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.
2019/01/02 18:34:41
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
Hello Dakka! As a mirror thread of the "How would you *slightly* change your favourite underperforming units/models? " thread, I am curious to know what kind of slight changes could Dakka bring to some overpowered units ? Same rules as in the other thread (change the unit in as minor as possible to make it fill it's main role to an acceptable standard, not to make it undeniably bad).
I begin with the hive-tyrant. I would let him get only one psy power (IIRC he has two), and lessen a bit its resilience (for example: if he has wings, -1 T. IIRC there was something like that before with flying tyranid MCs) This way, a walking hive tyrant would still be resilient, but if you want a mobile beast, you have to pay for it trading resilience for mobility.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/01/02 18:35:08
Remove Ion Bulwark from the knight warlord trait list.
If you want giant 400 point robots to have the same free relics and warlord traits as 40 point company commanders, you're going to have to make those buffs VERY SLIGHT.
VERY VERY SLIGHT. like, if Ion Bulwark is a thing it should be "reroll invuln saves of 1" not "add 1 to invuln saves."
It should not be "hmm decisions decisions, I could get this D2 2-shot bolt pistol, or this macro-cannon that does an average of 6 extra unsaved wounds per turn vs tanks."
"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!"
2019/01/02 20:26:07
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
Bullgryn: Delete the slabshield. No. I do not care whether you have a distinct model for it, you may not have a T5/3W/2+ unit that benefits from stacking Take Cover/Psychic Barrier and benefits from cover like infantry.
Remove Ion Bulwark from the knight warlord trait list.
If you want giant 400 point robots to have the same free relics and warlord traits as 40 point company commanders, you're going to have to make those buffs VERY SLIGHT.
VERY VERY SLIGHT. like, if Ion Bulwark is a thing it should be "reroll invuln saves of 1" not "add 1 to invuln saves."
It should not be "hmm decisions decisions, I could get this D2 2-shot bolt pistol, or this macro-cannon that does an average of 6 extra unsaved wounds per turn vs tanks."
Iron Bulwark actually has a very good reason why it exsists as a warlord trait, it's just unfortunately GW didn't forsee people stacking all the combos with unlimited Guard CP.
Cawls Wrath on the otherhand is an unbalanced abomination on top of an already powerful weapons platform.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/02 20:28:58
2019/01/02 20:28:25
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
IG Orders cost 1CP per use, and Grand Strategist is changed to make the first order your warlord issues per turn free. Apparently mono-IG have literal mountains of CP with no worthwhile sink, so it shouldn't hurt them while limiting how much nonsense the Loyal 32 can get up to.
2019/01/02 20:31:41
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
I really think that most of my over performers could be toned down with a rule to only allow the Warlords Stratagems to be used.
The Castellan is only silly due to the ability to feed it CP like its a suspect getting waterboarded. If you had to make it the Real Warlord, and gave it only the Knight Stratagems it would show its appropriately pointed.
2019/01/02 20:32:25
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
Remove Ion Bulwark from the knight warlord trait list.
If you want giant 400 point robots to have the same free relics and warlord traits as 40 point company commanders, you're going to have to make those buffs VERY SLIGHT.
VERY VERY SLIGHT. like, if Ion Bulwark is a thing it should be "reroll invuln saves of 1" not "add 1 to invuln saves."
It should not be "hmm decisions decisions, I could get this D2 2-shot bolt pistol, or this macro-cannon that does an average of 6 extra unsaved wounds per turn vs tanks."
Iron Bulwark actually has a very good reason why it exsists as a warlord trait, it's just unfortunately GW didn't forsee people stacking all the combos with unlimited Guard CP.
Cawls Wrath on the otherhand is an unbalanced abomination on top of an already powerful weapons platform.
"stacking all combos?"
What combo is stacked by ion bulwark other than "1/3cp to make my knight basically immune to shooting kthxbye"
"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!"
2019/01/02 20:39:49
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
So basically you want to remove IG Orders from the game.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
2019/01/02 20:41:07
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
Remove Ion Bulwark from the knight warlord trait list.
If you want giant 400 point robots to have the same free relics and warlord traits as 40 point company commanders, you're going to have to make those buffs VERY SLIGHT.
VERY VERY SLIGHT. like, if Ion Bulwark is a thing it should be "reroll invuln saves of 1" not "add 1 to invuln saves."
It should not be "hmm decisions decisions, I could get this D2 2-shot bolt pistol, or this macro-cannon that does an average of 6 extra unsaved wounds per turn vs tanks."
Iron Bulwark actually has a very good reason why it exsists as a warlord trait, it's just unfortunately GW didn't forsee people stacking all the combos with unlimited Guard CP.
Cawls Wrath on the otherhand is an unbalanced abomination on top of an already powerful weapons platform.
"stacking all combos?"
