Kanluwen wrote:

 Zid wrote:

Flyers have been part of the game since 5th and, honestly, during 5th they were just like any other vehicle other than the skimmer rules (which skimmer rules were bs...). Then 6th came along, made them actual fliers, which was cool and all, and they did some pretty unique things. But the rules were unwieldy. I think fliers should be more common than LoW because, lets be honest, a battalion of valk's would be more common than imperial knights stomping everywhere.

Essentially the game allows fielding super-heavies for no trade off. Which would be fine, but the addition of CP's kind of changes things. You should have to think before adding in a LoW instead of it being an auto include for many armies currently (Gulliman, Morty, Magnus....). A -1 CP isn't a lot, but its enough to make people think about what they build.

Just so we're clear, Flyers were present before 5th. They were a FW only thing though...same as LoW were at the time.

So once again: why is one thing acceptable but the other isn't? Because you think that one would be more common?
There are entire Houses of Knights, with some sworn to the Mechanicus and some sworn to the Imperium and a third group that operate as individuals sworn to a specific task.
You're about as likely to run into an Imperial Knight, considering those circumstances, than you are "a battalion of Valkyries"--which are primarily earmarked for special Regiments or high ranking Imperial officials.

Hell there are regiments of Super-Heavy Tanks for the Imperial Guard...but rarely are they ever fielded en masse. They usually are (shock and gasp...) placed under the command of an Armoured Regiment or attached as part of its order of battle.

TLDR: -1 CP for a Superheavy is stupid when you can't place them into a normal FOC. It's a points heavy investment for something that usually can't claim Cover saves easily and in the case of the Primarchs is vulnerable to being singled out barring some gimmicks like the Deathshroud.

Vaktathi wrote:

 Zid wrote:


No ones arguing that a lot of FW is fine, however, there are a few items that are legitimately broken;

Sure, but not really any moreso or at any greater rate than main Studio stuff.

Forgeworld models are made to be impressive and have fun with. They are excellent, excellent models, and I loved buying them in my old armies to have fun with. However, they aren't balanced properly.

Less well than mainline studio stuff? I don't see that there's any data for that, most tournaments allow it and FW stuff isn't routinely dominating tables or required to win by any means, certainly wasn't the case in previous editions.

We all know that 40k has a bit of pay to win in it, forgeworld exacerbates that tremendously; many players are unfamiliar with the dozens of units forgeworld has, and even fewer own models from FW. Even if the units were properly balanced, the knowledge difference between players creates a huge gap, and in wargames knowledge is power.

In theory I can get that argument, but in practice I just can't lend it a lot of credence. The internet exists, and, like it or not, the FW rules stuff is just as accessible as anything else (legally or illegally) unless you're somehow unable to use the internet and can only ever buy stuff from a brick and mortar store, so are forums and discussion groups where people talk about them,etc. Furthermore, not everyone is familiar with everything from the main studio, I've had people flummoxed by Obliterators and Hellhounds and Wave Serpents before, relatively common mainline units. I just can't bring myself to be terribly sympathetic to the ignorance issue, and, looking at tournament results for both 7E and 8E, the pay2win stuff hasn't generally been in the FW court. Do they have a few stinkers? Yes. If you banned FW would the game be appreciably more balanced? Not really. In fact, in general, when the main studio writes rules for FW models, they usually make them dramatically more powerful.

Wayniac wrote:
(Forgeworld being usually imbalanced is another issue, for everything that's fine you get garbage like Malefic Lords).

