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.

 Xenomancers wrote:
The plasma tank commander is still inferior to the battle cannon. Taking plasma sponsons on the battle tank is an interesting option though though...I think I will. They still get plasma vents correct?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
Let's also enjoy that Leman Russ plasma tank commanders can put out 2d6 + 4d3 plasma shots per turn for 172 points, hitting on 3s and able to order itself.

Like everyone complaining about Ravagers needs to chill.

These guys put out expected 15 shots with the same profile as a ravager except strength 8 instead of strength 5. Oh and they're T8, 3+ instead of T6, 5++. For less than 50 more points. Oh and they can receive orders.

Does GW not see that Guard are already dominating the tournament scene, and have been for a year and a half? What the feth?

Rather than nerf castellan they try to let you get 3 commanders for less. Ehhh...Castellan is still better unfortunately. Not nerfing Castellan is a huge mistake - it completely dominates the game.

This chapter approved flatly misses the mark. It will not solve any balance issues. Maybe people will buy more primaris though, so that's at least something.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The plasma tank commander is still inferior to the battle cannon. Taking plasma sponsons on the battle tank is an interesting option though though...I think I will. They still get plasma vents correct?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
Let's also enjoy that Leman Russ plasma tank commanders can put out 2d6 + 4d3 plasma shots per turn for 172 points, hitting on 3s and able to order itself.

Like everyone complaining about Ravagers needs to chill.

These guys put out expected 15 shots with the same profile as a ravager except strength 8 instead of strength 5. Oh and they're T8, 3+ instead of T6, 5++. For less than 50 more points. Oh and they can receive orders.

Does GW not see that Guard are already dominating the tournament scene, and have been for a year and a half? What the feth?

Rather than nerf castellan they try to let you get 3 commanders for less. Ehhh...Castellan is still better unfortunately. Not nerfing Castellan is a huge mistake - it completely dominates the game.

This chapter approved flatly misses the mark. It will not solve any balance issues. Maybe people will buy more primaris though, so that's at least something.

I mean...I already got a lot of primaris. It seems more to me like they are trying to sell dreads/sterngaurd/vangaurd vet boxes...so basically...they want us to play deathwatch.

I love how the excuse for why a lot of things didn't get adjusted was "wait for CA" and now it's "wait for the next FAQ."

I feel with SM being weak but included in all future campaign books GW is counting on it's largest customer segment to chase the balance of the faction by buying all of the 30-50$ supplements. The formations given to guard are strong, the marine ones not so much but they aren't terrible.

There's no excuse for knights to remain as they are. Dissie cannons still basically half the price of grav? The interaction between jinx/doom + harlies+DE? Yanarri still break the game? Grav cannons costing 50% more than plasma cannons? No reductions to DA HQs but drops across the board for other factions? Plasma Devs costing less than Hellblasters? 10 point storm shields for TWC? FW mortis dreads not getting a price drop? SM twin autocannons costing more than FW autocannons? 13 point tacs? Custode guard still costing 50+ points? 5 pt cultists vs 4 point infantry? Tank commander points drops? The is just off the top of my head looking at one shelf of my models, the list of head-scratching decisions is long.

Even if some of the changes were good they have been done in such a sloppy and inconsistent way that I can't believe that a multi-million dollar company puts their name on them and we are supposed to think this is a serious attempt at balancing. I have no idea what metric GW is using to attempt balance and I don't think they do either. Supposedly this took months to do and I'm trying to give GW credit but they showed up to their own tournament not knowing how flying charges worked.

As a side rant. The most recent chapter tactics was the worst case of boot-licking and brown-nosing I think I've ever sat through. I love that they are trying so hard to put content out and they do more for the community than I could ever dream but it was really hard to sit through.

bananathug wrote:
I love how the excuse for why a lot of things didn't get adjusted was "wait for CA" and now it's "wait for the next FAQ."

I feel with SM being weak but included in all future campaign books GW is counting on it's largest customer segment to chase the balance of the faction by buying all of the 30-50$ supplements. The formations given to guard are strong, the marine ones not so much but they aren't terrible.

There's no excuse for knights to remain as they are. Dissie cannons still basically half the price of grav? The interaction between jinx/doom + harlies+DE? Yanarri still break the game? Grav cannons costing 50% more than plasma cannons? No reductions to DA HQs but drops across the board for other factions? Plasma Devs costing less than Hellblasters? 10 point storm shields for TWC? FW mortis dreads not getting a price drop? SM twin autocannons costing more than FW autocannons? 13 point tacs? Custode guard still costing 50+ points? 5 pt cultists vs 4 point infantry? Tank commander points drops? The is just off the top of my head looking at one shelf of my models, the list of head-scratching decisions is long.

