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.

Why change them there obviously working as intended?

I mean Guard have been broken since launch, knights pretty much as well all though after many months they did get adjusted, elder have spent huge chunks of this edition topping tournaments, Tau had the moment in the sun as did Death Guard and GSC.

Marines have they're first top tier release since there fliers got nerfed shortly after launch and almost the entire player base lose there gak within 24hs with it taking just 7days to reach peak hysteria after a handful of tournaments with multiple IH must burn threads.

I mean I all ready know the answer but how many tournaments in the last few months were not won by either imp soup or Elder the answer is very few.

There should be celebration that soup is dead and elder air wing is on life support. Yes it's sad that marines will no longer be free wins at tournaments and that people might have to play for objectives rather than just trying to table the opposition by turn 2.

In the long run leaving marines as they are will be healthy for the game especially if future codexs provide non soup bonuses for the other races.

Models should never, ever be banned. That is against the hobby, the theme and punished players and collectors.

The supplements can be adjusted individually, rule by rule.

SeanDrake wrote:
Why change them there obviously working as intended?

I mean Guard have been broken since launch, knights pretty much as well all though after many months they did get adjusted, elder have spent huge chunks of this edition topping tournaments, Tau had the moment in the sun as did Death Guard and GSC.

Marines have they're first top tier release since there fliers got nerfed shortly after launch and almost the entire player base lose there gak within 24hs with it taking just 7days to reach peak hysteria after a handful of tournaments with multiple IH must burn threads.

I mean I all ready know the answer but how many tournaments in the last few months were not won by either imp soup or Elder the answer is very few.

There should be celebration that soup is dead and elder air wing is on life support. Yes it's sad that marines will no longer be free wins at tournaments and that people might have to play for objectives rather than just trying to table the opposition by turn 2.

In the long run leaving marines as they are will be healthy for the game especially if future codexs provide non soup bonuses for the other races.

Is it healthy that one marines supplement is clearly easier to play and superior to its peers?

Whilst I echo the merits of the game being more objective focused and a new meta, the point is that Iron hands as they are now can win by shooting people off the board whilst taking minimal losses. They just need tweaking back into line with the other supplements in terms of marines.

The other issue is that as phoenix rising shows, other armies are not getting the same level of power spikes, which will leave marines a clear head and shoulders better than a lot of armies.

Dudeface wrote:
Is it healthy that one marines supplement is clearly easier to play and superior to its peers?

Is it, really?

Funny thing is, for three years now when something is broken, unfun junk in Codex: SM, you can see funny trend. It's always A + Leviathan, B + Leviathan, C + Leviathan, D + Leviathan, etc, etc. Occasionally Leviathan being replaced by Deredeo or Contemptor Mortis. I look at Chaos/Space ""Marines"" armies on tournaments that consist of 4+ recast Leviathans (or 6+ Mortis/Deredeos, in both cases to the exclusion of everything else save for token buffing character), and think to myself 'gee, what could be the problem here, surely it's the base rules, not OP, pay to win junk with way too good stats for it's price'

Last time I checked, IH regular dreadnoughts are not a problem. You can kill these easily, and IH can't repair dead vehicles. Neither are Ironclads/Redemptors, really, they don't have defensive or offensive output to do so even with IH bonus. For some funny reason, though, combining unit with gazillion wounds (and damage dice rolls) with stratagems and rules meant for 80 pts dread doesn't really work. But, maybe, just maybe, it's not really the fault of the base rules, but the units not meant to work with them. Funny idea that, eh?

I don't say IH shouldn't be nerfed, far from it, but the approach OP (and a few others) propose, basically making IH bonus worthless for stuff it was actually meant to buff because only the smallest possible buffs will not make Leviathans OP is terrible one. Rules should be balanced to the most common denominator, not to outlier that wrecks any possible attempt at doing so. Give Leviathans Redemptor stats, delete 2+ stats across the board from all FW dreads (replacing them with Venerable upgrade), there, half of the problem solved, now you can fine-tune IH to the level of other SM much more easily.

 Ishagu wrote:
Models should never, ever be banned. That is against the hobby, the theme and punished players and collectors.