Hrm, it's usually more "for every stinker like Malefic Lords, there's two dozen units that are just fine or underpowered". Even most of the IG stuff that people complain about, like Earthshaker platforms, aren't unreasonably costed next to their tracked counterparts (you save 21pts but are much easier to kill, are vulnerable to morale, lose a heavy weapon, and are immobile) but rather the issue is more of an inherent metagame alpha strike issue where if that goes off right everything else becomes irrelevant.

ryzouken wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Can you explain A)? are you talking about just imperial guard forge world or all forge world, if its the latter you be having a laugh me bucko arrr

Why take drop pods when I can make my marines Raptors chapter and take Lias Issodon, saving 150ish points? (I lose access to Guilliman, I guess?)
Why take Codex Craftworlds anti infantry selections (banshees, scorpions, swooping hawks, etc.) when shadow spectres do the job better for cheaper?
Why take basilisks when I can take earthshaker batteries for cheaper and lose nothing I care about?
Why take plasma scions when elysians are cheaper?

These are four easy examples of hyper efficient things that stand out as superior to their codex counterparts. It's not an exhaustive list, just what I know of off the top of my head.
If Forgeworld weren't superior to the readily available codex options, people wouldn't generally bother going through the hoops and hurdles of international shipping costs and delays to order them, to say nothing of the pains of working on resin casts or the even higher prices on these models. I say that as someone who just procured two units of shadow spectres; they are simply the optimal selection compared to codex options in terms of anti infantry.

But go on ahead and argue why you believe it's balanced. Please provide specific examples.

tneva82 wrote:

ryzouken wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Can you explain A)? are you talking about just imperial guard forge world or all forge world, if its the latter you be having a laugh me bucko arrr

Why take drop pods when I can make my marines Raptors chapter and take Lias Issodon, saving 150ish points? (I lose access to Guilliman, I guess?)
Why take Codex Craftworlds anti infantry selections (banshees, scorpions, swooping hawks, etc.) when shadow spectres do the job better for cheaper?
Why take basilisks when I can take earthshaker batteries for cheaper and lose nothing I care about?
Why take plasma scions when elysians are cheaper?

These are four easy examples of hyper efficient things that stand out as superior to their codex counterparts. It's not an exhaustive list, just what I know of off the top of my head.
If Forgeworld weren't superior to the readily available codex options, people wouldn't generally bother going through the hoops and hurdles of international shipping costs and delays to order them, to say nothing of the pains of working on resin casts or the even higher prices on these models. I say that as someone who just procured two units of shadow spectres; they are simply the optimal selection compared to codex options in terms of anti infantry.

But go on ahead and argue why you believe it's balanced. Please provide specific examples.

Then "conveniently" forget all the broken stuff codexes have. But yeah it's okay for codex to be broken but numerically lower amount of FW and it's all FW stuff is bad.

Howabout if you want to ban FW stuff for being OP I want to ban all codex stuff since codex also has broken stuff? Fair is fair. Anything that contains OP stuff needs to be flat out banned after all.

ERJAK wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

ryzouken wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Can you explain A)? are you talking about just imperial guard forge world or all forge world, if its the latter you be having a laugh me bucko arrr

Why take drop pods when I can make my marines Raptors chapter and take Lias Issodon, saving 150ish points? (I lose access to Guilliman, I guess?)
Why take Codex Craftworlds anti infantry selections (banshees, scorpions, swooping hawks, etc.) when shadow spectres do the job better for cheaper?
Why take basilisks when I can take earthshaker batteries for cheaper and lose nothing I care about?
Why take plasma scions when elysians are cheaper?

These are four easy examples of hyper efficient things that stand out as superior to their codex counterparts. It's not an exhaustive list, just what I know of off the top of my head.
If Forgeworld weren't superior to the readily available codex options, people wouldn't generally bother going through the hoops and hurdles of international shipping costs and delays to order them, to say nothing of the pains of working on resin casts or the even higher prices on these models. I say that as someone who just procured two units of shadow spectres; they are simply the optimal selection compared to codex options in terms of anti infantry.

But go on ahead and argue why you believe it's balanced. Please provide specific examples.

Then "conveniently" forget all the broken stuff codexes have. But yeah it's okay for codex to be broken but numerically lower amount of FW and it's all FW stuff is bad.

Howabout if you want to ban FW stuff for being OP I want to ban all codex stuff since codex also has broken stuff? Fair is fair. Anything that contains OP stuff needs to be flat out banned after all.

