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.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 TechnoWitch wrote:
The only thing I really expect at this point is another unnecessary nerf to Deep striking and/or Blood Angels.

"Nerf".

No. They put put deep striking back to how it was in every prior edition. 8th is the outlier here.

Then why when they did the change hadn't they change GK rules which had turn 1 deep strike in mind when they wrote the rules for the codex?

Although, we shouldn't base balance off the worst codex in the history of 8th. DW are what GK is supposed to be, only against Xenos. GK are supposed to be this good, against Chaos. Only problem, GK sucks at all phases except when properly buffed facing troops in melee. I don't think DW were in tended to be this good.

That being said, I would love to see SM in general be brought closer to this level, rather than DW being nerfed down to GK levels.

Why not? GK nerfs happened because BA had good stuff, or because Gulliman re-rolls were too good. Why shouldn't DW be fixed to be as good as GK were?
Specially as DW are good vs everything not just xeno. GK give a stratagem to make demons better, DW ammo works on xeno, eldar, chaos and everything else.

I suspect that the nerf bat will be swung wildly this FAQ. I can't say what exactly, but if I were to bet, it would be whatever stratagems are used too much, and Ynnari in general (as rumours are they don't like them).

Hopefully they will also redress certain armies which are currently underpowered - grey knight point reductions, Necron buffs for things like Lychguard etc

Something about 3++ (and even 4++) on big high-toughness targets. That'd go a long way to bringing the Guard+Castellan in line.

That might even help out armor that doesn't have invuns since it suffers under the need to deal with the meta-monsters.

But Imperium and Aeldari soup is still super advantageous because of the optimization you can do with access to so many units and something really has to give there.
But it has to avoid single-codex armies and not nerf mixed-regiment Guard or multi-sept Tau or several-craftworld Eldar.

Perhaps, instead, it will be a buff to mono-codex situations somehow.

DW 2+ ammo is absolutely stupid. But i doubt they FAQ it.

DW make balancing the rest of marine shooting almost impossible. Because they are far and away better than any other form of marines right now.

And i like Reemule's idea for fixed CP.

Even if the Castellan is reigned in, it's absolutely stupid that Guard gets more CP than anyone else. There is no reason for one faction to have such easy access to them while no one else has that.

I think the most important change to make is to have another pass and the costing on the Rukkatrukk Squigbuggy, maybe another look at Burna Boyz as well.

rbstr wrote:


But Imperium and Aeldari soup is still super advantageous because of the optimization you can do with access to so many units and something really has to give there.
But it has to avoid single-codex armies and not nerf mixed-regiment Guard or multi-sept Tau or several-craftworld Eldar.

This is totally unfair to armies that don't have multiple factions.

For example, Dark Angels and Space Wolves can't bring two different tactics. They're at a colossal disadvantage if they can't ally but you can ally multiple different kinds of Guard.

If they're nerfing soup they need to nerf mixed regiment Guard and multi-sept Tau. Drop your bias.

 Marmatag wrote:
DW 2+ ammo is absolutely stupid. But i doubt they FAQ it.

DW make balancing the rest of marine shooting almost impossible. Because they are far and away better than any other form of marines right now.

And i like Reemule's idea for fixed CP.

Even if the Castellan is reigned in, it's absolutely stupid that Guard gets more CP than anyone else. There is no reason for one faction to have such easy access to them while no one else has that.

Go ahead, mono guard won't be bothered by fixed cp because the stratagems are irrelevant for then in most cases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:

rbstr wrote:


But Imperium and Aeldari soup is still super advantageous because of the optimization you can do with access to so many units and something really has to give there.
But it has to avoid single-codex armies and not nerf mixed-regiment Guard or multi-sept Tau or several-craftworld Eldar.

This is totally unfair to armies that don't have multiple factions.

For example, Dark Angels and Space Wolves can't bring two different tactics. They're at a colossal disadvantage if they can't ally but you can ally multiple different kinds of Guard.

If they're nerfing soup they need to nerf mixed regiment Guard and multi-sept Tau. Drop your bias.

Maybee because a lot of these factions should not have a separate codex?

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
DW 2+ ammo is absolutely stupid. But i doubt they FAQ it.

DW make balancing the rest of marine shooting almost impossible. Because they are far and away better than any other form of marines right now.

And i like Reemule's idea for fixed CP.

Even if the Castellan is reigned in, it's absolutely stupid that Guard gets more CP than anyone else. There is no reason for one faction to have such easy access to them while no one else has that.

Go ahead, mono guard won't be bothered by fixed cp because the stratagems are irrelevant for then in most cases.

Said no one ever.