Even if some of the changes were good they have been done in such a sloppy and inconsistent way that I can't believe that a multi-million dollar company puts their name on them and we are supposed to think this is a serious attempt at balancing. I have no idea what metric GW is using to attempt balance and I don't think they do either. Supposedly this took months to do and I'm trying to give GW credit but they showed up to their own tournament not knowing how flying charges worked.

As a side rant. The most recent chapter tactics was the worst case of boot-licking and brown-nosing I think I've ever sat through. I love that they are trying so hard to put content out and they do more for the community than I could ever dream but it was really hard to sit through.

The only strong formation of guard is the tank one, the infantry and artillery ones are meh, the emperors blade is useful but not that much and the scion one centers on valkyries completely wich they don’t need.

Martel732 wrote:
At this point I'd settle for no point changes, but drukhari cant take advantage of doom.

Yeah, I'd love that. Just force the farseer to cast buffing powers only to craftworlds, not harlies or drukhari. I think it's something that should work for anyone: psychic powers that buff friendly units can be casted only on units from the same book than the caster.

They already do. CWE buffs can only affect CWE units.

You're thinking hexes only hexing a target when interacting with a friendly book. Other books don't have that restriction (Null Zone, Death Hex).

Bharring wrote:
They already do. CWE buffs can only affect CWE units.

You're thinking hexes only hexing a target when interacting with a friendly book. Other books don't have that restriction (Null Zone, Death Hex).

No other book actually trys to pass of a buffing power as a hexing power. Re-roll all failed wounds isn't a debuff against that unit it a buff ti everything that shoot at them. Nullzoen, deathhex are debuffs the remove the invulnerable saves from the target.

They are totally different, also they don't allow for the insanity that is doom +Haywire BS or DOOM +Dissy spam. That needs to be stopped or a farseer is a 200 point model.

Bharring wrote:
They already do. CWE buffs can only affect CWE units.

You're thinking hexes only hexing a target when interacting with a friendly book. Other books don't have that restriction (Null Zone, Death Hex).

At this point, I don't care. Doom shouldn't work for drukhari. Or disintegrators need to go up. A lot.

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
They already do. CWE buffs can only affect CWE units.

You're thinking hexes only hexing a target when interacting with a friendly book. Other books don't have that restriction (Null Zone, Death Hex).

At this point, I don't care. Doom shouldn't work for drukhari. Or disintegrators need to go up. A lot.

I'll accept this when IMPERIUM & CHAOS as a keyword is banned as a force-unifying keyword, and ADEPTUS ASTARTES or HERETIC ASTARTES stops being legal as well, both for detachment combinations and army based combinations.

feth that. I'm still waiting for an edition where eldar are minority inconvenienced, much less bad. So sick of them being on top.

 Marmatag wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
They already do. CWE buffs can only affect CWE units.

You're thinking hexes only hexing a target when interacting with a friendly book. Other books don't have that restriction (Null Zone, Death Hex).

At this point, I don't care. Doom shouldn't work for drukhari. Or disintegrators need to go up. A lot.

I'll accept this when IMPERIUM & CHAOS as a keyword is banned as a force-unifying keyword, and ADEPTUS ASTARTES or HERETIC ASTARTES stops being legal as well, both for detachment combinations and army based combinations.

I can understand the first one and squinting perhaps adeptus astartes but heretic astartes? Really? How would you propose to play then codex heretic astartes? Think a bit before talking. I am not even entering on why would those things be equivalent with not having doom on drukhari when aeldary is also an army soup keyword

 Marmatag wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
They already do. CWE buffs can only affect CWE units.

You're thinking hexes only hexing a target when interacting with a friendly book. Other books don't have that restriction (Null Zone, Death Hex).

At this point, I don't care. Doom shouldn't work for drukhari. Or disintegrators need to go up. A lot.

I'll accept this when IMPERIUM & CHAOS as a keyword is banned as a force-unifying keyword, and ADEPTUS ASTARTES or HERETIC ASTARTES stops being legal as well, both for detachment combinations and army based combinations.

That's some of the most blatantly bais false equivalency BS, I have seen on here.
You are just arguing in bad faith as you clearly don't actually have a counter argument as to why doom should work with haywire or dissy's.