The supplements can be adjusted individually, rule by rule.

it is time imo, that differing traits cost differing points.,

That is an interesting idea. What if you could play stock codex, just basic rules. Then maybe by traits if you wanted to a design your own chapter. Or you could go all ham and get a specilised doctrin on top of traits, but all of those would cost points.

So Lets say a marine X army for 2000pts would have fewer rules then a IH army, but the IH army would have only 1800pts to spend on models. And am pulling the numbers out of my arse, am not claiming that the IH rules should cost 200pts or that costing 200pts would somehow fix the IH problem.

 Irbis wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Is it healthy that one marines supplement is clearly easier to play and superior to its peers?

Is it, really?

Funny thing is, for three years now when something is broken, unfun junk in Codex: SM, you can see funny trend. It's always A + Leviathan, B + Leviathan, C + Leviathan, D + Leviathan, etc, etc. Occasionally Leviathan being replaced by Deredeo or Contemptor Mortis. I look at Chaos/Space ""Marines"" armies on tournaments that consist of 4+ recast Leviathans (or 6+ Mortis/Deredeos, in both cases to the exclusion of everything else save for token buffing character), and think to myself 'gee, what could be the problem here, surely it's the base rules, not OP, pay to win junk with way too good stats for it's price'

Last time I checked, IH regular dreadnoughts are not a problem. You can kill these easily, and IH can't repair dead vehicles. Neither are Ironclads/Redemptors, really, they don't have defensive or offensive output to do so even with IH bonus. For some funny reason, though, combining unit with gazillion wounds (and damage dice rolls) with stratagems and rules meant for 80 pts dread doesn't really work. But, maybe, just maybe, it's not really the fault of the base rules, but the units not meant to work with them. Funny idea that, eh?

I don't say IH shouldn't be nerfed, far from it, but the approach OP (and a few others) propose, basically making IH bonus worthless for stuff it was actually meant to buff because only the smallest possible buffs will not make Leviathans OP is terrible one. Rules should be balanced to the most common denominator, not to outlier that wrecks any possible attempt at doing so. Give Leviathans Redemptor stats, delete 2+ stats across the board from all FW dreads (replacing them with Venerable upgrade), there, half of the problem solved, now you can fine-tune IH to the level of other SM much more easily.

No you just made sure anyone not playing IronHands never places a dreadnaught on the table outside of a narative game ever.

The fact that codex dreadnaughts need to have 6+++, half damage strategum and a -1 damage aura all stacking up to be considered remotely viable rules wise says the base unit design is the problem.

Codex dreadnaughts suck as badly as Failbadon does at black crusade 13.1 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.13

The FAQ's are up - Iron Hands & Raven Guard.

beast_gts wrote:
The FAQ's are up - Iron Hands & Raven Guard.

No nerf aside the March of the Ancients stratagem (IH dreadnought becoming character, now max 1 per game).
RIP the game until the next balance update.

 Irbis wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Is it healthy that one marines supplement is clearly easier to play and superior to its peers?

Is it, really?

Funny thing is, for three years now when something is broken, unfun junk in Codex: SM, you can see funny trend. It's always A + Leviathan, B + Leviathan, C + Leviathan, D + Leviathan, etc, etc. Occasionally Leviathan being replaced by Deredeo or Contemptor Mortis. I look at Chaos/Space ""Marines"" armies on tournaments that consist of 4+ recast Leviathans (or 6+ Mortis/Deredeos, in both cases to the exclusion of everything else save for token buffing character), and think to myself 'gee, what could be the problem here, surely it's the base rules, not OP, pay to win junk with way too good stats for it's price'

Last time I checked, IH regular dreadnoughts are not a problem. You can kill these easily, and IH can't repair dead vehicles. Neither are Ironclads/Redemptors, really, they don't have defensive or offensive output to do so even with IH bonus. For some funny reason, though, combining unit with gazillion wounds (and damage dice rolls) with stratagems and rules meant for 80 pts dread doesn't really work. But, maybe, just maybe, it's not really the fault of the base rules, but the units not meant to work with them. Funny idea that, eh?

