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.

Martel732 wrote:

 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.

Yes good... Let the hate flow through you..

Anyone remember instakill warp spiders? Pepperidge farms remembers.

Martel732 wrote:

 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.

Right. So you openly admit that you cannot be reasonable about this, so we can safely dismiss anything you have to say on the matter of game balance.

If you like. I don't really care.

Marin wrote:

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.

I didn’t expect Orks to be included. Also Reece said it was the reason that units from codexes such as Dark Eldar or IK weren’t nerfed. Which over performing units got a price hike sorry? Not Dissie Ravagers or Guardsmen. Not Castellans.

I think it’s obvious what the effect on the meta will be from this book but feel free to wait if you disagree.

 bullyboy wrote:
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.

I agree dude, I’m not upset about it really, more confused. I’ll not be buying CA because I can’t see the value proposition.

I figure there’s a better way to deliver FAQs and balance tweaks that will ensure they are more current. If CA doesn’t sell well I guess GW will get the message too.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Marin wrote:

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.

I didn’t expect Orks to be included. Also Reece said it was the reason that units from codexes such as Dark Eldar or IK weren’t nerfed. Which over performing units got a price hike sorry? Not Dissie Ravagers or Guardsmen. Not Castellans.

I think it’s obvious what the effect on the meta will be from this book but feel free to wait if you disagree.

 bullyboy wrote:
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.

I agree dude, I’m not upset about it really, more confused. I’ll not be buying CA because I can’t see the value proposition.

I figure there’s a better way to deliver FAQs and balance tweaks that will ensure they are more current. If CA doesn’t sell well I guess GW will get the message too.

For eldar spears and wave serpent.

https://imgur.com/a/6Q9fqt4?fbclid=IwAR1Lna0fZEiOn2A150lPn2ELQgd7mOz-1AF1x_ggnKjVETjWBdV_Nj8QK58

Marin wrote:
For eldar spears and wave serpent.

https://imgur.com/a/6Q9fqt4?fbclid=IwAR1Lna0fZEiOn2A150lPn2ELQgd7mOz-1AF1x_ggnKjVETjWBdV_Nj8QK58

Are you saying those 2 went up?
While that is true, that chart you linked (which is awesome. thanx) doesn't directly show the whole story
Spears went up 6ppm, but Twin Catapults went down 3ppm. So Spears only went up a net 3ppm.
Same goes for Fire Dragons, which went up 3ppm, but Fusion gusn went down 3ppm, so no net difference for the unit.
But Twin-Cats and Fusion guns are on other units, so it is clear that those decreases were meant for those other units.

-

Marin wrote:

 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.

I'm sure eldar have bright and dark lances which are S8 AP -4 Dd6

Marin wrote:

For eldar spears and wave serpent.

https://imgur.com/a/6Q9fqt4?fbclid=IwAR1Lna0fZEiOn2A150lPn2ELQgd7mOz-1AF1x_ggnKjVETjWBdV_Nj8QK58

Ah so Wave Serpents and Spears went up, Spears a whole 3 points too! Now the game is completely balanced. Brilliant.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Marin wrote:

For eldar spears and wave serpent.

https://imgur.com/a/6Q9fqt4?fbclid=IwAR1Lna0fZEiOn2A150lPn2ELQgd7mOz-1AF1x_ggnKjVETjWBdV_Nj8QK58

Ah so Wave Serpents and Spears went up, Spears a whole 3 points too! Now the game is completely balanced. Brilliant.

To be fair, the issue with Spears is less the Spears themselves and more about Ynnari Spears. Even regular Spears rely HEAVILY on support Characters. Not Character, Characters plural.

So I'm very glad GW seem to realize this and only bumped Spears a little instead of overreacting and nerfing them into uselessness.
The same happened with Serpents. The issue with them was less that they were too cheep, but that they were cheaper that the other Tanks, yet better somehow.
So the Serpent is now more expensive than some of the other tanks (except Prisms) because the other went down

-

"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."
Then Conceal and LQR are debuffs, then?
They impact what your opponent rolls, not what you roll.

How would 'Can't benefit from cover' be categorized, as it impacts your rolls (Saves) and mine (Scorpions to-hit rolls)?

"Who rolls" is a sillly measure of Debuff vs Buff. A much simpler, clearer, and more widely-understood differentiation is "Who is targetted?" Clearly the enemy.