This would be a fair point if you weren't so full of gak it was coming out of your ears. What broken stuff? What codex so far has been 'broken' in comparison to the indexes? Pretty much only AsMil right? And they got their most broken thing absolutely torn to bits in an FAQ. Everything else was just stuff from the index that didn't get nerfed (girlybro) or gimmick combos people flipped out about that actually kinda suck (infinte poxwalkers).

Meanwhile forgeworld have superchicken, malefic lords, and even the SoB repressors creating a pretty ridiculous power vacuum.

ERJAK wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

ryzouken wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Can you explain A)? are you talking about just imperial guard forge world or all forge world, if its the latter you be having a laugh me bucko arrr

Why take drop pods when I can make my marines Raptors chapter and take Lias Issodon, saving 150ish points? (I lose access to Guilliman, I guess?)
Why take Codex Craftworlds anti infantry selections (banshees, scorpions, swooping hawks, etc.) when shadow spectres do the job better for cheaper?
Why take basilisks when I can take earthshaker batteries for cheaper and lose nothing I care about?
Why take plasma scions when elysians are cheaper?

These are four easy examples of hyper efficient things that stand out as superior to their codex counterparts. It's not an exhaustive list, just what I know of off the top of my head.
If Forgeworld weren't superior to the readily available codex options, people wouldn't generally bother going through the hoops and hurdles of international shipping costs and delays to order them, to say nothing of the pains of working on resin casts or the even higher prices on these models. I say that as someone who just procured two units of shadow spectres; they are simply the optimal selection compared to codex options in terms of anti infantry.

But go on ahead and argue why you believe it's balanced. Please provide specific examples.

Then "conveniently" forget all the broken stuff codexes have. But yeah it's okay for codex to be broken but numerically lower amount of FW and it's all FW stuff is bad.

Howabout if you want to ban FW stuff for being OP I want to ban all codex stuff since codex also has broken stuff? Fair is fair. Anything that contains OP stuff needs to be flat out banned after all.

This would be a fair point if you weren't so full of gak it was coming out of your ears. What broken stuff? What codex so far has been 'broken' in comparison to the indexes? Pretty much only AsMil right? And they got their most broken thing absolutely torn to bits in an FAQ. Everything else was just stuff from the index that didn't get nerfed (girlybro) or gimmick combos people flipped out about that actually kinda suck (infinte poxwalkers).

Meanwhile forgeworld have superchicken, malefic lords, and even the SoB repressors creating a pretty ridiculous power vacuum.

 Zid wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

 Zid wrote:

Flyers have been part of the game since 5th and, honestly, during 5th they were just like any other vehicle other than the skimmer rules (which skimmer rules were bs...). Then 6th came along, made them actual fliers, which was cool and all, and they did some pretty unique things. But the rules were unwieldy. I think fliers should be more common than LoW because, lets be honest, a battalion of valk's would be more common than imperial knights stomping everywhere.

Essentially the game allows fielding super-heavies for no trade off. Which would be fine, but the addition of CP's kind of changes things. You should have to think before adding in a LoW instead of it being an auto include for many armies currently (Gulliman, Morty, Magnus....). A -1 CP isn't a lot, but its enough to make people think about what they build.

Just so we're clear, Flyers were present before 5th. They were a FW only thing though...same as LoW were at the time.

So once again: why is one thing acceptable but the other isn't? Because you think that one would be more common?
There are entire Houses of Knights, with some sworn to the Mechanicus and some sworn to the Imperium and a third group that operate as individuals sworn to a specific task.
You're about as likely to run into an Imperial Knight, considering those circumstances, than you are "a battalion of Valkyries"--which are primarily earmarked for special Regiments or high ranking Imperial officials.

Hell there are regiments of Super-Heavy Tanks for the Imperial Guard...but rarely are they ever fielded en masse. They usually are (shock and gasp...) placed under the command of an Armoured Regiment or attached as part of its order of battle.