Bharring wrote:
They already do. CWE buffs can only affect CWE units.

You're thinking hexes only hexing a target when interacting with a friendly book. Other books don't have that restriction (Null Zone, Death Hex).

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
They already do. CWE buffs can only affect CWE units.

You're thinking hexes only hexing a target when interacting with a friendly book. Other books don't have that restriction (Null Zone, Death Hex).

At this point, I don't care. Doom shouldn't work for drukhari. Or disintegrators need to go up. A lot.

Doom works for drukhari, unfortunately. So A CWE buff is actually buffing a drukhari unit. A single farseer or a supreme command detachment in quite common in many competitive drukhari armies. If the eldar psyker can't buff drukhari units what's the point of allying those units?

Dis cannons are well priced considering the drukhari codex and the drukhari codex only. They are the most effective ranged weapon but several other options are absolutely terrible. So they should probably get a price hike but only if other stuff go down in price. At the moment the army is balanced, there are lots of underperforming stuff and some other ones that are very powerful but still the codex as a whole works good for the first time in years. The soup is the problem, always have been. Nerf the soup, not the army.

I remember flocks being useful for the first time in their history during index time, but they didn't last for long. Why? Not because they were overpowered or undercosted, but because ynnari could use them to trigger an overpowered combo. In the end a unit that was finally viable for drukhari, and far from being overpowered, was nerfed into the ground because of the soup. I don't want the same fate for dis cannons.

No psychic debuff is restricted to benefiting a specific faction.

And complaining about haywire? Cry more, Knights exist. There is no other tool in this game to counter them. A lot of lists don't run vehicles making Haywire garbage.

And you guys want to apply restrictions to Eldar without the same things being applied to your factions. ADEPTUS ASTARTES supreme command with 3 different kinds of librarians? Magnus buffing Mortarian? Warp Time?

There are a lot of broken combos out there. You need to get over it.

 Marmatag wrote:
Let's also enjoy that Leman Russ plasma tank commanders can put out 2d6 + 4d3 plasma shots per turn for 172 points, hitting on 3s and able to order itself.

Like everyone complaining about Ravagers needs to chill.

These guys put out expected 15 shots with the same profile as a ravager except strength 8 instead of strength 5. Oh and they're T8, 3+ instead of T6, 5++. For less than 50 more points. Oh and they can receive orders.

Does GW not see that Guard are already dominating the tournament scene, and have been for a year and a half? What the feth?

At least get your maths right. That tank is 192 points. The two plasma sponsons will be 20 points.

Dont forget to account for the fact that a Ravager is super mobile whereas the LR will be penalised as soon as it moves (-1 to hit for heavy weapons), and if it moves more than 5" it will only get one shot from its turret. And in a meta with high AP AT firepower, its not going to be around for long.

The potential reason why the tank commander received a buff was to price it inline with an Armiger Helverin. Both are now 172 points.

And no guard haven't been dominating, but they are doing reasonably well as a mono list. All the guard stuff that got a decrease weren't being used as often in the last 6 months and weren't part of soup.

Tau who would be on par with Guard as a mono codex just got huge buffs too and possibly will overtake them. No complaints there?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:


This chapter approved flatly misses the mark. It will not solve any balance issues. Maybe people will buy more primaris though, so that's at least something.

I think its too early to tell. Objectively speaking many armies will get better than the top cookie cutter lists that received little to no decreases and who wont benefit from Vigilus formations.

 Marmatag wrote:
No psychic debuff is restricted to benefiting a specific faction.

And you guys want to apply restrictions to Eldar without the same things being applied to your factions. ADEPTUS ASTARTES supreme command with 3 different kinds of librarians? Magnus buffing Mortarian? Warp Time?

Of course it should be a rule for everyone, not only the aeldari.

Haywire ins't broken at all, it's actually fairly priced. The only source of haywire firepower that is a top tier unit is a Skyweavers squad.

People complain about aeldari combos and effective units but forget or ignore AM craziness because they're all WAAC imperium players, mostly SM players, that can ally AM but not ravagers and other stuff.

 JNAProductions wrote:

ccs wrote:

 Brutus_Apex wrote:

Cultists are 5 points but Guard are 4? In what fething world does this even remotely make sense? Just adjust the keywords on cultists, it's not hard. They aren't a 5 point model.

Maybe they're just trolling all of you who think you know how to properly stat this game better than they do.