I don't say IH shouldn't be nerfed, far from it, but the approach OP (and a few others) propose, basically making IH bonus worthless for stuff it was actually meant to buff because only the smallest possible buffs will not make Leviathans OP is terrible one. Rules should be balanced to the most common denominator, not to outlier that wrecks any possible attempt at doing so. Give Leviathans Redemptor stats, delete 2+ stats across the board from all FW dreads (replacing them with Venerable upgrade), there, half of the problem solved, now you can fine-tune IH to the level of other SM much more easily.

Given the Iron hands lists doing well have more repulsor executioners and flyers in than leviathans, all of which are GW main plastics, I think we can discredit this entire concept that FW is a problem.

For those calling for 200+ point Feirros in addition to removing reroll 1s in the doctrine:

You're crazy. The only reason Feirros is great is BECAUSE you don't need another captain (and even that is HIGHLY debatable because there's still plenty of non heavy weapons and the chapter master strat to think about). Feirros isnt as strong as people think.

That said, a very small points bump (let's say 130 ish) wouldn't be uncalled for.

 NurglesR0T wrote:
It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

The Iron Hands being broken in half is pretty clear evidence that Dakka had no clue about how bad marines actually were or how to fix them. *~Marines aren't durable enough they need free invulns free FNP~* *~Marines don't do enough damage we should increase the AP of every bolt weapon~* *~Marines should take reduced damage to capture how durable they are in the fluff. Multidamage plasma makes them a joke~* GW does all of that and BAM marines are a problem again just like they were at the start of 8th unless suddenly everyone forgot about Rulesbloat Aquilaman's Razorback+tactical marine lists.

Marines need point increases across the board, I'm not sure why marines deserve a gentle hand when every other army gets kneecapped. If certain chapter tactics are terribad with the higher point costs then those specific tactics should be compensated with different buffs.

They have implemented one of the suggestions. 8 more to go!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DominayTrix wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:
It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

The Iron Hands being broken in half is pretty clear evidence that Dakka had no clue about how bad marines actually were or how to fix them. *~Marines aren't durable enough they need free invulns free FNP~* *~Marines don't do enough damage we should increase the AP of every bolt weapon~* *~Marines should take reduced damage to capture how durable they are in the fluff. Multidamage plasma makes them a joke~* GW does all of that and BAM marines are a problem again just like they were at the start of 8th unless suddenly everyone forgot about Rulesbloat Aquilaman's Razorback+tactical marine lists.

Marines need point increases across the board, I'm not sure why marines deserve a gentle hand when every other army gets kneecapped. If certain chapter tactics are terribad with the higher point costs then those specific tactics should be compensated with different buffs.

This isn't true. Marines are expensive and elite, and won#t be taking allies in most cases.

Iron Hands get around the elite problem by being super durable, but other chapters are as easy to destroy as they were in the old codex.

 Ishagu wrote:
They have implemented one of the suggestions. 8 more to go!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DominayTrix wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:
It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

The Iron Hands being broken in half is pretty clear evidence that Dakka had no clue about how bad marines actually were or how to fix them. *~Marines aren't durable enough they need free invulns free FNP~* *~Marines don't do enough damage we should increase the AP of every bolt weapon~* *~Marines should take reduced damage to capture how durable they are in the fluff. Multidamage plasma makes them a joke~* GW does all of that and BAM marines are a problem again just like they were at the start of 8th unless suddenly everyone forgot about Rulesbloat Aquilaman's Razorback+tactical marine lists.

Marines need point increases across the board, I'm not sure why marines deserve a gentle hand when every other army gets kneecapped. If certain chapter tactics are terribad with the higher point costs then those specific tactics should be compensated with different buffs.

This isn't true. Marines are expensive and elite, and won#t be taking allies in most cases.

Iron Hands get around the elite problem by being super durable, but other chapters are as easy to destroy as they were in the old codex.