TLDR: -1 CP for a Superheavy is stupid when you can't place them into a normal FOC. It's a points heavy investment for something that usually can't claim Cover saves easily and in the case of the Primarchs is vulnerable to being singled out barring some gimmicks like the Deathshroud.

I can see your point. Honestly, I would have rather super-heavies have been a niche-funsies thing permanently. But I can see why people dislike them too. I mean they have become a normal part of the game, I just wish they weren't the linchpin in many typical archetypes you see; but then again, its been the same since forever. Some guy finds an army that is super hard to beat, and everyone copies it. I think its just pretty crappy that games involving LoW's boil down to; kill the lord, I win, don't kill the lord, I lose sorts of things.

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, OK, you want Lasguns on sergeants (Powerfists on regular sergeants annoys me too, they're only on Veteran Sergeants for some reason) but it's frankly laughable to say they didn't pay attention to army styles other than "wave of bodies" when out of all the vehicles in the codex, the ONLY ones that didn't get SOME kind of change index to codex (whether that be stat change, points change, or special Stratagem referring specifically to that vehicle) were:

-Regular Taurox
-Wyvern? I don't remember whether the Wyvern or the Hydra got the Aerial Spotter stratagem.

Hydra, Manticore, and the Deathstrike didn't get access to Aerial Spotters but both the Wyvern and Basilisk both did.

If I'm going to be honest, I feel like the Hydra really should have gotten something to make it feel different to the other armies' anti-"Fly" keyword capabilities. I don't know what that something should be (whether it is being static BS4 versus both "Fly" and non-"Fly" keywords to represent the fact that it's supposedly just throwing boatloads of shells at the target or having more shots than it currently has), but it just feels exceedingly lackluster for an item described as throwing walls of flak up.

All the rest, every SINGLE one, got changed for the better. I'm not sure what it is with you and letting one thing completely ruin an entire release for you, but between this sergeant lasgun thing and the whole "I wish I didn't have to take a couple Enginseers" skitarii thing...I don't know what to tell you, man. We got regiment rules. They're really flavorful and in depth. the internal balance is pretty darn good, amazing by GW standards.

Truth be told, the Sergeant Lasgun thing is a pet peeve. It hasn't ruined my enjoyment but it does give me something to bring up when people talk about how the book feels "more customizable" than previous ones or things we'd like to have seen done differently. I've actually submitted it a few times for FAQs/Erratas in the hope that someone finally realizes that it's actually a thing that is possible thanks to the kit(which isn't actually doable with the new Laspistol and Frag Grenade loadout I might add, since both of those are the right hands of the model).
It's a pet peeve for me because of the fact that the other three armies I have/had(AdMech which are shelved until Fires of Cyraxus or the FW Cyraxus list gets released whichever comes first, Tau, and Marines/Deathwatch) have Sergeant/Sergeant equivalents rocking the same weapon as the rest of the squad while the one army I have which actually has long held that the weapons of an officer(pistol/sword) were not necessarily for the NCOs. There was a great little fluff bit in "Cadian Blood" where the Whiteshield(Conscripts by another name) leading the squad remarks (paraphrasing here) how he feels foolish waving a sword around like the Captain does, since he's "just" a sergeant equivalent.

AdMech for me wasn't just the Enginseers thing. It was the fact that all the flavor and feel of my Skitarii army was shitcanned in favor of everything being rolled into one book and then being called an idiot/fool for liking running Skitarii by themselves. If it was just the Enginseers or requiring an AdMech HQ, I would have been mostly okay. If it were just the removal of Doctrina Imperatives, the same thing likely would have been true of me being okay with it.

But that wasn't it. It was the fact that now I have to take an AdMech HQ and I'm saddled with just the Canticles side of things, while losing the ability to run a purely Skitarii army. I wouldn't tell people to take a Marine Captain with a Power Maul and Pistol, then just "pretend" he's a Chaplain if they'd lost the option for Chaplains. I think it was a HUGE misstep to not include a Skitarii HQ option or not to make Doctrina Imperatives an actual ability on Skitarii models.