Do explain how a Cultist is worth a 25% increase over a Guardsmen. Please, enlighten us.

It's not got anything to do wether or not a cultist is worth 25% more than a guardsman. It's about poking you lot in the eye & hearing you yowl. THAT is worth a point.

CA has become redundant in only 12 months.

Reece from FLG has stated that the book is written way in advance of its release which explains why changes to Knights, Drukhari and other over performing factions weren't included.

What it doesn't explain is why I should waste my hard earned on a book that is by definition out of date as it releases.

I guess if I was a Sisters player or had an interest in the different missions I'd be tempted.

In terms of balance this CA is a massive fail. Almost all of the 'meta lists' got stronger, sometimes directly, other times indirectly.

The OP explains how some ork weapons only cause mortal wounds to the bearer on unmodified rolls of 1 and how they feel this mechanic should have been rolled out to other factions. This is not the only discrepancy between Ork mechanics and those of other armies. There is a vast discrepancy with the costs of Ork weapons and other factions counterparts now - our equivalent to a heavy flamer is more expensive, our equivalent to a Power Fist is more expensive, our equivalent to plasma is more expensive, our bikers are more expensive.

I'm not particularly bothered about this discrepancy from a balance perspective - it's irritating and tedious but not going to completely destroy any lists I don't think, I am bothered from a customer perspective that a book that I waited an incredibly long time for is seemingly out of date less than 2 months after its release though. This does annoy me. It also annoys me that factions that had their codexes early seem to get more attention than those without as they have repeated updates on an annual basis while later books languish/continue to dominate (depending on your book). This isn't parity and it isn't balance by design. It's a clear attempt to draw in more sales under the pretence of balance and that is bogus.

To me, it seems clear that CA is not the correct mechanism to affect balance. Leave CA to serve another, more appropriate purpose. GW needs to think of a quicker, probably electronic way to edit points and unit entries so we don't have to wait a year for obviously broken combos to get fixed. I'm not sure why I should pay for GW to correct their balance mistakes either but here we are.

To me, it seems clear that CA is not the correct mechanism to affect balance. Leave CA to serve another, more appropriate purpose. GW needs to think of a quicker, probably electronic way to edit points and unit entries so we don't have to wait a year for obviously broken combos to get fixed. I'm not sure why I should pay for GW to correct their balance mistakes either but here we are.

Ultimately, if GW ever wants to take their TT Sport seriously, they will have to do this. I believe FFG is already doing this so this isn't something impossible for them to do. Knowing that they also have a Kill Team Builder and a Warscroll Builder that they could easily change points on shows that GW already has infrastructure to do this.

Chapter Approved could be better served as a source that takes all datasheets released over the year(in supplements and such) and reprints them in a collected place.

 Eldarsif wrote:

To me, it seems clear that CA is not the correct mechanism to affect balance. Leave CA to serve another, more appropriate purpose. GW needs to think of a quicker, probably electronic way to edit points and unit entries so we don't have to wait a year for obviously broken combos to get fixed. I'm not sure why I should pay for GW to correct their balance mistakes either but here we are.

Ultimately, if GW ever wants to take their TT Sport seriously, they will have to do this. I believe FFG is already doing this so this isn't something impossible for them to do. Knowing that they also have a Kill Team Builder and a Warscroll Builder that they could easily change points on shows that GW already has infrastructure to do this.

Chapter Approved could be better served as a source that takes all datasheets released over the year(in supplements and such) and reprints them in a collected place.

100%.

GW have the infrastructure they just lack the desire as I assume they can't think of a way to effectively monetize such a system.

Ice_can wrote:

Wayniac wrote:

 admironheart wrote:
so what happened to the -1 army traits getting changed?

Is it still in the works....so soon to be a beta or new update/errata.

Possibly in the 1st Big FAQ of 2019

or was that all just random speculation that went no where?

Nobody knows yet. It could have just been fake news, or the sources were right about changes but (obviously) wrong about them being in CA. There's a chance these changes will come in the Big FAQ since GW wants to keep errata out of CA as well for some reason.

From what some of the play testers have said about CA one the embargo was lifted on them by GW, it's heavily implied that CA is what they were testing 6+ months ago, those changes of -1 to hit traits only started leaking what 2 months ago so that would ve about 6 months from FAQ3 if GW's playtest lead time is really that long.

Interesting. Which of them said that?

 Blackie wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
No psychic debuff is restricted to benefiting a specific faction.