What do allies have to do with anything I mentioned? I'm talking about at the very beginning of 8th before the Guard codex was even out and Gulliman + Razorbacks + Tactical marines was actually a strong viable well rounded list. I can't find any specific links at the moment, but I remember Lawrence Baker winning a large GT or something with a pure Ultramarines list. Didn't the other marine chapters also get durability buffs as well as offensive buffs? The Iron Hands may be the biggest boogieman, but all of the supplements seemed to do very well last weekend especially when compared to non-space marines. Many of the overpowered strategems like the double firing Thunderfire cannon one are non-specific. Tell me again why ONLY Iron Hands need a nerf and this problem can't be boiled down to "The new SM Codex made marines competitively strong and adding any supplement is enough to give them an edge over non-marine armies. Iron Hands are simply the strongest option of those supplements so the attention is on them."

The Iron Hands FAQ has been updated.

Looks like a lot of things suggested have been changed. Good job GW .

IH are still the best, however. And that's perfectly fine.

beast_gts wrote:
The Iron Hands FAQ has been updated.

So does this mean all the blue Iron Hands armies turn their bionics back in at the armory and shout Gulliman's name again?

As a quick recap

- Feirros now only gives 5++ to INFANTRY
- Iron Stone only works on one vehicle per battle round and you declare at the start of the battle round
- March of Ancients can only be used once
- 4+ DTW strat now costs 2 CP
- 4+ Overwatch strat now costs 2CP
- Machine Empathy strat can not repair a vehicle already repaired that turn
- Reforge psychic power can not repair a vehicle already repaired that turn

They are still flavorful and have some decent combos but they've mostly removed the worst offenders out of the book. Hopefully everyone will settle down now.

SeanDrake wrote:
Why change them there obviously working as intended?

I mean Guard have been broken since launch, knights pretty much as well all though after many months they did get adjusted, elder have spent huge chunks of this edition topping tournaments, Tau had the moment in the sun as did Death Guard and GSC.

Marines have they're first top tier release since there fliers got nerfed shortly after launch and almost the entire player base lose there gak within 24hs with it taking just 7days to reach peak hysteria after a handful of tournaments with multiple IH must burn threads.

I mean I all ready know the answer but how many tournaments in the last few months were not won by either imp soup or Elder the answer is very few.

There should be celebration that soup is dead and elder air wing is on life support. Yes it's sad that marines will no longer be free wins at tournaments and that people might have to play for objectives rather than just trying to table the opposition by turn 2.

In the long run leaving marines as they are will be healthy for the game especially if future codexs provide non soup bonuses for the other races.

When IH vehicles get, by default, the IG Defensive Gunners stratagem, Tenacious warlord trait, as well as the Tallarn/Cadian/Valhallan doctrine bonuses, all at the eame time as their basic subfaction abilities, on top of all the marine special rules and abilities, we've gone way beyond those other examples.

There's no way to argue that's good for the game, particularly if that's resting on the assumption that other factions will get treated the same way when there is no such indication.

Nobody is going to celebrate the death of other meta issues just because they get beat even harder by the new hotness. That doesn't solve anything, it gets us another 7E debacle.

 DominayTrix wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:
It's ironic that it was only a few months ago this forum cast aside space marines as useless and in need of major buffs to be anywhere near viable.. my how the pendulum swings.

The Iron Hands being broken in half is pretty clear evidence that Dakka had no clue about how bad marines actually were or how to fix them. *~Marines aren't durable enough they need free invulns free FNP~* *~Marines don't do enough damage we should increase the AP of every bolt weapon~* *~Marines should take reduced damage to capture how durable they are in the fluff. Multidamage plasma makes them a joke~* GW does all of that and BAM marines are a problem again just like they were at the start of 8th unless suddenly everyone forgot about Rulesbloat Aquilaman's Razorback+tactical marine lists.

Marines need point increases across the board, I'm not sure why marines deserve a gentle hand when every other army gets kneecapped. If certain chapter tactics are terribad with the higher point costs then those specific tactics should be compensated with different buffs.

You are going too far I think. Marines got more killy no doubt. We should probably just dump the super doctrines...and in the case of ultramarines - just fold that into their chapter tactics because their chapter tactics blows or just make the super doctrines stratagem effects. IDK. Marines have never really had a chance to be powerful ever - this Ironhands and Crimson fist crap though....

