strength fire like is found in meltas.
Suppressors, TFCs to tremor, WW to suppress when charging fight first units, reapers or TACs, dreadnoughts - especially T8 varieties, judiciars...marines have tons of useful things. Some a little less useful when you have to open a metal box first, but a list doesn't need to spam them to make good use.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/28 22:39:09
I'd argue drukhari are good, but are likely as OP as Harlequins and SoB. The counter to both of those factions is pretty much transports, counter deep striking units, and auspex scan.
If marine players keep building lists to kill other marines then the anti meta boogeyman armies will continue to place in the top 5. This problem is further magnified by the population skewing towards playing.marines.
blaktoof wrote: I'd argue drukhari are good, but are likely as OP as Harlequins and SoB. The counter to both of those factions is pretty much transports, counter deep striking units, and auspex scan.
If marine players keep building lists to kill other marines then the anti meta boogeyman armies will continue to place in the top 5. This problem is further magnified by the population skewing towards playing.marines.
The problem with teching against stuff like Harlequins is that you have a good chance to never meet one, while it weakens your mirror matchup and then you lose to the marine army your basically guaranteed to run into.
Its harder for the big % of the field to tech against the small % then the other way around.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/28 23:41:14
blaktoof wrote: I'd argue drukhari are good, but are likely as OP as Harlequins and SoB. The counter to both of those factions is pretty much transports, counter deep striking units, and auspex scan.
If marine players keep building lists to kill other marines then the anti meta boogeyman armies will continue to place in the top 5. This problem is further magnified by the population skewing towards playing.marines.
The problem with teching against stuff like Harlequins is that you have a good chance to never meet one, while it weakens your mirror matchup and then you lose to the marine army your basically guaranteed to run into.
Its harder for the big % of the field to tech against the small % then the other way around.
This doesn't make sense, so punish the faction that is good but has a famously low playerbase because you cant tech into them and the most popular?
IRT OP: I don't think the Drukhari are broken. I think there are two interactions that probably need to be cleaned up, but I don't think they're broken at all.
We have a few Harlequin players locally, and so long as you build your list to be able to play reactively and defensive at first, and keep it fairly well rounded, you have a game to play.
I think anytime a new codex comes out, it's going to take the meta by storm. I can remember people on here bitching about Space Wolves, and Blood Angels, and the what, 30-page thread of how broken the Dark Angels are?
I think we just need to give it a bit of time to balance out and see what the meta does.
People bitch, incessantly, but most of the people I hear complaining about the game on social media, in the communities and local gaming groups are the people who complain and don't play, have never played against, or have played against said codex once and got their ass kicked, and then screamed bloody murder because of it.
I know this is an unpopular opinion, but 9th edition so far is, in my opinion, and experience is very well balanced between each other with the new codexes. Now, obviously, we need every army to get their new codex, and GW is clearly working on that to get everyone up to snuff, but the game is actually much better than people have given it credit for.
I also think that covid has just exacerbated all of this. I am lucky, my group has been meeting at my home, we have big barbeque days and people play. So even during lockdowns we have been playing lots of games and kept going, so I do have the privilege of probably playing more games than many folks have had the opportunity to. I also understand that until you get to put models on the table and play the game, everything seems broken on paper, or it can seem that way.
Give it time. I don't think its anywhere near as bad as people think.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/04/29 04:32:10
This? These top 3 and bottom 3 win rates scream balanced to you?
53.04%
52.97%
52.85%
44.06%
44.06%
43.83%
This is the top 3 and bottom 3 champions out of 155 champions in League of Legends. Out of 30 factions GW's numbers are 7 times as bad at the top and 2,5 times as bad at the bottom.
Here is the corrected math I butchered previously.
This is the top 3 and bottom 3 champions out of 155 champions in League of Legends. Out of 30 factions GW's numbers are 7 times as bad at the top and 2,5 times as bad at the bottom.
so we just gonna ignore that Drukhari counter marines who happen to be the biggest player base which might be why the numbers are so skewed?
Luthon1234 wrote: so we just gonna ignore that Drukhari counter marines who happen to be the biggest player base which might be why the numbers are so skewed?
That seems reasonable, especially because they are beating the heck out of Astra Militarum, Daemons and Harlequins as well. What do you expect if one army autowins against the most popular faction, is that just how things are supposed to be? No match-up should be more than 60% win rate, this whole 70% win rate on against all factions is ABSURD, with 30% win rate you might as well not play, 34% ought to be the very bottom of any match-up and the any faction with more than 55% win rate overall and more than 20 games played needs to get looked at.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/29 05:38:02
At these tournaments, are there any Table Top Simulator included? If so easy access to virtually any army may be a cause for the spike in players as DE didn't have a super large tournament following before this (unlike marines where majority of people often have random marine units and armies in their collections)
blaktoof wrote: I'd argue drukhari are good, but are likely as OP as Harlequins and SoB. The counter to both of those factions is pretty much transports, counter deep striking units, and auspex scan.
