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.

I started this thread on Warseer looking for support to start a petition to fix the Nephilim. I was met with a combination of skepticism, indifference, and outright hostility. I was ready to give up on the whole idea.

But today, in my inbox, there was something magical! An e-mail response from GW Customer Service thanking me for an e-mail I sent requesting a fix for the Nephilim, and inviting me to follow up by phone to discuss it further. AND a promise to forward my opinion on to the studio! I accepted the invitation to call, and the customer service rep listened to what I had to say and discussed it with me. He wasn't familiar with the Dark Angels rules yet, but after I explained to him how the Nephilim utterly failed at its supposed role, and how unbalanced the Heldrake was by comparison, he had no choice to agree with me that S6 Blacksword missiles were a very odd choice. He too promised to forward my comments to the studio.

So I say to you: do not hang your head in despair! The hostile, secretive GW we once knew is no more! Customer Service is prepared not only to hear our voices, but to pass them along to those with the power to make some much needed changes! If you agree that the Nephilim was a massive disappointment rules-wise, if you would love to purchase one if only it was 180 points of flyer, instead of the 130 or so it is now, let GW know! Just send an e-mail to [EMAIL="CustServ@gwplc.com"]CustServ@gwplc.com[/EMAIL] and/or call 1-800-394-4263. I suggest you use your real name because that's what I did and they responded warmly. I'm not sure if they'd respond the same to an alias (although I have no real reason to think they wouldn't, I'm just not sure).

Also, fill out this one-question survey stating that you won't buy a Nephilim until its rules are fixed, and offering a suggestion about how you think that should be accomplished.

If you don't want to write your own e-mail, please just copy-paste the below polite message and send it to them. Feel free to edit it if you like, and there's no need to credit me as the author. If anything will convince them to fix this unit, it's VOLUME! So let's crank it up to 11! I'll be posting the same thing at all the other 40k sites I can think of. If you'd like to repost my message anywhere else, please do so!

PS. Troll away, call me a whiner, I don't care. I won't debate you or respond to you. Nor should anyone else who agrees with my position. The way to make trolls go away is not to feed them!

Example e-mail text:

Dear Games Workshop,

As a Warhammer 40k player, I was very disappointed to learn that the Nephilim, billed in the White Dwarf preview and the codex as an air superiority fighter, is actually quite ineffective against AV12 flyers, which are the most prevalent and dangerous flyers in the game currently. I believe its rules represent a substantial design failure, and the unit as currently written is not worth 180 points in a Dark Angels army. I also believe it is not worth my money and will not buy one unless its rules are amended to better reflect its points cost, as well as to ameliorate Dark Angels' relatively poor defenses against AV12 flyers. I would most like to see the Nephilim updated so that [Blacksword missiles are S7 AP2/Blacksword missiles have the Haywire special rule/Blacksword missiles have the Armorbane special rule/the Avenger Megabolter has Rending/insert your own idea here!]. I believe that if you admit that the Nephilim's rules are below par by amending the codex to fix them, your fans will admire your responsiveness and their respect for your design team will increase. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Dear Customer:

Thank you for expressing your interest in Games Workshop (tm) Products and the Games Workshop (tm) Hobby (tm). As you know we are committed to excellence in the Hobby (tm) and consider your feedback very important. We acknowledge your concerns about the Nephilim (tm) and will forward your email to the appropriate person. If you have any further concerns do not hesitate to buy more GW Products (tm) from your local Hobby Center (tm).

Sincerely, GW's automated form letter system.




Anyway, TBH, I hope you fail. Besides taking a lot of pleasure in seeing such an ugly model have garbage rules I do NOT want to see GW making balance changes after a book is printed just because a few fans complained about something. That's an absolute disaster waiting to happen, especially since most 40k players have absolutely no clue about how to balance a game properly.

On the bright side, at least I saved $75.

Also, your ideas are ridiculously overpowered. STR 7 AP 2 missiles or rending wouldn't be that bad, but armorbane or haywire missiles makes it way too good. Not only do those make it instant death to other flyers they also make it an insanely good anti-tank unit.

I feel like at one point in development the missiles were blast weapons. It would explain why missile lock was listed.

I agree that it isn't great currently as an anti-air unit. It would have been interesting if they kept with the debuff theme that the codex has and gave them some kind of EMP missiles to mess with enemy flyers.

 Peregrine wrote:
Also, your ideas are ridiculously overpowered. STR 7 AP 2 missiles or rending wouldn't be that bad, but armorbane or haywire missiles makes it way too good. Not only do those make it instant death to other flyers they also make it an insanely good anti-tank unit.

welcome to yet another installment of "why the fans don't write the rules."

I will admit I was a bit dissapointed with it after how it was billed but I got a single one to have some anti-air. For now it's going to sit in it's box(for some odd reason it came unwrapped from GW).

I don't expect they will make it better but if they did I would not be unhappy.

