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.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 easysauce wrote:

cause after all, I dont get to play the "save" part of the game anymore...

people paid PTS to use powers, and have the power to deny they, just as they pay pts for guns that ignore armour, or markerlights to ignore cover.

Markerlights and weapons that ignore armor saves don't increase the what you get to bring to the table however. They're not directly comparable.

There's a big difference, especially given how *much* they can potentially increase the size of what you can bring to the table.

so talk about restricting SUMMONING powers then, not warp caps, and a nerf, on top of the 7th ed across the board nerf, to all pyskers in general.

simple rule "you cant summon more the x units per game" done and done.

The other thing is that some of these things that shoot a ton, and ignore cover devalue units that have been paid for and as such are akin to having extra points in particular matchups.

Breng77 wrote:
The other thing is that some of these things that shoot a ton, and ignore cover devalue units that have been paid for and as such are akin to having extra points in particular matchups.

exactly...

paying X pts to be able to remove Y pts from the table, is 100% comparable to paying X pts to ADD y pts to your side.

not to mention that you have a far better chance of removing models sucessfully then you do of summoning ones...

+ all the stuff you nerf that doesnt need it if you further nerf psykers then they already are.

Deamons need all those WC dice to "shoot" as well as summon potential friends.

They have an almost zero presence in the actual shooting phase and require the new psychic phase to be able to "shoot" at stuff. Which, due to the new rules, has made said "shooting" much less reliable. The only wait to maintain that reliability, is to chuck dice at it.

So limiting their dice in any way is directly limiting their potential firepower, all because of a potential (and terrible imo) way to play the army.

If they want to spend all their dice summoning extra units for the first two turns, go ahead. It means they aren't doing much if any damage to the opponent army, while basically replacing their own losses they are suffering over the course of those turns with their additional summoned units.

Meanwhile Space Marine Drop Pod armies (specifically looking at you Sentinels of Terra and Salamanders) are landing up to 18 Objective Secured Troops choices all over the board systematically eliminating whatever targets they want, while out scoring you through the first few and likely critical turns.

Between the Deamon player spending all their time summoning and deploying random stuff, and the Marine player, in this example, having to take the time to deploy 60+ marines and vehicles, do you really think that deamon player is going to get much more then 2 turns of gameplay to try and out score/maneuver the Marine player in 2 hours of tournament play?

And then there is Grey Knights, bringing a comparable amount of WC dice as Deamons AND they actually have a presence in the shooting phase.

I think as the game plays out, its not going to be nearly as bad as people thinking.

EDIT TO ADD: Summoning deamons at the right time, right place and of the right type will be what wins games. Not, however, spending all your time trying to spam as many onto the board as you can.

jy2 wrote:
Namely, all the psykers should be there to cast powers rather than to just give dice to their super-saiyan psyker god.

+1 for this comment.

Red Corsair wrote:
As it stands open ended 1850 isn't broken but lets be honest, its boring as feth. Necrons can take 4 night scythe warrior squads and 6 annihilation barges for 1200 on the nose. At 1850 they have enough to round this off with a wraiths/destroyer lords but at 1500 you can squeeze one mini star in. Makes this list much more one dimensional doesn't it? SO people will scale back the spam on their own.

At 1500, good luck squeezing in a LOW and having a balanced list too.

Psychic phase can stay unrestricted because getting the power dice required to break the phase and run the clock will be terrible.

But no, everyone wants to keep playing more and more points while every edition adds more and more time consuming mechanics. The shooting phase got slower as did the psychic phase. This on top of random objectives making players gruel over a mid game decision. Less points people. Will make the events better anyway. This way games will all make T5 on schedule barring extremes.

You might be on to something. Smaller games might be the new norm. Sure people wont like not being able to take all the toys they used to but it could help the problem. The only issue is the lower points you go the better the daemon summoning army will be.

 Red Corsair wrote:
[quote= I honestly think the best solution to most headaches in here is simply playing lower points. I have no idea why people are SO attached to 1750-1850. Try 1500, it still leaves enough room to take powerful units, but it will come at a cost. Same for spamming. You over due it and your left with a one dimensional army.

As it stands open ended 1850 isn't broken but lets be honest, its boring as feth. Necrons can take 4 night scythe warrior squads and 6 annihilation barges for 1200 on the nose. At 1850 they have enough to round this off with a wraiths/destroyer lords but at 1500 you can squeeze one mini star in. Makes this list much more one dimensional doesn't it? SO people will scale back the spam on their own.