And you guys want to apply restrictions to Eldar without the same things being applied to your factions. ADEPTUS ASTARTES supreme command with 3 different kinds of librarians? Magnus buffing Mortarian? Warp Time?

Of course it should be a rule for everyone, not only the aeldari.

Haywire ins't broken at all, it's actually fairly priced. The only source of haywire firepower that is a top tier unit is a Skyweavers squad.

People complain about aeldari combos and effective units but forget or ignore AM craziness because they're all WAAC imperium players, mostly SM players, that can ally AM but not ravagers and other stuff.

1Once again for the hard of reading people arn't complaining about just haywire, it's the cascade effect of allowing doom to effect haywire that people are objecting to.

2 DOOM isn't a ficken Debuff, in what way is reroll wounds a debuff, no invlunerable save is a debuff, can't gain the benifit of cover is a debuff but reroll wounds is a straight up buff.

Reroll all failed wounds was also a pretty dumb mechanic to even introduce but GW seams to be happily oblivious to that.

3 Yes we're all so biased imperial soup players, some of us have been complaining about Guard being undercosted for months, becuase it obvious the Imperial soup would be so much more powerful with 5ppm guard than 4ppm guardsmen.

I've been after eldar since 2nd. I am the OG eldar hater. So don't tell me to get over it. They've never paid off their karma for 2nd, much less any other edition

Armies shouldn't be balanced off what they had in previous editions, 'karma' isn't a thing and that's not how that works.

Ice_can wrote:

2 DOOM isn't a ficken Debuff, in what way is reroll wounds a debuff, no invlunerable save is a debuff, can't gain the benifit of cover is a debuff but reroll wounds is a straight up buff.

It affects the opponent's unit so it's a debuff. A debuff giving a bonus to units attacking the target, but still a debuff.

Reroll all failed wounds was also a pretty dumb mechanic to even introduce but GW seams to be happily oblivious to that.

You've beeing arguing against Doom for decades ? (to be fair it's a bit stronger now)

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
CA has become redundant in only 12 months.

Reece from FLG has stated that the book is written way in advance of its release which explains why changes to Knights, Drukhari and other over performing factions weren't included.

What it doesn't explain is why I should waste my hard earned on a book that is by definition out of date as it releases.

I guess if I was a Sisters player or had an interest in the different missions I'd be tempted.

In terms of balance this CA is a massive fail. Almost all of the 'meta lists' got stronger, sometimes directly, other times indirectly.

The OP explains how some ork weapons only cause mortal wounds to the bearer on unmodified rolls of 1 and how they feel this mechanic should have been rolled out to other factions. This is not the only discrepancy between Ork mechanics and those of other armies. There is a vast discrepancy with the costs of Ork weapons and other factions counterparts now - our equivalent to a heavy flamer is more expensive, our equivalent to a Power Fist is more expensive, our equivalent to plasma is more expensive, our bikers are more expensive.

I'm not particularly bothered about this discrepancy from a balance perspective - it's irritating and tedious but not going to completely destroy any lists I don't think, I am bothered from a customer perspective that a book that I waited an incredibly long time for is seemingly out of date less than 2 months after its release though. This does annoy me. It also annoys me that factions that had their codexes early seem to get more attention than those without as they have repeated updates on an annual basis while later books languish/continue to dominate (depending on your book). This isn't parity and it isn't balance by design. It's a clear attempt to draw in more sales under the pretence of balance and that is bogus.

To me, it seems clear that CA is not the correct mechanism to affect balance. Leave CA to serve another, more appropriate purpose. GW needs to think of a quicker, probably electronic way to edit points and unit entries so we don't have to wait a year for obviously broken combos to get fixed. I'm not sure why I should pay for GW to correct their balance mistakes either but here we are.

Reece has stated that only orcs are not included in CA since their codex is new. They have decided to make under performing fraction and units stronger, some over performing units got price hike. After all the balance is mainly done for the tournament metta, not for players that don`t wanna buy new models and just want their models to be OP. Only the betta testers have played with the new rules and the rest of as can be smart and wait to see how the changes effect the game.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
CA has become redundant in only 12 months.

Reece from FLG has stated that the book is written way in advance of its release which explains why changes to Knights, Drukhari and other over performing factions weren't included.

What it doesn't explain is why I should waste my hard earned on a book that is by definition out of date as it releases.

I guess if I was a Sisters player or had an interest in the different missions I'd be tempted.