"Done. And all that was needed was to add 1 word = <Craftworld> in between 'Your' and 'units'"
Because Phoenix Lords aren't worth of Doom?

I get that you want this change for balance reasons, but let's not pretend that the change is consistent with the core concepts.

It'd be like if my Sorceror is casting a direct damage power on your Imperial Guard, he shouldn't suffer the negative effects of Null Zone, but if he's targetting your Marines, he does? And then how would that work for buffs or powers without specific targets?

You just hate Doom.

Dudeface wrote:

Of course they do, remove the heretic astartes key word and suddenly they become 4pt nobodies who can't fire twice or get +1 to wound.

Cultists have the 'Astartes' keyword? Why? They were marines? How effed is that...


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.

If GW would have just made all marines 2w then I would buy some primarises too...
But, nope. So, never.
As with this CA book, if it doesn't sell well, then maybe GW will stop alientating people to corner a market in some cokeheaded MBA's dreamworld.

Bharring 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."
Then Conceal and LQR are debuffs, then?
They impact what your opponent rolls, not what you roll.

How would 'Can't benefit from cover' be categorized, as it impacts your rolls (Saves) and mine (Scorpions to-hit rolls)?

"Who rolls" is a sillly measure of Debuff vs Buff. A much simpler, clearer, and more widely-understood differentiation is "Who is targetted?" Clearly the enemy.

"Done. And all that was needed was to add 1 word = <Craftworld> in between 'Your' and 'units'"
Because Phoenix Lords aren't worth of Doom?

I get that you want this change for balance reasons, but let's not pretend that the change is consistent with the core concepts.

It'd be like if my Sorceror is casting a direct damage power on your Imperial Guard, he shouldn't suffer the negative effects of Null Zone, but if he's targetting your Marines, he does? And then how would that work for buffs or powers without specific targets?

You just hate Doom.

So you'd rather give balancing a problem interaction two fingers because it gies against how eldar worked in previous editions.
So does keyword Aeldari so just ban that as a keyword if your a fluff above balance mood.

 Galef wrote:
To be fair, the issue with Spears is less the Spears themselves and more about Ynnari Spears. Even regular Spears rely HEAVILY on support Characters. Not Character, Characters plural.

The issue with Spears (and any other unit that’s over performing) is that they are too effective at something for their points. They would be an auto include in any army and they are efficient without Ynarri or support characters. There is no such thing as ‘regular’ Spears either. Spears are Spears, whether Ynarri or Craftworld and they feature heavily in both competitive lists. Further, your statement that they rely on support characters to be as effective as possible is true of almost any unit in the game, including some support characters themselves.

Either way my point isn’t to discuss the minutiae of whether ‘Unit A’ is nerfed enough or not. It’s subjective, prone to hostility and pointless. Rather that certain, other units that are clearly over performing were completely ignored and that is a failing of CA.

Martel732 wrote:
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

I exalted this cause it made me laugh. And its true, Eldar were so broken at times.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Marin wrote:

For eldar spears and wave serpent.

https://imgur.com/a/6Q9fqt4?fbclid=IwAR1Lna0fZEiOn2A150lPn2ELQgd7mOz-1AF1x_ggnKjVETjWBdV_Nj8QK58

Ah so Wave Serpents and Spears went up, Spears a whole 3 points too! Now the game is completely balanced. Brilliant.

Wave serpents realistically barely went up. like 10ish points.

Eldar armies on average are going down in cost.

Martel732 wrote:
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

Flamers and Pulsa Rokkits got me through my hatred of Eldar in 2nd edition. Watching Exarchs run around waiting for the fire to stop while the rest of the army was knocked on their ass was very cathartic.

That being said, the hate is still there, not sure it ever really goes away.

"Eldar armies on average are going down in cost."
Based on which units in CWE lists?

The Ranger/Hemlock/etc cant-be-hit crap? That didn't go down.

The Guardian Bombs? No change.

The Serpents that back things up? Up.

The Reapers? Unchanged.

Spears? Unchanged.

Farseers? Unchanged.

I haven't looked at too many of the tourny lists yet, but the ones I've looked up have all gone up. Maybe not by enough. But certainly not down.

Some lists took Eldrad, who went down 15 points compared to Serpents going up 12. And there are Jetseers here and there that went down 3 points. But the number of things that went up, and the volume they went up by, is a lot larger than those few points.