At 1500, good luck squeezing in a LOW and having a balanced list too.

Psychic phase can stay unrestricted because getting the power dice required to break the phase and run the clock will be terrible.

But no, everyone wants to keep playing more and more points while every edition adds more and more time consuming mechanics. The shooting phase got slower as did the psychic phase. This on top of random objectives making players gruel over a mid game decision. Less points people. Will make the events better anyway. This way games will all make T5 on schedule barring extremes.

Preaching to the choir, for some reason folks just want to play with all the toys, thinking they are somehow hamstrung without those extra points, but now with everything scoring you don't need mass troops necessarily to be competitive. The time constraints are really the only way people are going to be forced to play at 1500 points. Besides, point costs for almost every keeps going down with each new codex, so people don't realize they are getting more models for less anyway.

jy2 wrote:

Namely, all the psykers should be there to cast powers rather than to just give dice to their super-saiyan psyker god.



+1 for this comment.

Except this is the antithesis of the rules as written by GW. If psykers were all limited to their own warp charges most powers would be so unrealiable as to render them mostly useless. As written the rules are exactly having multiple psykers around to power up a few of them. The old rules functioned much better for "every psyker casting powers"

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but from what I've seen being posted elsewhere and heard of locally is that The Eldrad seer council jetbike list with the formation of the seer's added to it is going to be even deadlier as it allows no one to suffer perils of the warp. Now to me that's just going to be a huge mess and that list from my experience was broken in 6th and now it sounds even more broken.

If I were to organize a tournament I'd remove...

Escalation/Apoc Rules - essentially removing Formations
Maelstrom Cards ( Don't see the need to try and regulate them )
Limit every army to two detachments

I still don't know how I feel yet about unbound armies, but I don't think they'll be a huge problem if you removed those 3 above. If it becomes a S*** storm in the next weeks then make it battleforged only lists. My 2 Cents.

And hello... long time creeper not poster lol

Well if you are going to limit detachments you probably should ban unbound. As for seer council I don't htink it is really any better, the warlocks still take perils, and it will cast fewer powers. The only difference is invisibility + fortune is broken as heck.

I think you need the baseline on army composition before we can even attempt to balance anything else. That's not to diminish the clusterfeth that is the psychic phase but if we can't even agree on what game we're all playing, it's pretty hard to start.


We all know the apoc stuff is a non-starter (escalation, formations, unbound)

Battle forged sadly isn't much better. Gotta put a stop to unlimited foc's.

Why are Formations a non-starter? Or do you only mean the Apoc ones that are noted as Apoc?

Why is Escalation a non-starter? With the nerf to Strength D is it really the issue it was in 6th?

Unbound I can barely agree with but that's mostly to avoid confusion when I'm playing people. I wouldn't mind trying a source limited Unbound. But at this point I'm probably slightly crazy.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Why are Formations a non-starter? Or do you only mean the Apoc ones that are noted as Apoc?

Why is Escalation a non-starter? With the nerf to Strength D is it really the issue it was in 6th?

Unbound I can barely agree with but that's mostly to avoid confusion when I'm playing people. I wouldn't mind trying a source limited Unbound. But at this point I'm probably slightly crazy.

The subtext of what I'm saying: You can't balance a sandbox. If we can't agree on a format, good luck fixing anything.


I would axe the apoc stuff because. well, I don't like apoc and this isn't a play date.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Why are Formations a non-starter? Or do you only mean the Apoc ones that are noted as Apoc?

Why is Escalation a non-starter? With the nerf to Strength D is it really the issue it was in 6th?

Unbound I can barely agree with but that's mostly to avoid confusion when I'm playing people. I wouldn't mind trying a source limited Unbound. But at this point I'm probably slightly crazy.

To me anything that's able to instantly wipe something off the board in regular sized games shouldn't be allowed. They may have been toned down, but 2-5 only grants you cover/invulnerable saves... What if you have none of those. IDK i just find D weapons very stupid and in some cases unfair.

Formations like the seer council one completely removing Perils of the Warp for your army just seems unbalanced for ALL the other armies. And being victim to that list I don't want to play it or let alone imagine it and allow others to play against it.

After thinking about it more I can see how the ability to just blunt force trauma powers through is a significant problem. The problem is there is no way I can see to not gimp the problems without gimping everyone else or being very complicated.