What combo is stacked by ion bulwark other than "1/3cp to make my knight basically immune to shooting kthxbye"
When you have 9 CP period for you list which started at 6cp untill FAQ'd you weren't even looking at ever takinh rotate on a dominus class ever. Giving "imperium lists access to 20 +CP is the issue mono codex it needs to exsist as otherwise that 600 points is dead before it even shoots 50% of the time.
Not that a Castellen is correct at 600 with cawls wrath exsisting.
Play against a vallient and tell me it havibg a 4++ is broken?
So basically you want to remove IG Orders from the game.
No mono guard apparently have nothing to spend CP on, plentiful
CP and game breaking orders.
It's an interesting spin on trying to balance them, while actually hurting soup more.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/02 20:43:26
2019/01/02 20:48:49
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
Yeah, as an IG player I wouldn't mind the 1CP per Order, though I'd still think making the first "free" shouldn't be a Warlord Trait.
The only problem I foresee is finding something the HQs can do, then.
The only concern is that making Orders into stratagems would be too limiting (1 per phase is the problem with the Sororitas Acts of Faith in the beta codex). So, all the orders past the first one (or two?) are 1CP, but you can use the same order more than once, and spend 80 CP for all I care...
2019/01/02 20:49:10
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
No mono guard apparently have nothing to spend CP on, plentiful
CP and game breaking orders.
It's an interesting spin on trying to balance them, while actually hurting soup more.
So if we're charging CP in order to allow models to use basic abilities, I assume you also won't object to Necrons paying 2CP to use MWBD, other units paying XCP to activate their auras for a turn (X being the number of units in the aura) etc.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
2019/01/02 20:49:50
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
No mono guard apparently have nothing to spend CP on, plentiful
CP and game breaking orders.
It's an interesting spin on trying to balance them, while actually hurting soup more.
So if we're charging CP in order to allow models to use basic abilities, I assume you also won't object to Necrons paying 2CP to use MWBD, other units paying XCP to activate their auras for a turn (X being the number of units in the aura) etc.
RIght. We should find something else for Company Commanders to do. Perhaps Marine players wouldn't mind us giving them a re-roll 1s aura like Captains have?
2019/01/02 20:50:44
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
No mono guard apparently have nothing to spend CP on, plentiful
CP and game breaking orders.
It's an interesting spin on trying to balance them, while actually hurting soup more.
So if we're charging CP in order to allow models to use basic abilities, I assume you also won't object to Necrons paying 2CP to use MWBD, other units paying XCP to activate their auras for a turn (X being the number of units in the aura) etc.
When other armies have aura's they can change at will sure they can pay CP for them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unit1126PLL wrote: Yeah, as an IG player I wouldn't mind the 1CP per Order, though I'd still think making the first "free" shouldn't be a Warlord Trait.
The only problem I foresee is finding something the HQs can do, then.
The only concern is that making Orders into stratagems would be too limiting (1 per phase is the problem with the Sororitas Acts of Faith in the beta codex). So, all the orders past the first one (or two?) are 1CP, but you can use the same order more than once, and spend 80 CP for all I care...
What if it was 1CP per order but it effected say evey unit wholely within 6 inches of that HQ commander and 3 inches of platoon commanders.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/02 21:03:43
2019/01/02 21:04:48
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
No mono guard apparently have nothing to spend CP on, plentiful
CP and game breaking orders.
It's an interesting spin on trying to balance them, while actually hurting soup more.
So if we're charging CP in order to allow models to use basic abilities, I assume you also won't object to Necrons paying 2CP to use MWBD, other units paying XCP to activate their auras for a turn (X being the number of units in the aura) etc.
When other armies have aura's they can change at will sure they can pay CP for them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unit1126PLL wrote: Yeah, as an IG player I wouldn't mind the 1CP per Order, though I'd still think making the first "free" shouldn't be a Warlord Trait.
The only problem I foresee is finding something the HQs can do, then.
The only concern is that making Orders into stratagems would be too limiting (1 per phase is the problem with the Sororitas Acts of Faith in the beta codex). So, all the orders past the first one (or two?) are 1CP, but you can use the same order more than once, and spend 80 CP for all I care...
What if it was 1CP per order but it effected say evey unit wholely within 6 inches of that HQ commander and 3 inches of platoon commanders.
I wouldn't say wholly within, because it's dumb to force an army to blob up like that. I'd say within, just like all the Space Marine HQs have.
2019/01/02 21:18:33
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
No mono guard apparently have nothing to spend CP on, plentiful
CP and game breaking orders.
It's an interesting spin on trying to balance them, while actually hurting soup more.
So if we're charging CP in order to allow models to use basic abilities, I assume you also won't object to Necrons paying 2CP to use MWBD, other units paying XCP to activate their auras for a turn (X being the number of units in the aura) etc.