If marine players keep building lists to kill other marines then the anti meta boogeyman armies will continue to place in the top 5. This problem is further magnified by the population skewing towards playing.marines.
The problem with teching against stuff like Harlequins is that you have a good chance to never meet one, while it weakens your mirror matchup and then you lose to the marine army your basically guaranteed to run into.
Its harder for the big % of the field to tech against the small % then the other way around.
This doesn't make sense, so punish the faction that is good but has a famously low playerbase because you cant tech into them and the most popular?
where am I talking about punishing a faction?
My post does nothing but explain why Marines are not building to defeat Harlequins en masse.
I wonder what the winrates would look like in LoL if you had every team choose a team comp before the tournament, no bans, and made them play with that the whole tournament.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
This? These top 3 and bottom 3 win rates scream balanced to you?
53.04%
52.97%
52.85%
44.06%
44.06%
43.83%
This is the top 3 and bottom 3 champions out of 155 champions in League of Legends. Out of 30 factions GW's numbers are 7 times as bad at the top and 2,5 times as bad at the bottom.
The numbers are not comparable and misleading for people who don't know how they came to be.
LoL is a more or less completely solved game with lots of sources and tools to analyse what is the best playstyle (= lane, items, runes, counter-picks) for each champion. If you deviate from what is best you get horrible results.
Right now on op.gg you can check Anivia for example, who got a 55% win rate overall. Which is the average of a 82% win rate for MID lane and an abysmal 17% win rate for SUPPORT lane. The numbers are inflated in both directions, as a new patch just hit yesterday and all data gets reset with every patch, so we only have a few hundred games for Anivia at the moment, but the reality will be, that Anivia is a MID lane champ first and every other role will have considerably lower win rates.
If the opponent picks a champion that absolutely counters Anivia, you are able to either take a different champ altogether, or itemise differently during the game.
Compare this to 40k, where everybody is running their own combination of units, wargear, terrain, psychic powers and so on.
What is the optimal Imperial Guard list? What are you going to do if you want to play Sentinel heavy and run into MM spam?
Additionally, all champions are playing with the current ruleset. You can't say the same for all the 8th edition codizes. Guard and Tau got left behind for the moment, while 9th edition armies are doing well compared to each other.
Luthon1234 wrote: so we just gonna ignore that Drukhari counter marines who happen to be the biggest player base which might be why the numbers are so skewed?
That seems reasonable, especially because they are beating the heck out of Astra Militarum, Daemons and Harlequins as well. What do you expect if one army autowins against the most popular faction, is that just how things are supposed to be? No match-up should be more than 60% win rate, this whole 70% win rate on against all factions is ABSURD, with 30% win rate you might as well not play, 34% ought to be the very bottom of any match-up and the any faction with more than 55% win rate overall and more than 20 games played needs to get looked at.
Funny you have that opinion while bringing up LoL as an example for balanced win rates.
You absolutely have champions that counter other champions, exaggerated if you don't play the intented role.
How about an ADC Braum on top lane against.. I don't know, any other champ who is natively playing top?
Designer's Note: Hardened Veterans can be represented by any Imperial Guard models, but we've really included them to allow players to practise their skills at making a really unique and individual unit. Because of this we won't be making models to represent many of the options allowed to a Veteran squad - it's up to you to convert the models. (Imperial Guard, 3rd Edition)
Well the top problem with top w40k faction is thought that they are never countered by anything or they are countered by something that is beaten by everything else.
If GSC were suddenly the anti harli or anti DE army, then we wouldn't see them being played anyway. over 60% win rates on anything is a sign that something went wrong durning design, unless it is like the last 2 months of an edition .
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ordana wrote: where am I talking about punishing a faction?
My post does nothing but explain why Marines are not building to defeat Harlequins en masse.
Because it not possible to do? not when you have to play against other marines, demon soups, SoBs etc. It would require armies being played with 2-3 list, which you pick depending on opponent, before every game or side decks.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/29 10:59:12
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
This? These top 3 and bottom 3 win rates scream balanced to you?
53.04% 52.97% 52.85% 44.06% 44.06% 43.83%
This is the top 3 and bottom 3 champions out of 155 champions in League of Legends. Out of 30 factions GW's numbers are 7 times as bad at the top and 2,5 times as bad at the bottom.
The numbers are not comparable and misleading for people who don't know how they came to be. LoL is a more or less completely solved game with lots of sources and tools to analyse what is the best playstyle (= lane, items, runes, counter-picks) for each champion. If you deviate from what is best you get horrible results.
LOL is not solved, new builds occasionally pop up and sometimes a champion will explode in popularity as people find out it has been sleeper OP for a while. I don't see how deviating from what is best yielding bad results is any different in 40k, even a top faction will tend to do poorly if you intentionally build a bad army list.