All of that stuff rolled together is why I refuse to buy AdMech at this juncture and am waiting until there's a Skitarii HQ option, even if it's a single daggone character option, to bring them back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
I was surprised when people didn't complain (too much) about Index CWE.

There were still complaints, but not nearly as much.

Turned out, there was more sanity than I expected.

They were still too busy complaining about Conscripts.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Zid wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

 Zid wrote:

Flyers have been part of the game since 5th and, honestly, during 5th they were just like any other vehicle other than the skimmer rules (which skimmer rules were bs...). Then 6th came along, made them actual fliers, which was cool and all, and they did some pretty unique things. But the rules were unwieldy. I think fliers should be more common than LoW because, lets be honest, a battalion of valk's would be more common than imperial knights stomping everywhere.

Essentially the game allows fielding super-heavies for no trade off. Which would be fine, but the addition of CP's kind of changes things. You should have to think before adding in a LoW instead of it being an auto include for many armies currently (Gulliman, Morty, Magnus....). A -1 CP isn't a lot, but its enough to make people think about what they build.

Just so we're clear, Flyers were present before 5th. They were a FW only thing though...same as LoW were at the time.

So once again: why is one thing acceptable but the other isn't? Because you think that one would be more common?
There are entire Houses of Knights, with some sworn to the Mechanicus and some sworn to the Imperium and a third group that operate as individuals sworn to a specific task.
You're about as likely to run into an Imperial Knight, considering those circumstances, than you are "a battalion of Valkyries"--which are primarily earmarked for special Regiments or high ranking Imperial officials.

Hell there are regiments of Super-Heavy Tanks for the Imperial Guard...but rarely are they ever fielded en masse. They usually are (shock and gasp...) placed under the command of an Armoured Regiment or attached as part of its order of battle.

TLDR: -1 CP for a Superheavy is stupid when you can't place them into a normal FOC. It's a points heavy investment for something that usually can't claim Cover saves easily and in the case of the Primarchs is vulnerable to being singled out barring some gimmicks like the Deathshroud.

I can see your point. Honestly, I would have rather super-heavies have been a niche-funsies thing permanently. But I can see why people dislike them too. I mean they have become a normal part of the game, I just wish they weren't the linchpin in many typical archetypes you see; but then again, its been the same since forever. Some guy finds an army that is super hard to beat, and everyone copies it. I think its just pretty crappy that games involving LoW's boil down to; kill the lord, I win, don't kill the lord, I lose sorts of things.

Speaking for myself, until Lords of War differentiate between Superheavies and Characters...it's a pointless exercise to ask for there to be a penalty.

the_scotsman wrote:

Alright, then the only two vehicles in the codex that were not changed for the better were the Hydra (which is average-to-good depending on your regular opponents) and the Manticore (which is bordering on OP or is OP, depending on who you ask.) Everything else got some kind of rules/stats change, not even looking at points. The codex is more customizable than previous codexes not because it has more options in it, but because it has the same number of options but way, way, WAY more of them are viable choices and internally balanced against the rest of it. We're living in a world where people whine about BULLGRYNS on these forums.

You know, I would feel more for you about the removal of doctrina imperatives if they had been removed.They still exist, and they're actually a much better buff than they used to be. If you're willing to take three enginseers (and given that Enginseers run around with Guard regiments, I'm not sure how unfluffy it is to see them in a Skitarii army) you can take a whole Brigade detachment of just skitarii units and have enough command points to use both the Doctrina Imperatives stratagems every single turn if you want to. And it'll even be a pretty solid army - take it with Graia, Agripinaa, Stygies, or heck Metalica tactics depending on your composition and you've got a perfectly solid Skitarii army. Skitarii are among the few things that actually got solidly buffed with the new codex, points dropped on both skitarii infantry types, the Taser Lance got a buff from Ironstriders, and the new Doctrina stratagems are balls-awesome when used with Taser and Plasma weapons.