When other armies have aura's they can change at will sure they can pay CP for them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unit1126PLL wrote: Yeah, as an IG player I wouldn't mind the 1CP per Order, though I'd still think making the first "free" shouldn't be a Warlord Trait.
The only problem I foresee is finding something the HQs can do, then.
The only concern is that making Orders into stratagems would be too limiting (1 per phase is the problem with the Sororitas Acts of Faith in the beta codex). So, all the orders past the first one (or two?) are 1CP, but you can use the same order more than once, and spend 80 CP for all I care...
What if it was 1CP per order but it effected say evey unit wholely within 6 inches of that HQ commander and 3 inches of platoon commanders.
I wouldn't say wholly within, because it's dumb to force an army to blob up like that. I'd say within, just like all the Space Marine HQs have.
I would honestly have to double check as I know some of my marine aura's are wholly within thanks to FAQing. But I also dislike tge wierd conga lining that within started to be abused for, personally I would rather larger area's with wholly within than the smaller within shenanigans with units congalining across the board.
2019/01/02 21:18:36
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
No mono guard apparently have nothing to spend CP on, plentiful
CP and game breaking orders.
It's an interesting spin on trying to balance them, while actually hurting soup more.
So if we're charging CP in order to allow models to use basic abilities, I assume you also won't object to Necrons paying 2CP to use MWBD, other units paying XCP to activate their auras for a turn (X being the number of units in the aura) etc.
RIght. We should find something else for Company Commanders to do. Perhaps Marine players wouldn't mind us giving them a re-roll 1s aura like Captains have?
Sounds fair, as long as Cadians get re-roll all hits if they don't move. I'd gladly trade orders for that. Otherwise, 1 CP per order is stupid. Guard armies have plenty to spend CP on, I'll always spend at least 3 CP per turn (overlapping fields of fire + re-roll), so 15 CP per game if we assume 5 turn games. Just because the Guard doesn't blow it's CP in the first turn like some armies doesn't mean those CP are useless.
2019/01/02 21:39:28
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
Phaeron Gukk wrote: IG Orders cost 1CP per use, and Grand Strategist is changed to make the first order your warlord issues per turn free. Apparently mono-IG have literal mountains of CP with no worthwhile sink, so it shouldn't hurt them while limiting how much nonsense the Loyal 32 can get up to.
Given that models issuing Orders generally don't do literally anything else at all, and that a classic IG Infantry wall list will exhaust those CP's in a couple of turns, we'd better be changing some other mechanics in the process, because thats no slight change.
No mono guard apparently have nothing to spend CP on, plentiful
CP and game breaking orders.
It's an interesting spin on trying to balance them, while actually hurting soup more.
So if we're charging CP in order to allow models to use basic abilities, I assume you also won't object to Necrons paying 2CP to use MWBD, other units paying XCP to activate their auras for a turn (X being the number of units in the aura) etc.
RIght. We should find something else for Company Commanders to do. Perhaps Marine players wouldn't mind us giving them a re-roll 1s aura like Captains have?
As mentioned in the now closed silly Guardsmen thread disaster from last week, I'd trade Orders entirely for the Captain reroll 1's buff in a heartbeat no questions asked if it was the exact same thing.
I don't think most opponents would feel the same way after playing however
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2019/01/02 21:40:30
Subject: Re:How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
I should have been clearer on one point; I would want them to cost CP, not that they'd be stratagems. Think SoB's faith points, but using a pre-existing system and less(?) disappointment. It's intentionally a different use for CPs, because mono-IG armies should be able to spam FRFSRF to their heart's content. The point is to make orders functionally inaccessible in Soup builds, not weaker. If it's too harsh power-wise (and I don't think it is), then buffing CCs with something like a re-roll aura sounds fine.
Also if my Overlord had access to such a variety of useful buffs akin to IG orders I'd be too busy dreaming to pay for them lol.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/02 21:41:32
2019/01/02 22:38:39
Subject: Re:How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
Phaeron Gukk wrote: I should have been clearer on one point; I would want them to cost CP, not that they'd be stratagems. Think SoB's faith points, but using a pre-existing system and less(?) disappointment. It's intentionally a different use for CPs, because mono-IG armies should be able to spam FRFSRF to their heart's content. The point is to make orders functionally inaccessible in Soup builds, not weaker. If it's too harsh power-wise (and I don't think it is), then buffing CCs with something like a re-roll aura sounds fine.
Also if my Overlord had access to such a variety of useful buffs akin to IG orders I'd be too busy dreaming to pay for them lol.
I could see orders becoming something like a slew of different auras that require CP to activate. So they'd mechanically work the same way as other factions' auras (affecting everyone within 6", not just one unit per order), but the flexibility of being able to choose what to use on a given turn would come at the cost of CP.