Please don't call other posters names. It's a violation of the terms of membership here. -Mannahnin

Sure the Nephilium doesn't have a torrent weapon the same way the helldrake does. and one shot with the lascannon even if its twin linked seems weak.

BUT your forgetting its other weapon option, the Megabolter. 5 STR 6 AP 4 shots! Combine that with the two missiles you can fire a turn, its putting out 7 STR 6 AP 4 shots a turn, along with the 3 STR 5 AP 4 shots from the twin linked Heavy bolter.

People Keep wanting to compare it to the Helldrake, which they're inclined to do. But you all seem to forget that its not the only flyer out there. Most fliers are AV 10, unless they are some sort of flying troop transport.. and the Nephilium will tear them up with volume of fire. And sure its stated to be "Air superiority" in the description, but its also have the strafing run rule so its hitting on a 2+ on ground targets. That makes it awesome against light vehicles and infantry.

I already told the trolls I wouldn't feed their trolling. Why do they still troll? Is it that they've forgotten how not to troll? Or do I come across as insincere when I promise not to feed them? Maybe they think if they can spit enough venom and bile and pettiness at me, I'll be FORCED to respond. Sorry to disappoint. I've got a 1++ save against trolling.

Ralis wrote:
Sure the Nephilium doesn't have a torrent weapon the same way the helldrake does. and one shot with the lascannon even if its twin linked seems weak.

BUT your forgetting its other weapon option, the Megabolter. 5 STR 6 AP 4 shots! Combine that with the two missiles you can fire a turn, its putting out 7 STR 6 AP 4 shots a turn, along with the 3 STR 5 AP 4 shots from the twin linked Heavy bolter.

People Keep wanting to compare it to the Helldrake, which they're inclined to do. But you all seem to forget that its not the only flyer out there. Most fliers are AV 10, unless they are some sort of flying troop transport.. and the Nephilium will tear them up with volume of fire. And sure its stated to be "Air superiority" in the description, but its also have the strafing run rule so its hitting on a 2+ on ground targets. That makes it awesome against light vehicles and infantry.

Definitely how I plan to field mine if I ever incorporate it into a list, I actually like the model and wanted one to have one, it seems like it would make for a great air support for my deathwing. I was hoping it would be stronger vs av 12 flyers because all of the flyers in my local meta are AV 12 besides mine .

I'm sorry, The insult was going to far I admit that.

But you all seem to be judging the Nephilium based on its stat line without fielding it.

I have one, I've used it, and sure in game one it died quickly to a Quad Gun, but then what flier doesn't. In game two it did a great job dropping enemy infantry.

 Ixe wrote:
I already told the trolls I wouldn't feed their trolling. Why do they still troll? Is it that they've forgotten how not to troll? Or do I come across as insincere when I promise not to feed them? Maybe they think if they can spit enough venom and bile and pettiness at me, I'll be FORCED to respond. Sorry to disappoint. I've got a 1++ save against trolling.

So anyone who disagrees with you is a troll? Good to know.

 Ixe wrote:
I already told the trolls I wouldn't feed their trolling. Why do they still troll? Is it that they've forgotten how not to troll? Or do I come across as insincere when I promise not to feed them? Maybe they think if they can spit enough venom and bile and pettiness at me, I'll be FORCED to respond. Sorry to disappoint. I've got a 1++ save against trolling.

Yet you just fed them

Hmm?

I remember sending GW customer service a couple of e-mails.

The first was regarding the propellant for their spray gun (don't judge me), which had disappeared from the Canadian site - but was still on the US site. I got a reply pretty quick - apparently it was some sort of minor screwup somewhere - and when I looked for it again a couple weeks later, it was back in its proper section.

The second was more recent. I was browsing the online store, got to the Sisters of Battle section, and noted that none of the Battle Conclave models were listed in the Sisters section, rather, they were only available from the Grey Knights section. So I sent them an e-mail suggesting that maybe those models should be listed in both sections - and yes, I was very polite about it. In response to that e-mail, I just got an e-mail back saying they passed on my feedback to the web design team. A few weeks later, I was sad to have noted they still weren't listed in the HQ section of the Sororitas section.

 Ixe wrote:
I already told the trolls I wouldn't feed their trolling. Why do they still troll? Is it that they've forgotten how not to troll? Or do I come across as insincere when I promise not to feed them? Maybe they think if they can spit enough venom and bile and pettiness at me, I'll be FORCED to respond. Sorry to disappoint. I've got a 1++ save against trolling.

Any validity your OP might have possibly contained was utterly wiped out by this ridiculously childish post.

My god.

Just look at it.

 Peregrine wrote:
especially since most 40k players have absolutely no clue about how to balance a game properly.

Unfortunately neither does GW, so what is one to do

I always look at what Druchii net was able to do with the previous codex and helped get a temp fix.
Gw does listen and respond sometimes.
I would likely use it to pound ground targets we have very good anti-air from the ground.

if you like the model then buy it, paint it and use it.

the rules are a festering unbalanced pile anyways, why bother trying to min/max it?