In terms of balance this CA is a massive fail. Almost all of the 'meta lists' got stronger, sometimes directly, other times indirectly.

The OP explains how some ork weapons only cause mortal wounds to the bearer on unmodified rolls of 1 and how they feel this mechanic should have been rolled out to other factions. This is not the only discrepancy between Ork mechanics and those of other armies. There is a vast discrepancy with the costs of Ork weapons and other factions counterparts now - our equivalent to a heavy flamer is more expensive, our equivalent to a Power Fist is more expensive, our equivalent to plasma is more expensive, our bikers are more expensive.

I'm not particularly bothered about this discrepancy from a balance perspective - it's irritating and tedious but not going to completely destroy any lists I don't think, I am bothered from a customer perspective that a book that I waited an incredibly long time for is seemingly out of date less than 2 months after its release though. This does annoy me. It also annoys me that factions that had their codexes early seem to get more attention than those without as they have repeated updates on an annual basis while later books languish/continue to dominate (depending on your book). This isn't parity and it isn't balance by design. It's a clear attempt to draw in more sales under the pretence of balance and that is bogus.

To me, it seems clear that CA is not the correct mechanism to affect balance. Leave CA to serve another, more appropriate purpose. GW needs to think of a quicker, probably electronic way to edit points and unit entries so we don't have to wait a year for obviously broken combos to get fixed. I'm not sure why I should pay for GW to correct their balance mistakes either but here we are.

You can't get too upset about this, however. The book has to be developed, it will always fall behind the current meta, but will still affect it indirectly (sometimes positively or negatively). An FAQ book will always be chasing, it will never be current.

dhallnet wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

2 DOOM isn't a ficken Debuff, in what way is reroll wounds a debuff, no invlunerable save is a debuff, can't gain the benifit of cover is a debuff but reroll wounds is a straight up buff.

It affects the opponent's unit so it's a debuff. A debuff giving a bonus to units attacking the target, but still a debuff.

While I certainly agree that Doom affects the enemy unit and no other "malediction" (as they were called in 7E) specifies what friendly Faction can apply the "debuff", when you look at whose ROLLS are affected, it's clearly a buff to friendly units targeting the specific enemy unit. Those are the rolls that are buffed. If Doom forces the enemy unit to re-roll successful saves, that'd be a "true" debuff. It's also be more powerful than now

Doom does need reworked as currently the Faction that benefits the most isn't always CWE, but tends to be DE. That's an issue

Personally, I'd just Errata Doom to read as follows:
"Doom has a warp charge of 7. If manifested, target an enemy unit with 24" of the Psyker. Your <Craftworld> units may reroll failed to wound rolls against the target unit the start of the next Psychic Phase"
Done. And all that was needed was to add 1 word = <Craftworld> in between "Your" and "units"

-

 Galef wrote:

dhallnet wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

2 DOOM isn't a ficken Debuff, in what way is reroll wounds a debuff, no invlunerable save is a debuff, can't gain the benifit of cover is a debuff but reroll wounds is a straight up buff.

It affects the opponent's unit so it's a debuff. A debuff giving a bonus to units attacking the target, but still a debuff.

While I certainly agree that Doom affects the enemy unit and no other "malediction" (as they were called in 7E) specifies what friendly Faction can apply the "debuff", when you look at whose ROLLS are affected, it's clearly a buff to friendly units targeting the specific enemy unit. Those are the rolls that are buffed. If Doom forces the enemy unit to re-roll successful saves, that'd be a "true" debuff. It's also be more powerful than now

Doom does need reworked as currently the Faction that benefits the most isn't always CWE, but tends to be DE. That's an issue

Personally, I'd just Errata Doom to read as follows:
"Doom has a warp charge of 7. If manifested, target an enemy unit with 24" of the Psyker. Your <Craftworld> units may reroll failed to wound rolls against the target unit the start of the next Psychic Phase"
Done. And all that was needed was to add 1 word = <Craftworld> in between "Your" and "units"

Maybe they tested it and reviewed the result and decided its fine ?
There is not much ways eldar can get rid of heavy hitters without doom and jinx.
Doom also have weakness you have to cast it, you can be denied and you pay for HQ that is only good at casting spells.
If doom was a problem, than we should have seen much more assassins on the table, but that is not the case.

 Sir Heckington wrote:
Armies shouldn't be balanced off what they had in previous editions, 'karma' isn't a thing and that's not how that works.

It should for eldar. I'm seriously sick of them.