Maybe then have cheap, minor auras available to Platoon Commanders (eg pay 1CP, re-roll 1s to hit), while Company Commanders could have more expensive/powerful abilities (eg pay 2-3CP, re-roll all misses). Throw in an effect for voxes (maybe 12" bubble for units with voxes, recost appropriately) and it seems like a workable scheme. That'd all be pretty useless to soup's Loyal 32, but a lot more valuable to mono-Guard lists.
Phaeron Gukk wrote: I should have been clearer on one point; I would want them to cost CP, not that they'd be stratagems. Think SoB's faith points, but using a pre-existing system and less(?) disappointment. It's intentionally a different use for CPs, because mono-IG armies should be able to spam FRFSRF to their heart's content. The point is to make orders functionally inaccessible in Soup builds, not weaker. If it's too harsh power-wise (and I don't think it is), then buffing CCs with something like a re-roll aura sounds fine.
Also if my Overlord had access to such a variety of useful buffs akin to IG orders I'd be too busy dreaming to pay for them lol.
I could see orders becoming something like a slew of different auras that require CP to activate. So they'd mechanically work the same way as other factions' auras (affecting everyone within 6", not just one unit per order), but the flexibility of being able to choose what to use on a given turn would come at the cost of CP.
Maybe then have cheap, minor auras available to Platoon Commanders (eg pay 1CP, re-roll 1s to hit), while Company Commanders could have more expensive/powerful abilities (eg pay 2-3CP, re-roll all misses). Throw in an effect for voxes (maybe 12" bubble for units with voxes, recost appropriately) and it seems like a workable scheme. That'd all be pretty useless to soup's Loyal 32, but a lot more valuable to mono-Guard lists.
You guys are vastly overrating guard orders... re-rolling 1's to hit on a lasgun squad gets you what, 2-3 extra hits tops? Re-rolling all misses gives you an extra what, 7-8 lasgun hits maybe? FRFSRF gives you an extra 9 lasgun hits on average... again, so what? 9 lasgun hits is 1 dead MEQ. Who would ever spend 1 CP to kill a single marine? Orders make guardsmen go from absolutely worthless to decent for their points.
Making orders cost CP would be a massive nerf to mono-IG armies, and wouldn't effect soup armies because while they use orders to make their guardsmen better, it's not like 3 extra MEQ dead is that big of a deal, assuming they can get all 30 guardsmen in 12" and issue orders to all of them to get off a solid volley.
2019/01/02 22:48:42
Subject: Re:How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
I'd give the Hemlock some sort of potential minus to casting powers as it gets degraded. As it stands a Hemlock on 1 wound is just as effective as on 12 and it can be really absurd and frustrating for your opponent to throw a lot of damage at it and to essentially do nothing. It also removes a lot of potential skill from the use of it since it's an incredibly cool concept for a unit and is an interesting mix of damage and support abilities. I don't know how effective a psychic nerf from degradation would be, but just making so it can't throw out so many easy smites and jinxes despite being beaten up would go a long way to addressing it outside of increasing its points until it becomes unusable.
Nazi punks feth off
2019/01/02 23:02:20
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
I think a very simple "fix" to a lot of serious issues would be to limit stratagems to more exclusive units, and likewise edit/remove some keywords from certain units. Most of the powerful combinations come from soup, or from stratagems which equally affect a single toughness 3 model, or a 500+ point Knight or Baneblade, etc.
I'd have liked to see one extra page of stratagems per codex, but more importantly limit stratagems to certain units - this would also make certain units more worth taking "Oh well, these stats aren't great...but they have this cool stratagem", much in the way you're seeing the Specialist Detachments (note they're mostly based around the more rare units in the armies from Vigilus...not surprising). I think stratagems could be a good way to "fix" many underperforming units, or give them at least some flavor. This should have been more heavily considered at the onset.
One of the main issues with stuff like Chaos cultists is that they (admittedly - for no reason) benefit from stratagems that were not really intended for them. So, cut and clip some keywords, or change the stratagems to be used on X, Y and Z. Some of these already exist of course, but some units could benefit from more "aimed" stratagems.
Look at stuff like Vengeance for Cadia in the guard codex - that makes certain guard units comically powerful vs. Chaos for, what, 1 CP? Limit it to an <INFANTRY> unit or something like that. I think if GW narrowed stratagems down across the board (something they won't do), it would be a much more interesting game. Perhaps they'll learn lessons from 8th when they revise it in a few years time.
2019/01/03 08:50:47
Subject: How would you *slightly* change your despised overperforming units/models?
I'd just ban the soups from matched play to be honest, that basically kills the most significant cheesy combos in the game.
Then just adjust some points costs.
This is the only way to fix 40k issues with minor changes. Most of the overperforming units are not that broken outside the soup and if they get an appropriate points cost they wouldn't be broken even in their stand alone faction, if they really are over performing on their own.