Right now on op.gg you can check Anivia for example, who got a 55% win rate overall. Which is the average of a 82% win rate for MID lane and an abysmal 17% win rate for SUPPORT lane. The numbers are inflated in both directions, as a new patch just hit yesterday and all data gets reset with every patch, so we only have a few hundred games for Anivia at the moment, but the reality will be, that Anivia is a MID lane champ first and every other role will have considerably lower win rates.
Drukhari stats are a max of DT and non-DT builds, how is that different from support and mid Anivia? How many hundreds of games do we have for Drukhari? Each patch each LOL champion gets hundreds of times more games than each 40k faction.
If the opponent picks a champion that absolutely counters Anivia, you are able to either take a different champ altogether, or itemise differently during the game.
Compare this to 40k, where everybody is running their own combination of units, wargear, terrain, psychic powers and so on. What is the optimal Imperial Guard list? What are you going to do if you want to play Sentinel heavy and run into MM spam?
Additionally, all champions are playing with the current ruleset. You can't say the same for all the 8th edition codizes. Guard and Tau got left behind for the moment, while 9th edition armies are doing well compared to each other.
In 40k you can change your playstyle and your secondaries. There is no guarantee that itemization actually helps the person that is weak in a particular LOL matchup and not the one that is strong. Some champions do not get updated for many patches, the update rate of LOL is faster, but Drukhari and Harlequins are an 8th and 9th edition codex beating both 8th and 9th edition codexes.
Luthon1234 wrote: so we just gonna ignore that Drukhari counter marines who happen to be the biggest player base which might be why the numbers are so skewed?
That seems reasonable, especially because they are beating the heck out of Astra Militarum, Daemons and Harlequins as well. What do you expect if one army autowins against the most popular faction, is that just how things are supposed to be? No match-up should be more than 60% win rate, this whole 70% win rate on against all factions is ABSURD, with 30% win rate you might as well not play, 34% ought to be the very bottom of any match-up and the any faction with more than 55% win rate overall and more than 20 games played needs to get looked at.
Funny you have that opinion while bringing up LoL as an example for balanced win rates. You absolutely have champions that counter other champions, exaggerated if you don't play the intented role.
How about an ADC Braum on top lane against.. I don't know, any other champ who is natively playing top?
I don't think it's funny at all that 40k balance is worse than LOL balance and people are praising the game for how balanced it currently is, despite the 70% win rate elephant in the room.
There is no guarantee that you will not get countered in LOL, sometimes you counter, sometimes you get countered, depending on if you have other people to pick for you or if you pick early or late in matchmaking, in 40k it's blind but that only increases the need for every matchup to be fun and balanced.
You can misplay in 40k just like you can misplay in LOL by playing Braum top and it happens all the time, you can pick bad secondaries, over or under commit, charge Tau Fire Warrior into Berzerkers or use Berzerkers to hold objectives in the back where a unit of Cultists would have sufficed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/29 11:34:42
Karol wrote: Well the top problem with top w40k faction is thought that they are never countered by anything or they are countered by something that is beaten by everything else.
If GSC were suddenly the anti harli or anti DE army, then we wouldn't see them being played anyway. over 60% win rates on anything is a sign that something went wrong durning design, unless it is like the last 2 months of an edition .
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ordana wrote: where am I talking about punishing a faction?
My post does nothing but explain why Marines are not building to defeat Harlequins en masse.
Because it not possible to do? not when you have to play against other marines, demon soups, SoBs etc. It would require armies being played with 2-3 list, which you pick depending on opponent, before every game or side decks.
You dont play harlequins of course. Harlequins are super good for punishing mistakes and bad play and they play decent vs most SM factions.
That is the reason although their WR seem good, that they have less top 3 appearances in 2021 than custodes or death guard.
Harlequins also have some bad matchups like craftworlds aeldar, grey knight, nids, they also have very hard matchups vs custodes.
Generally what is good vs harlequins is currently considered bad and not used and that is inflating the WR.
If i were GK player i would have been happy that armies like drukhari are comming so strong, because you are playing just subpar SM army and you have bigger chance vs the drukhari and harlequins.
blaktoof wrote: I'd argue drukhari are good, but are likely as OP as Harlequins and SoB. The counter to both of those factions is pretty much transports, counter deep striking units, and auspex scan.
If marine players keep building lists to kill other marines then the anti meta boogeyman armies will continue to place in the top 5. This problem is further magnified by the population skewing towards playing.marines.
Part of the problem there is that Harlequins and SoB are both 8th edition Codexes. GW can rebalance them when their books release for 9th, but DE now have their book. We see this quite often when editions change but Codexes stay legal from the previous edition. There's almost always 1-2 armies that benefit from the specific rules changes between editions. In this case Harlequins seem to have benefitted massively from relatively light points increases and their general "hit hard, hit fast" playstyle being very advantageous in 9th. I'm not sure the same counters that work against DE are great against Harlequins, and vice-versa. DE have a much greater range of defensive profiles and their basic transports have more wounds, which changes the maths on what works best against them compared to Harlequin transports.