And I thought, the major problem was paying almost double Storm Talon price for 2 only slightly modified sprues.

 Kroothawk wrote:
And I thought, the major problem was paying almost double Storm Talon price for 2 only slightly modified sprues.

QFT right there....

kb305 wrote:


if you like the model then buy it, paint it and use it.

the rules are a festering unbalanced pile anyways, why bother trying to min/max it?

Because its the difference of buying 1 or 3, and actually using it.

canadianguy wrote:
I always look at what Druchii net was able to do with the previous codex and helped get a temp fix.
Gw does listen and respond sometimes.
I would likely use it to pound ground targets we have very good anti-air from the ground.

10+ years ago no?

 Kroothawk wrote:
And I thought, the major problem was paying almost double Storm Talon price for 2 only slightly modified sprues.

I would agree with this. To my mind, I can see the weapons as appropriate for an air superiority fighter, and it has rules that make it useful for harassing light vehicles/infantry too. I think if it was reduced in points cost by a little, it would be worth taking. Making it 130-150 pts should be ok, right? I think its points cost is the change that would generate the least complaints. Changing its weapons or armour would likely create rage against it unfortunately.

That being said, making the Blacksword Missiles S7 AP2 seems the most reasonable of your suggestions. Given that there are only 6 of them, I cant see this upsetting the Nephilims balance too much.

 Ravenous D wrote:

kb305 wrote:


if you like the model then buy it, paint it and use it.

the rules are a festering unbalanced pile anyways, why bother trying to min/max it?

Because its the difference of buying 1 or 3, and actually using it.

im refering to the whole game in general, not the DA flier rules.

just play what you want and have fun. winning at an unbalanced broken game = being king gak of turd mountain.

 HerbaciousT wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
And I thought, the major problem was paying almost double Storm Talon price for 2 only slightly modified sprues.

I would agree with this. To my mind, I can see the weapons as appropriate for an air superiority fighter, and it has rules that make it useful for harassing light vehicles/infantry too. I think if it was reduced in points cost by a little, it would be worth taking. Making it 130-150 pts should be ok, right? I think its points cost is the change that would generate the least complaints. Changing its weapons or armour would likely create rage against it unfortunately.

That being said, making the Blacksword Missiles S7 AP2 seems the most reasonable of your suggestions. Given that there are only 6 of them, I cant see this upsetting the Nephilims balance too much.

Hell i would settle for the missiles being S7 AP 4 then we have a fair chance of destroying the drake before it rips us apart.

canadianguy wrote:

I would likely use it to pound ground targets we have very good anti-air from the ground.

Pretty much my point on the Warseer forum. Btw OP most people are prob on both forums anyway. So don't be too shocked at the same responses here. Best of luck on your mission but you have basically received the standard response from GW.

They will fix it. They aren't going to put out a $70.00ish item just so no one buys them. Bad business. It'll get FAQ'd to heldrake troll level in no time.

 Peregrine wrote:

Anyway, TBH, I hope you fail. Besides taking a lot of pleasure in seeing such an ugly model have garbage rules I do NOT want to see GW making balance changes after a book is printed just because a few fans complained about something. That's an absolute disaster waiting to happen, especially since most 40k players have absolutely no clue about how to balance a game properly.

I don't always agree with Peregrine, but this would be one of the times where I do. If the Nepahalim were to get a revamp this soon after it launched, it would set a bad precedent for GW. The rules they release should be the final rules. The FAQs should not be for reworking the rule for a unit, they should be used to answer questions.

 Peregrine wrote:
Anyway, TBH, I hope you fail. Besides taking a lot of pleasure in seeing such an ugly model have garbage rules I do NOT want to see GW making balance changes after a book is printed just because a few fans complained about something. That's an absolute disaster waiting to happen, especially since most 40k players have absolutely no clue about how to balance a game properly.

Can't say I have a problem with GW fixing their mistakes...*if* it actually is a mistake in the first place. Nothing says that every unit must be exceptional at its role. It can "ok" at its role and still not be a mistake of some kind. GW aren't going to change the rules just because a few fans complain. Now if thousands complain they might make faq ruling.

Skriker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
welcome to yet another installment of "why the fans don't write the rules."

We don't agree often Solo, but I am with you on this one.

Skriker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 HerbaciousT wrote:
That being said, making the Blacksword Missiles S7 AP2 seems the most reasonable of your suggestions. Given that there are only 6 of them, I cant see this upsetting the Nephilims balance too much.

Not really all that limiting to only have 6 missiles in a 5-7 turn game...I might agree with you if the nephilim has 1 or 2 Blackswords, but with 6 that just gets a little nuts.

Skriker

I'll support this if we can add a sidenote that all my Space Marines should be T9 and have a 1++ save to reflect the invincible angels of death that the codex and other sources have let me to believe they should be.