Guard have better stratagems than a lot of people. A double shooting Wyvern is pretty solid, for example.

 Marmatag wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
DW 2+ ammo is absolutely stupid. But i doubt they FAQ it.

DW make balancing the rest of marine shooting almost impossible. Because they are far and away better than any other form of marines right now.

And i like Reemule's idea for fixed CP.

Even if the Castellan is reigned in, it's absolutely stupid that Guard gets more CP than anyone else. There is no reason for one faction to have such easy access to them while no one else has that.

Go ahead, mono guard won't be bothered by fixed cp because the stratagems are irrelevant for then in most cases.

Said no one ever.

Guard have better stratagems than a lot of people. A double shooting Wyvern is pretty solid, for example.

Which is a formation, which imo is basically a repeat of the same mistake gw did in 7th.

Also double shooting is solid on all units that get access to it, some pay cp others just are a bunch of space Elfs.

What if Guard were nerfed in how many CP their formations got? BNs only get 3, Brigades get 8? CP remains the same for other detachments.

And tothe guy who just suggested we nerf DW down to GK levels, that is a dumb comment and you should feel bad for saying it. GK is the worst performing codex, bar none. It's not even close. Even the factions that had NO CODEX outperformed it. And DW already pays the GK tax in points. It's their rules that make them better. GK have to pay for their special sauce, DW gets it for free.

I guess name for me please the pure DW lists that are performing well?

The best answer is to simply give everyone 15 CP and deduct one per <FACTION>, <DETACHMENT> that isn't a battalion or brigade, and for each SUPER HEAVY.

There's no reason for all lists not to have equal access to CP, and there's no reason for soup armies to have as many command points as non-soup armies.

I would also flatly remove command point regeneration abilities altogether and replace them with a new mechanic.

Command points have real value in 8th edition, despite what people may say about the quality of stratagems in a codex. That is a different problem, that merits looking into as well. It doesn't stop us from solving the first problem though, which is unfair distribution of command points.

Just like formations created major imbalances in 7th, access to CP and good stratagems do the same thing in 8th.

Strength from death, only when "Aeldari" units are destroyed.

Karol has sort of a victim complex. He doesn't seem to understand that GK weren't directly nerfed, they were just overreliant on mechanics that other factions were better at exploiting, so they got hit the hardest when those mechanics were nerfed. They're the victims of being an early codex and won't really be fixed without a complete rework of the faction's mechanics. I feel his pain, though. I really don't see how my Necrons can be fixed until something is done with RP.

Not expected but whenever a guard player uses MoveMoveMove they should have to perform a lighting bolt celebration.

Is there really that much outcry for DW to be nerfed?

I'll admit there is a massive difference between a PAGK and a storm Vet, but that's cause GK have no business being 21ppm with gear

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
What if Guard were nerfed in how many CP their formations got? BNs only get 3, Brigades get 8? CP remains the same for other detachments.

And tothe guy who just suggested we nerf DW down to GK levels, that is a dumb comment and you should feel bad for saying it. GK is the worst performing codex, bar none. It's not even close. Even the factions that had NO CODEX outperformed it. And DW already pays the GK tax in points. It's their rules that make them better. GK have to pay for their special sauce, DW gets it for free.

I guess name for me please the pure DW lists that are performing well?

I’m technically an Astra Militarum player, but I play Militarum Tempestus, so I’m paying 9 ppm. Should I get reduced CP, or should detachments with the Militarum Tempestus keyword get an exception?

 Marmatag wrote:

This is totally unfair to armies that don't have multiple factions.

For example, Dark Angels and Space Wolves can't bring two different tactics. They're at a colossal disadvantage if they can't ally but you can ally multiple different kinds of Guard.

If they're nerfing soup they need to nerf mixed regiment Guard and multi-sept Tau. Drop your bias.

That's a good point that I'd overlooked. I guess I'd view all Space Marines chapters as falling under the same umbrella as Septs, Kultures, ect. (There's certainly an argument to be made that these weirdo chapters should be folded into one book, but that's for another time). They all share the Adeptus Astartes keyword after all.
It's really the "super-faction" keywords where the problems come from because of breadth of specialized units something like Imperial soup allows. It's on a different level compared to the trading Tau's overwatch on 5s for Sacea's reroll a failed hit or mixing deathwatch marines with spacewolves.

It's a great time to be playing 40K. We have a living rules set with designers who seem to be engaged with the community.

My money is on Bolter Drill going official and a Beta rule of the GSC CP deal applying to all factions.

 fraser1191 wrote:
Is there really that much outcry for DW to be nerfed?