My friend made a great suggestion that dev doctrine should not give AP bonus but just allow you to move and shoot without penalty (for all marines across the board)...so there is a real trade off between staying in devastator and switching to tactical. Then Ironhands reroll 1's in devestator would still be a nice bonus but not OP and it might encourage them to take a weapon that isn't heavy...you know cause...iron hands have basically the same aresenal as other marine chapters. Just ideas. We want good internal balance first and then we can figure out what external balance should be. With a ton of new releases coming out...its possible that marines are actually underpowered in their current state and we just don't know it yet...I actually would not be the least bit surprised if that were the case because that seems to be what happens a lot with marines. They come out first and look pretty good...they other armies get even better stuff.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NurglesR0T wrote:

beast_gts wrote:
The Iron Hands FAQ has been updated.

So does this mean all the blue Iron Hands armies turn their bionics back in at the armory and shout Gulliman's name again?

As a quick recap

- Feirros now only gives 5++ to INFANTRY
- Iron Stone only works on one vehicle per battle round and you declare at the start of the battle round
- March of Ancients can only be used once
- 4+ DTW strat now costs 2 CP
- 4+ Overwatch strat now costs 2CP
- Machine Empathy strat can not repair a vehicle already repaired that turn
- Reforge psychic power can not repair a vehicle already repaired that turn

They are still flavorful and have some decent combos but they've mostly removed the worst offenders out of the book. Hopefully everyone will settle down now.

To be fair they did not touch the biggest issue. The Ironhands super doctrine. It is too good compared to the very similar ultramarines one. Turn 1 on and reroll 1's for free in addition and stacks with dev doctrine while buffing heavy weapons...It's not difficult to see it is the root of the problem. Crimson fists however do apear to be more powerful now and will need nerfs. They are also overpowered by their super doctrine.

I think the nerf was perfect. Enough so that games can be made competitive. I prefer gradual rather than overkill and this has certainly done it.

Whilst IH flyers will still be a thing, they arent going to have alpha strike protection from t1 and neither will they get Iron stone following them around.

They can still be killed quite comfortably by many lists.

Yeah, we can count this one as a bullseye for GW.

DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

It's a 4+ DTW (from any unit) that's made AFTER a normal DTW attempt. It's probably the best psy denial ability in the game. 2 CP is fine.
Now it's a last attempt denial for when you absolutely need it, instead of another auto-use strat.

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

It can be used after a DtW attempt, it's also one of 50 instead of one of 20 Stratagems. Both BT and WE are not supposed to have psykers, this is meant to make up for the perceived weak matchup, IH got it just to add insult to injury in terms of all the things they can do. No you cannot just go out and grab all the Stratagems of every other faction, make improvements on some of them and get them at the same cost, that's insanity.

 vict0988 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
DTW for 2CP on 4+ is overpriced.

1 CP was extremely cheap for 50% deny chance from any unit and at any roll

Now you might have to think about when to use it, instead of being a no-brainer for every psychic phase of your opponent

Then it needs to increase for World Eaters too then. And Graia. And eventually Black Templars when they get their stuff.
1CP for a 4+ deny (2CP for 75% chance) was perfectly acceptable. People are just looking to nerf Iron Hands for the sake of nerfing them without actually targeting the ACTUAL problems they have.

It can be used after a DtW attempt, it's also one of 50 instead of one of 20 Stratagems. Both BT and WE are not supposed to have psykers, this is meant to make up for the perceived weak matchup, IH got it just to add insult to injury in terms of all the things they can do. No you cannot just go out and grab all the Stratagems of every other faction, make improvements on some of them and get them at the same cost, that's insanity.

World Eaters and Black Templars can just as easily add in an extra detachment and get that access to Psykers. So your argument doesn't work.

For 3CP you have a 75% chance to shut down Magnus lol
I think it's a game changing Strat, and could even be costed higher.

 Ishagu wrote:
For 3CP you have a 75% chance to shut down Magnus lol
I think it's a game changing Strat, and could even be costed higher.

And World Eaters have easier access to farming CP as a mono army with Cultist troops, so should it cost more for them?

I don't think GW uses a stratagems efficiency as its CP cost, or how much CP an army can generate. I think they either pick the costs at random, or have some chart with re-rolls 1 CP, utility 2 CP, something for one thing that can work for more things 1-3CP etc.