3 Enginseers, 6 units of Skitarii, 3 units of Infiltrators, 3 Dunecrawlers, 2 Balistarii and 1 big unit of Ironstriders with the Stygies tactics is a perfectly competitive army in 8th.

 BoomWolf wrote:
TBH, this is a bit your fault here.

The fact admech and skitiarri would become one was obvious, very obvious.
Heck, people complained on the fact they are not one army from the day they dropped.

 BoomWolf wrote:
TBH, this is a bit your fault here.

The fact admech and skitiarri would become one was obvious, very obvious.
Heck, people complained on the fact they are not one army from the day they dropped.

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Alright, then the only two vehicles in the codex that were not changed for the better were the Hydra (which is average-to-good depending on your regular opponents) and the Manticore (which is bordering on OP or is OP, depending on who you ask.) Everything else got some kind of rules/stats change, not even looking at points. The codex is more customizable than previous codexes not because it has more options in it, but because it has the same number of options but way, way, WAY more of them are viable choices and internally balanced against the rest of it. We're living in a world where people whine about BULLGRYNS on these forums.

That's a fair assessment I guess. I will say that there are still some "dud" options that really could have been avoided such as Special Weapon Squads. Why they still can't be full 6/6 Special Weapons, I will never understand.

You know, I would feel more for you about the removal of doctrina imperatives if they had been removed.They still exist, and they're actually a much better buff than they used to be. If you're willing to take three enginseers (and given that Enginseers run around with Guard regiments, I'm not sure how unfluffy it is to see them in a Skitarii army) you can take a whole Brigade detachment of just skitarii units and have enough command points to use both the Doctrina Imperatives stratagems every single turn if you want to. And it'll even be a pretty solid army - take it with Graia, Agripinaa, Stygies, or heck Metalica tactics depending on your composition and you've got a perfectly solid Skitarii army. Skitarii are among the few things that actually got solidly buffed with the new codex, points dropped on both skitarii infantry types, the Taser Lance got a buff from Ironstriders, and the new Doctrina stratagems are balls-awesome when used with Taser and Plasma weapons.

3 Enginseers, 6 units of Skitarii, 3 units of Infiltrators, 3 Dunecrawlers, 2 Balistarii and 1 big unit of Ironstriders with the Stygies tactics is a perfectly competitive army in 8th.

Competitive or not...it's still 3 Enginseers that I didn't have to take last edition.

I ran the Skitarii War Cohort for 7th or alternated it with a Skitarii Maniple Detachment and a Killclade Formation.
I never ran Sydonian Dragoons either. Just Ballistarii.

I think at this point we'll just both have to accept that our ideas differ. I wanted to be able to keep a purely Skitarii army with the Skitarii special rules and you don't see a problem with the fact that I now have to add models I didn't before and use rules I specifically went out of my way to avoid.

the_scotsman wrote:

I suppose we'll have to. To me, "convert or add three human-sized models to my army" is one of the single lowest bars I personally would have ever had to get under to make my army work in the new edition. I've already converted at least a dozen Harlequins, swapped the loadouts of half my Skyweavers, changed all my Autarchs to remove weapon options that no longer exist, and converted several Leman Russ tanks and metal vostroyans for the same reason.

I don't dispute the "My army doesn't play the same as it used to" portion, nor the "it would have been preferable if GW had included a character option for me" part. It's the "and there's nothing I can do to change the situation, therefore everything is ruined and I must shelve my 500+$ skitarii army until this gross injustice is corrected!" I do not see why you can't take a minute to calm down, put on your big boy pants, and convert a couple HQs to use as Enginseers and just call them skitarii commanders. You are not going to convince me that shelving an army that you probably spent hundreds of hours building and painting over having to add three models for the new edition is not the height of childish behavior.