I'll admit there is a massive difference between a PAGK and a storm Vet, but that's cause GK have no business being 21ppm with gear

I don't think anybody wants DW nerfed so much as other options becoming viable over the storm vets.

And I think everyone wants to see GKs bring some pain.

I don't want Death Watched nerfed but if a default weapon that is essentially a superbolter and a built in 3++ is the only way to make marine infantry viable then something is very wrong with over all game design.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
Until ITC stops skewing the way they count factions, I don't think their results are going to be valid. They consider balance based on winrate, not composition. They count factions in a weird way so that you can have soup but go down as "Astra Militarum"

They split it down by 1. primary faction 2. secondary factor 3. detachment 4. unit.... its the single most precise data set that has ever been compiled for 40k. I mean have you even bothered to go listen to the breakdowns they have done? Its all 100% volunteer work as well so if you would like to change how the data is organized you are 100% welcome to but honestly the way they are doing it is very good and the guy volunteering to do the work clearly has a background in stats and is doing an amazing job.

If I bring a Castellan, Loyal 32, and a bit of BA...am I soup or Guard?

The answer SHOULD be soup. But no--it apparently is Guard because "the most model count" is Guard.

To answer your question, of your 1396 points after the Castellan, whichever Guard or BA has more than the other of those points, that is your faction. 600 point knight, 600 point guard, 800 point BA? You are Blood Angels.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
I don't want Death Watched nerfed but if a default weapon that is essentially a superbolter and a built in 3++ is the only way to make marine infantry viable then something is very wrong with over all game design.

The Deathwatch infantry is the way that all marine infantry should be standard (without the inheriting stats from terminators, bikes etc).

The above logic gives a false idea of what a viable faction is. If 80 plus percent of a blood angel's codex is not worth taking then it's not a viable faction. The fact that IOM superfriends can cover that up by letting you cherry pick a super heavy and some cheer leading guardsmen doesn't mean that blood angels can win games.

The minute you take allies your not a pure army and should not be labeled as such.

The only problem with Deathwatch was allowing Stormbolters to have SIA. It pretty much eliminated all other weapon options. I'm a deathwatch player and I'd be happy if they just limited the stormbolter to watch sgt in a vet sqd (and terminators of course). No other nerf would be necessary.

Quick and Dirty GK Hotfix:

Nemesis Strike Force
If all Models in your Army have the "GREY KNIGHT" Keyword you can put as many as you want in Tactical Reserve and your Tactical Reserverse can enter the Game Beginning Turn 1 Anywhere on the Board, more than 9 Inch Away from enemy modells.


It gives GK full unrestricted Deep Strike Turn 1. It wont completely fix GK until a new codex, but it gives a pure GK Army an unique and powerful niche with one simple rule.

 bullyboy wrote:
The only problem with Deathwatch was allowing Stormbolters to have SIA. It pretty much eliminated all other weapon options. I'm a deathwatch player and I'd be happy if they just limited the stormbolter to watch sgt in a vet sqd (and terminators of course). No other nerf would be necessary.

i'm not sure that is really the underlying issue that concerns players. DW arn't exactlly OP but I suspect the issue people have it's that DW pay x amount of points for y improvement in performance, where y is greater than x currently.
Aslong as GW peg deathwatch to the points vanilla marines pay at the current rate DW will always be better.

Currently GK need codex 2.0 even GW had to admit that.

I suspect Marines and Choas marine's to get 2.0 codex's due to new models but Guilliman could do with a rewrite to be less rerolling your reroll for reroll's and chapter tactics for all.

I suspect they will fiddle with necrons a bit more rather than admit imthey need a 2.0 codex yet.

It would be nice if Dakka and BCP/FLG made a distinction between using allies and using soup. I see them as two different things but apparently having so much as a single cheap ally unit (assassin) counts as soup these days.

Hmm confused by the outcry over DW, they are mid tier army at best lol,, nerfing them would just be silly, but hey its GW and they got no clue how to balance anything.

As for predictions for the FAQ, if the last big faq taught me anything, its that they will do nothing of any real note, so I predict they take a couple wild swings, hit a few things that should have been left alone, maybe FAQ something that actually needed it through luck, and otherwise accomplish nothing that truly helps the game.

Imo there really is no point in discussing this right now, as it’ll just turn into another 50-page Wishlist of arguments.

The FAQ won’t be out until mid-April at the earliest. This is simply because of Adepticon being at the very end of March. Chances are though, they’ll do what they did last time and release it just before the GW Grand Finals and then proceed to say it’ll not be in use for them. Which means early May/towards the end of Spring.

I know exactly what'll be in the next FAQ: A lot of disappointment.

Some of you will get screwed over. Most of you won't get whatever it is you're clamoring for.