"So you'd rather give balancing a problem interaction two fingers because it gies against how eldar worked in previous editions.
So does keyword Aeldari so just ban that as a keyword if your a fluff above balance mood."
I didn't say Doom doesn't need some balance help. I said don't contort the rules in a backwards unintuitive way just because it's overtuned right now. Up the points on a Farseer, or up the roll needed, or make denials easier, or don't play Deathstars/Knights. But don't remove Doom or make it awkward.

Why would banning Aeldari make more sense than banning Imperium or Chaos? wouldn't those be equally silly? I understand the viewpoint that those shouldn't exist, as soup is bad; at least that's consistent. But picking only one of the Soups to kill because you don't play it is intellectually dishonest.

I do agree that CWE have been OP far too often. I hope they fix it. But just removing all fluff and flavor from CWE isn't the right way to do it.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
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

Flamers and Pulsa Rokkits got me through my hatred of Eldar in 2nd edition. Watching Exarchs run around waiting for the fire to stop while the rest of the army was knocked on their ass was very cathartic.

I had an Assault Marine I called "The Blue Hero" who absolutely lived to set Exarchs on fire. Good times!

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


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

Which of the meta lists got stronger?

Would be good to provide examples rather than just sweeping statements.

 Smirrors wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


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

Which of the meta lists got stronger?

Would be good to provide examples rather than just sweeping statements.

We don't need no stinkin' evidence! We base our judgement on real emotions!

Bharring wrote:
"Eldar armies on average are going down in cost."
Based on which units in CWE lists?

The Ranger/Hemlock/etc cant-be-hit crap? That didn't go down.

The Guardian Bombs? No change.

The Serpents that back things up? Up.

The Reapers? Unchanged.

Spears? Unchanged.

Farseers? Unchanged.

I haven't looked at too many of the tourny lists yet, but the ones I've looked up have all gone up. Maybe not by enough. But certainly not down.

Some lists took Eldrad, who went down 15 points compared to Serpents going up 12. And there are Jetseers here and there that went down 3 points. But the number of things that went up, and the volume they went up by, is a lot larger than those few points.

"So you'd rather give balancing a problem interaction two fingers because it gies against how eldar worked in previous editions.
So does keyword Aeldari so just ban that as a keyword if your a fluff above balance mood."
I didn't say Doom doesn't need some balance help. I said don't contort the rules in a backwards unintuitive way just because it's overtuned right now. Up the points on a Farseer, or up the roll needed, or make denials easier, or don't play Deathstars/Knights. But don't remove Doom or make it awkward.

Why would banning Aeldari make more sense than banning Imperium or Chaos? wouldn't those be equally silly? I understand the viewpoint that those shouldn't exist, as soup is bad; at least that's consistent. But picking only one of the Soups to kill because you don't play it is intellectually dishonest.

I do agree that CWE have been OP far too often. I hope they fix it. But just removing all fluff and flavor from CWE isn't the right way to do it.

Eldrad went down in points. Jetbike farseer down 3 points. Gardian platforms got 3 points cheaper (scatter lasers). Autarcs on bikes got 3 points cheaper. Reapers can take EML for a savings of 2 or 3 points. Direavengers are down 1 point. Starcannons down in points.
It's a lot of little things.

Flacons and WW are now cheaper firepower per point that Crimson hunters. Nightspinners droped by a bunch. Direavengers are down 1 point. IMO you can actaully fit more into a list now. The lists might look a little different.

I really like the WW drop. With 2x starcannon they are now 14 points off - WW with scatter lasers now 16 points off. Gaurdian bikers down to 20 points with catapult.

Top lists don't play Scatter Laser platforms, Nor Reaper Exarchs with EML. No one is going to bring Falcons over Crimson Hunters.

You can't say Eldar lists got cheaper and then list a bunch of stuff where half is never taken.

I love Eldar hate, it's hilarious. You'd think Doom hadn't existed for like, well, forever basically. So you don't want Doom for Harlequins and Drukhari, I get that, I really do. But you'd better be open to nerfing your own soup too (Imperium, chaos). Your Ultramarine Librarian casts null zone? OK, but anything that is not Adeptus Astartes will still have to punch through an invuln save. Does that sound OK to you?

I'm all for nerfing the soup, but it had better be across the board. No picking and choosing.

