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.

 bullyboy wrote:
One other thing that annoys be about Abby.
He gets to add a CP if he passes his dark pacts Ld check. But on a 2+. So another needless dice roll.
If he passes his Ld check, just give him the CP and stop adding pointless additional rolls.

Yeah, that's a really annoying trend that they're continuing form 9th. There's already a dice roll required. Why do we need another one that rarely fails?

I assume this may mean we can generate more than 1CP per turn now.

Oh oh, we’ve just reached the “wait and see” stage of the 40K circle of life.

Regardless of rules, points etc, some people are obviously going to match units that feel like they should be on a similar level (although I agree that Abby should be slightly beneath Bobby g)

 bullyboy wrote:
One other thing that annoys be about Abby.
He gets to add a CP if he passes his dark pacts Ld check. But on a 2+. So another needless dice roll.
If he passes his Ld check, just give him the CP and stop adding pointless additional rolls.

Chaos just happens to be a little more fickle, but it does have a quantifiable effect on the outcome.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
One is a Primarch. The other is simply A Very Naughty Boy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, Abaddon can join a unit, Guilliman can’t. So there’s some level of added survivability there.

This shouldwnt matter at all abbey is chosen by the 4 if Chaos gods say your strong then your strong.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Look at that fething mess of the datasheet for Legionaires. GW legit didn't learn anything from 9th, and y'all said that something like Combi-Weapons being consolidated would help make things simple and less convoluted!

HAHAHAHAHAHA

EviscerationPlague wrote:
HAHAHAHAHAHA

Look at that fething mess of the datasheet for Legionaires. GW legit didn't learn anything from 9th, and y'all said that something like Combi-Weapons being consolidated would help make things simple and less convoluted!

HAHAHAHAHAHA

The datasheet is pretty simple tho..?
And the consolidation on it makes it actually parseable, imagine if all the melee weapons were standalone options like before instead of the consolidated version now

Yeah, I love how the "b-b-b-but he's probably still competitive in-game, maybe he's 200 points!" is only point being made against those complaining Abaddon's stats got nerfed.

Some of us actually care about the lore and aren't interested in playing DotA on the tabletop. Why the need to defend GW here? It's just objectively weird that Abaddon is (probably) less tough than a marine wearing Gravis armor.

So far chaos rules look the worst out of what been previewed and space marines look the best.

Lame. Another edition of marine spank here we go.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
It's just objectively weird that Abaddon is (probably) less tough than a marine wearing Gravis armor.

So you're assuming Gravis will be T6+ or was that shown somewhere?

EviscerationPlague wrote:
HAHAHAHAHAHA

Look at that fething mess of the datasheet for Legionaires. GW legit didn't learn anything from 9th, and y'all said that something like Combi-Weapons being consolidated would help make things simple and less convoluted!

HAHAHAHAHAHA

I don't know why you're so desperate for every squad to only have one type of weapon. That seems really boring. Just because your eyes unfocus when there's more than 3 lines of text, doesn't mean we should remove customization from the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Boosykes wrote:
So far chaos rules look the worst out of what been previewed and space marines look the best.

Lame. Another edition of marine spank here we go.

Yes, the 3 units out of 500 and 0 chapter specific abilities we've seen will absolutely define the edition. You've cracked the code. Congratulations.

Also, not for nothing, Marines were unplayable for the majority of 8th and 9th. People get so focused on the dark angels meta or the ironhands dominance that they don't remember the other 4 years where the best marine lists were at like 42% winrate.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Second is that "Heavy Melee Weapon" is a thing for consolidated powerfists, etc. :(

*sigh*

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Third is that the Aspiring Champion doesn't get bonus attacks over the rest of the unit.

The consolidationists here must be loving this.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
EDIT: Also wait what the feth Marks are a detachment ability and not the faction ability?!

Much like Oaths of Moment vs Doctrines, it appears GW messed up what should be core to the army and what should be part of a detachment.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
HAHAHAHAHAHA

Look at that fething mess of the datasheet for Legionaires. GW legit didn't learn anything from 9th, and y'all said that something like Combi-Weapons being consolidated would help make things simple and less convoluted!