Again to reiterate some of these changes are not just being done here: http://warhammerworld.games-workshop.com/2014/05/24/new-warhammer-40000-rules-and-our-events-in-2014/

They are going with battle forged only and a limit of one combined arms detachment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breng77 wrote:

jy2 wrote:

Namely, all the psykers should be there to cast powers rather than to just give dice to their super-saiyan psyker god.



+1 for this comment.

Except this is the antithesis of the rules as written by GW. If psykers were all limited to their own warp charges most powers would be so unrealiable as to render them mostly useless. As written the rules are exactly having multiple psykers around to power up a few of them. The old rules functioned much better for "every psyker casting powers"

It was mainly exalted for the "super-saiyan psyker god" part. lol

We could just wait and see as suggested multiple times.

Just let the tiers form. In 6th, it was basically Eldar, Tau, Chaos reigning supreme.

In 7th, I can see Eldar, Chaos, Grey Knights as masters of the psychic phase.

Lou_Cypher wrote:
We could just wait and see as suggested multiple times.

Just let the tiers form. In 6th, it was basically Eldar, Tau, Chaos reigning supreme.

In 7th, I can see Eldar, Chaos, Grey Knights as masters of the psychic phase.

The fear in this is the in balance in the game could drive an already decreasing player base out of the game. Once that is done it is hard to bring them back in with changes that should of been suggested/implemented from the start.

 Tomb King wrote:
Again to reiterate some of these changes are not just being done here: http://warhammerworld.games-workshop.com/2014/05/24/new-warhammer-40000-rules-and-our-events-in-2014/

They are going with battle forged only and a limit of one combined arms detachment.

And unlimited Allie slots. So basically no change from the craziness that currently exists. Remember kids, there is no requirement for a Combined Arms Detachment to take an Allied one now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tomb King wrote:

Lou_Cypher wrote:
We could just wait and see as suggested multiple times.

Just let the tiers form. In 6th, it was basically Eldar, Tau, Chaos reigning supreme.

In 7th, I can see Eldar, Chaos, Grey Knights as masters of the psychic phase.

The fear in this is the in balance in the game could drive an already decreasing player base out of the game. Once that is done it is hard to bring them back in with changes that should of been suggested/implemented from the start.

On a local level I'd agree with you TK. But that's because at a local level most people into tournaments talk to each other and have a pretty solid understanding of what their community wants. I'd disagree heavily with this being the case with larger events. Why? Because they bring in a multitude of areas normally. And likely stand to gain as many as they lose initially based on rule changes or no changes. And most people go to those events to see friends and hangout, not to "win". Changes the dynamic drastically.

Example being I hate Adepticon's obsession with KP's in 6th edition where they didn't belong. But I still played in their events because it was a great overall event and I got to hang with friends and meet new people. At a local level you don't have the extra encouragement generally.

Breng77 wrote:

jy2 wrote:

Namely, all the psykers should be there to cast powers rather than to just give dice to their super-saiyan psyker god.



+1 for this comment.

Except this is the antithesis of the rules as written by GW. If psykers were all limited to their own warp charges most powers would be so unrealiable as to render them mostly useless. As written the rules are exactly having multiple psykers around to power up a few of them. The old rules functioned much better for "every psyker casting powers"

I've got no problems with making changes. It's not as if GW rules are all that great/balanced anyways. You'd think that they would have learned from their experience with Fantasy, but it doesn't look that way.

Basically, this is just a suggestion. If you like the rules as they are now, then just stick with it. If you are looking at possible suggestions as to alternative ways on running a more balanced psychic phase, then this is just another possible solution. I do prefer this method over, say, a hard cap/limit.

 Tomb King wrote:


The fear in this is the in balance in the game could drive an already decreasing player base out of the game. Once that is done it is hard to bring them back in with changes that should of been suggested/implemented from the start.

The player base in tournament play maybe. I don't think rule changes are the main draw in grabbing players in the first place especially in pick up games at the store or just collecting miniatures. Just the pricing really, not the gameplay itself.

Tiers are still going to be all over the place regardless of how OP a faction is because of the mechanics. Morrigan/Doom in MvC3, Meta-Knight in Brawl, Eddie in Guilty Gear. Only one of them has actually been capped/banned but only after multiple tournament results that actually show them dominating the other. Taking UMvC3 as an example, everyone wanted Wesker nerfed and it was only later that they actually saw Morrigan, Doom, Vergil, and Zero as the true top tiers.