The thing is, I'm not sure GW really wants to mess with soup that much. Heck, I just used the ebay coupon today to buy the loyal 32. I was holding out for CA, but looks like nothing's changing so now my Ravenwing and Deathwatch are going to get 5 more CP.

Bharring wrote:
I didn't say Doom doesn't need some balance help. I said don't contort the rules in a backwards unintuitive way just because it's overtuned right now. Up the points on a Farseer, or up the roll needed, or make denials easier, or don't play Deathstars/Knights. But don't remove Doom or make it awkward.

Why would banning Aeldari make more sense than banning Imperium or Chaos? wouldn't those be equally silly? I understand the viewpoint that those shouldn't exist, as soup is bad; at least that's consistent. But picking only one of the Soups to kill because you don't play it is intellectually dishonest.

I do agree that CWE have been OP far too often. I hope they fix it. But just removing all fluff and flavor from CWE isn't the right way to do it.

How is making it a craftworld units only making it awkward?
Increasing points was suggested and met with wraith forks
CWE players complain that in CWE lists farseers can't be more points. (They actually complained they are already overpriced)
Harliquins players say skyweavers can't be more points.
Drukari players all laugh will stroking thier dissy cannons.

Let's see create slanesh, civil war, 1 side decieded to renounce the old excesses while the other continues to revel in them? Aeldari certainly seam like the one's to hold grudges. But it ok Cat lady has arrive Harry everyone is friendssss.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Smirrors wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


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

Which of the meta lists got stronger?

Would be good to provide examples rather than just sweeping statements.

We don't need no stinkin' evidence! We base our judgement on real emotions!

Thought it was obvious.

Imperial soup of Castellan + Guard + SM.
Imperial soup of Castellan + Guard.
Aeldari soup lists of all flavours.
CWE lists including Alaitoc flywing.
Imperial soup of IK + Loyal 32.
Death Guard + Renegade Knights.
Chaos soup of TS + Daemons.
Chaos soup of Super friends.

Honourable mono lists mention - Tau.

Here’s the lists that reduced in effectiveness following CA;
Cultist bomb. (Black Legion/Alpha Legion).

Ice_can wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I didn't say Doom doesn't need some balance help. I said don't contort the rules in a backwards unintuitive way just because it's overtuned right now. Up the points on a Farseer, or up the roll needed, or make denials easier, or don't play Deathstars/Knights. But don't remove Doom or make it awkward.

Why would banning Aeldari make more sense than banning Imperium or Chaos? wouldn't those be equally silly? I understand the viewpoint that those shouldn't exist, as soup is bad; at least that's consistent. But picking only one of the Soups to kill because you don't play it is intellectually dishonest.

I do agree that CWE have been OP far too often. I hope they fix it. But just removing all fluff and flavor from CWE isn't the right way to do it.

How is making it a craftworld units only making it awkward?
Increasing points was suggested and met with wraith forks
CWE players complain that in CWE lists farseers can't be more points. (They actually complained they are already overpriced)
Harliquins players say skyweavers can't be more points.
Drukari players all laugh will stroking thier dissy cannons.

Increasing points for units that are priced appropriately considering only their own codex is absolutely wrong. Kill the soup instead.

Remember razorwing flocks? For the first time in history they became viable, not overpowered since they needed a 60 points tax beastmaster to work, but then abused by the ynnari who could trigger their combo by fielding multiple 7 pts units. Result? GW killed the whole unit and now no ones bring them anymore in drukhari lists. Increasing points for units that become way better in the soup than how they are designed to be in their codex is a terrible solution, that screws internal balance of the single codexes and pushes to souping even more.

Like the new rules about creating characters/vehicles or whatever, soups should be relegated to open play. They're a plague.

It is pretty surreal for people to see Ynnari as some sort of unintended soup effect. The Ynnari were explicitly designed to work as allies, that's their whole point, they cannot function in another way. If there are issues with the Ynnari (as there is) it is a problem with their rules, not allies in general.

slightly surprised at Cultists going up, would have expected them to be subject to similar restrictions as grots, i.e. most of the stratagems in C:CSM cannot be used on them unless specifically stated they can be

 Crimson wrote:
It is pretty surreal for people to see Ynnari as some sort of unintended soup effect. The Ynnari were explicitly designed to work as allies, that's their whole point, they cannot function in another way. If there are issues with the Ynnari (as there is) it is a problem with their rules, not allies in general.

Razorwing flocks weren't clearly designed to work as cheap soul burst triggers.