HAHAHAHAHAHA

The datasheet is pretty simple tho..?
And the consolidation on it makes it actually parseable, imagine if all the melee weapons were standalone options like before instead of the consolidated version now

Yup, I think there's no actual outcome here that wouldn't illicit a complaint from some people though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Second is that "Heavy Melee Weapon" is a thing for consolidated powerfists, etc. :(

*sigh*

What else did I suggest when you branded me a consolidationist? I think I'm 2/2 so far.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
Yeah, I love how the "b-b-b-but he's probably still competitive in-game, maybe he's 200 points!" is only point being made against those complaining Abaddon's stats got nerfed.

Some of us actually care about the lore and aren't interested in playing DotA on the tabletop. Why the need to defend GW here? It's just objectively weird that Abaddon is (probably) less tough than a marine wearing Gravis armor.

You're still thinking along one axis.

If Abaddon can deepstrike with terminators and be untargetable outside of 12" then should he really be T9? Does T6 actually matter for things that are going to eventually target him?

He also still beats the crap out of most things.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
HAHAHAHAHAHA

Look at that fething mess of the datasheet for Legionaires. GW legit didn't learn anything from 9th, and y'all said that something like Combi-Weapons being consolidated would help make things simple and less convoluted!

HAHAHAHAHAHA

The datasheet is pretty simple tho..?
And the consolidation on it makes it actually parseable, imagine if all the melee weapons were standalone options like before instead of the consolidated version now

EP thinks that squads shouldn't be allowed to have more than one type of weapon, for some reason.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
It's just objectively weird that Abaddon is (probably) less tough than a marine wearing Gravis armor.

So you're assuming Gravis will be T6+ or was that shown somewhere?

Assumption made by reading between the lines on the marine post.

Dudeface wrote:
What else did I suggest when you branded me a consolidationist? I think I'm 2/2 so far.

Are you happy about this? Are you happy to see options, no... just straight up weapons that have been part of the game since its inception vanish into the Jervisified hell of "generic weapon options"? Do you think we're better off this way?

Dudeface wrote:


Yup, I think there's no actual outcome here that wouldn't illicit a complaint from some people though.

Just like the eternal conundrum about special characters really... if you make them good or auto-include or unlock interesting things people complain about them being 'must fields' and OP, if you make them comparable to regular characters people complain that they're not special enough. Can't please all the people all the time.

Boosykes wrote:
So far chaos rules look the worst out of what been previewed and space marines look the best.

Lame. Another edition of marine spank here we go.

What makes you say that? They look amazing. Sure the legionaries are basic, but they are supposed to be. They are the "grunts". However, they also get reroll melee wound 1's(all wounds on objectives) and have the chance at either exploding 6's or auto wounds on 6's. They even have the option to reroll the dark pact test. Obliterator weapons look nasty and the helldrake flamer is scary.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
What else did I suggest when you branded me a consolidationist? I think I'm 2/2 so far.

Are you happy about this? Are you happy to see options, no... just straight up weapons that have been part of the game since its inception vanish into the Jervisified hell of "generic weapon options"? Do you think we're better off this way?

the weapons did not vanish, your "heavy melee weapons" can still be power fists of thunder hammer as you wish

There is no meaningful difference between S8 -3 2 and S8 -2 3 for the scale of army that 40k represents on the tabletop. And consolidating means that now you have more freedom in modeling. My Nightlords can now bring nostraman chainglaive and still be WYSIWYG. I could bring a greatsword in a more "knightly" chapter or even bring a polearm for example. Consolidating like that opens up a world of customisation while also not removing any of the existing stuff.

So umm... why would one ever want to take the Reaper Chaincannon now that it only hits on 4's?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
What else did I suggest when you branded me a consolidationist? I think I'm 2/2 so far.

Are you happy about this? Are you happy to see options, no... just straight up weapons that have been part of the game since its inception vanish into the Jervisified hell of "generic weapon options"? Do you think we're better off this way?

Trading slight amounts of S and AP to be able to say your single model is now totally efficient for this purpose that will probably never really statistically matter was fun for listbuilding, but not really a game-worthy concept.

Combi-weapons are a little different scope so I see that one, but I am also unsure that all combis become that.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
What else did I suggest when you branded me a consolidationist? I think I'm 2/2 so far.