Need more results before putting a hard cap or bans on anything.

Lou_Cypher wrote:

The player base in tournament play maybe. I don't think rule changes are the main draw in grabbing players in the first place especially in pick up games at the store or just collecting miniatures. Just the pricing really, not the gameplay itself.

I have personally known more than one person who picked up the game, without great knowledge of what armies were "good", and played just a few games, only to realize that they simply couldn't win, and then quit the game. Unbalanced games find it much harder to recruit the sorts of players who eventually get into tournament play.

you mean someone who has no clue about the game, or armies, who built a list based on that lack of knowledge will lose to people who do have that knowledge?

sorry but that isnt a "balance" issue any more then a newbie in COD being constantly owned by people who know all the good spots to hide/shoot or whatever, or a lousy chess player losing to a better chess player.

See this article

http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2014/05/24/7th-edition-warhammer-40k-review-the-good-the-bad-and-solutions/

Cap warp charges at 12 per turn just like fantasy rules


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Im a daemons player and i think capping warp charges at 12 is the right thing to do.
As a Blood angels player i personally do not think vechicles should be scoring either.

Or you could just lower the points level and it makes farming WC's WAY riskier. Sure you can hamfist 8 level 3 heralds in, but they won't have anywhere to hide turn 1 any way.

Oh btw people wouldn't need to carry as much crap around and games would probably all finish on time. Heaven forbid.

Every edition lowers points. If you take all your previous edition books and make lists its crazy how many more units have crept in over the years. Yet nobody ever DARES play lower point games.

I'll stop now rather then risk being the broken record guy.

that article is wrong on many counts though...

look up the GK faq for combat squads, expect that to be copy pasted to the other marine FAQ's once the dust has settled a bit.

FLGS is unfortunetly getting WAY ahead of itself on this one.

again, limiting WC's nerfs the units that just got nerfs, and dont need further nerfing.

if you have such a problem with summoning units, put a cap on summons instead of screwing over other armies like GK...

GK went from each unit casting a power 90% of the time, to half their units casting powers 75% of the time with an increased chance to perils.

further nerfing that with limited WC's is just silly and uneeded.

again, if you have an issue with the possiblity of someone getting UBER lucky on summons rolls, then nerf the # of sumoned units.

psyker based armies SHOULD be good/dominant in the P phase just like shooty armies SHOULD dominate the shooting phase.

@Easysauce

it's already in the relevant other FAQ's. It's not in SM or DA because that's how the rule is actually written in those codexes. Just figured I'd throw that out there.

 Hulksmash wrote:
@Easysauce

it's already in the relevant other FAQ's. It's not in SM or DA because that's how the rule is actually written in those codexes. Just figured I'd throw that out there.

really? good to know, it wasnt in there last night when I checked.... actually I just checked again, its not the the SW or any other FAQ besides GK

are you sure its in there, either codex or FAQ, and specifically mentioning that combat squads take up two FOC choices now when split?

It's in the BA FAQ. Not in the SW because they don't combat squad.

As for total number of units in the detachment that doesn't mean they take up 2 FOC slots. It was related to previous 6th and the total number for how many units you had toward keeping units in reserve. It seriously nerfed GK combat squads deepstriking last edition.

 easysauce wrote:
you mean someone who has no clue about the game, or armies, who built a list based on that lack of knowledge will lose to people who do have that knowledge?

sorry but that isnt a "balance" issue any more then a newbie in COD being constantly owned by people who know all the good spots to hide/shoot or whatever, or a lousy chess player losing to a better chess player.

Not at all. I mean someone who saw the game, and, for example, liked the look of orks. And lost, so asked for help, and was told that the solution was to not play orks because they suck. Well, sure, he's going to buy a second army now, right? It's one thing to lose due to a lack of knowledge. It's another thing to seek knowledge and be told that you're out of luck because you made the wrong choice of faction initially. That's where the lack of balance costs new players.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Why are Formations a non-starter? Or do you only mean the Apoc ones that are noted as Apoc?

From a personal perspective, I don't like formations because they're literally "take X units (that you might otherwise be taking anyway), get Y special rules & abilities for free" often with the addendum of "because GW happens sell these particular things together in one box".

Essentially they get bonus abilities and rules, they get to do so outside of any sort of FoC, and pay nothing for the privilege.

As for escalation stuff, at this point with the nerfing to D weapons and relatively low power amongst most common superheavies, I really don't have a problem with it.