Are you happy about this? Are you happy to see options, no... just straight up weapons that have been part of the game since its inception vanish into the Jervisified hell of "generic weapon options"? Do you think we're better off this way?

Depends on the weapons. Consolidating 2 almost identical profiles for the PF and the heavy chain weapon into one seems fine. Same as consolidating the myriad axes, swords, clubs on Terminators into Accursed Weapons worked out just fine, especially when PF and CF remained as options. I hope they do the same with the Plague Marine weapons, because so many of those are just ridiculously similar that they only serve to prolong the Fight phase as you roll each one separately.

Right now, the only change I've seen that worries me a little is the combi-weapon one, but Ill need to see another example first to conclude whether this was a Librarian-specific change or a general combi-weapon change.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So umm... why would one ever want to take the Reaper Chaincannon now that it only hits on 4's?

Plenty of shots still, and you can still hit on 3's if you don't move with it, probably gonna be nasty with dark pacts

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
the weapons did not vanish, your "heavy melee weapons" can still be power fists of thunder hammer as you wish

Then why not just reduce it further to "Gun" and "Heavy Gun" and "Sharp Thing"? I mean, they're not really vanishing, are they?

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
There is no meaningful difference between S8 -3 2 and S8 -2 3 for the scale of army that 40k represents on the tabletop.

Except the game has reintroduced a whole host of universal and weapon special rules that could show the differences between a Power Fist and a Thunderhammer. Did you forget that?

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
Plenty of shots still, and you can still hit on 3's if you don't move with it, probably gonna be nasty with dark pacts

Same amount of shots, but hits less. So it's objectively worse, thus my question still stands.

Hello my name is lord_blackfang and I think I may be a consolidationist

*crowd claps politely*

Would have liked a better name tho, heavy combat weapon is a name usually associated with stuff like two handed clubs.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So umm... why would one ever want to take the Reaper Chaincannon now that it only hits on 4's?

HB and CC squad with Lethal or Sustained.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So umm... why would one ever want to take the Reaper Chaincannon now that it only hits on 4's?

Remember [Heavy] works the other way around now and gives you a +1 to Hit if you stayed stationary instead of giving you -1 if you moved.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
Yeah, I love how the "b-b-b-but he's probably still competitive in-game, maybe he's 200 points!" is only point being made against those complaining Abaddon's stats got nerfed.

Some of us actually care about the lore and aren't interested in playing DotA on the tabletop. Why the need to defend GW here? It's just objectively weird that Abaddon is (probably) less tough than a marine wearing Gravis armor.

So gravis has 9w and 4++?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
the weapons did not vanish, your "heavy melee weapons" can still be power fists of thunder hammer as you wish

Then why not just reduce it further to "Gun" and "Heavy Gun" and "Sharp Thing"? I mean, they're not really vanishing, are they?

Because theres a bigger difference between a lascannon and a heavy bolter than between a PF and a TH....

Guns that are almost the same (cough cough boltguns) are already being consolidated anyway.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
There is no meaningful difference between S8 -3 2 and S8 -2 3 for the scale of army that 40k represents on the tabletop.

Except the game has reintroduced a whole host of universal and weapon special rules that could show the differences between a Power Fist and a Thunderhammer. Did you forget that?

Fair enough, but historically, havnt they always been basically the same? (unwieldy, armor cracking weapons)

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So umm... why would one ever want to take the Reaper Chaincannon now that it only hits on 4's?

3's if you stand still, which is likely why the heavy keyword was created.

Regards the consolidation.... mostly happy, the intercessor consolidation was a good move, the power weapons I'm fine with, the "heavy close combat weapon" is quite selective in it's application so I'm ok with that in this instance. Oddly the combi-weapon I'm half happy with, I think there should have been 2 types of combi-weapon, one for infantry, one for big stuff and rather they cap the number of weapons if they were worried about spam. Instead the "all in 1" profile is a little meh.

All I know is there's less chance I'm going to have to learn the difference between a big choppa, 'uge choppa, choppa, power klaw, the "not quite power klaw" on the bike warboss and so on if I play against orks as a guess, which is fine by me.