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.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
The new Genestealer cult downgraded GSC to allies of convenience to Tyranids, which i agree stops possible telepathy abuse but it also 100% invalidates my army.

I was really excited to run a 100% infiltrating vanguard nid list, Broodkin alongside manufactorum alongside deathleapers brood. But as Allies of convenience infiltrators treat other infiltrators as enemy units, meaning they must be 18'' away from each other if they can see each other :( Just spent like £200 on space hulk genestealers and lictors and the like and on a students salary that is all my warhammer for a while, unusable. That'll teach me to get excited about a fluff themed army...

It just seems to unnecessarily restrictive, and I get the feeling they didn't even consider the ramifications of the change.

Good thing I didn't get my hopes up and buy the GSC. Dodged an expensive bullet, there.

 oldzoggy wrote:

On the Lib conclave
- This is not an army this max 5 guys on bikes. There is a huge difference between no longer being able to run your speed freak army or having to find an other use for your 5 converted starter set bikes.
- This unit isn't killed off at all. Sure it can't cast as much as easy as it used to do but they got a huge boost by giving them a rulebook worth of SM only powers with tons of unique and potentially game breaking powers

It was nerfed harshly. If I'm not an Ultramarine player my Conclave can cast a total of 2 (!) powers per Psychic Phase. That's a fraction of what it could do before. And I can't run them as a Psychic Scream unit either because they are only ever allowed to cast PS once as long as they stick together as a unit.

On the Drop pod thing
- Ad mech, IG, sisters and Inq are not a top popular army so no suprize there that these got hit.
- SM's don't suffer from it since they can use their own pods.

I can't use an AD to bring in a Drop Pod for my Gladius Grav-Centurions anymore, I'll have to play 55pts more for a 2nd Scout Squad at very least - and I cannot bring other Chapters in that way, e.g. Iron Hands Gladius with Red Scorpions AD w/ Drop Pod. That entire built doesn't really work anymore (Caveat: This is based on my assumption that the BB transport ruling will also extend to Vanilla Chapters allied each other, which seems to be the FAQs intention. It is not in the FAQ that way right now).

On the IC's smuggling in Close combat with the Skyhammer Annihilation force.
- The Skyhammer Annihilation force isn't dead its still just as killy as before as are the IC's you just can't max its power lvs as much as you or others would like to.
This is in no way a fair comparison to what happened to the less popular books.

It's not gone but the army list doesn't work that way. Just like you have to find something else to compensate for the changes mentioned/whined about in this very thread.

My point isn't that white scars are a "gimmick" my point is that GW is likely to feth your army over if you are doing something creative unless you play a popular army then you might even expect a boon.

Ignoring that SM get hit by nerfs just like other armies do. Yes, SM gets too many new toys by comparison, I'd rather have seen AM,Ork and Tyranid Codex Updates / Supplements instead of the Angels of Death book, and I'm a SM player. I tried playing a Tyranid player last week, brought 10-man tactical Squads, assault marines, regular termis, a land raider and honour guard in a simple CAD - and I still shredded him to tiny, pitiful pieces. It's not fun to win that way at all, I love the look of Nids on the table, but I can't have an interesting match with them as a SM player.

Why did I even try. Sure have it SM's are just as frequently and just as hard Nerfed by GW as all the less popular armies.

nekooni wrote:

 oldzoggy wrote:

On the Lib conclave
- This is not an army this max 5 guys on bikes. There is a huge difference between no longer being able to run your speed freak army or having to find an other use for your 5 converted starter set bikes.
- This unit isn't killed off at all. Sure it can't cast as much as easy as it used to do but they got a huge boost by giving them a rulebook worth of SM only powers with tons of unique and potentially game breaking powers

It was nerfed harshly. If I'm not an Ultramarine player my Conclave can cast a total of 2 (!) powers per Psychic Phase. That's a fraction of what it could do before. And I can't run them as a Psychic Scream unit either because they are only ever allowed to cast PS once as long as they stick together as a unit.

On the Drop pod thing
- Ad mech, IG, sisters and Inq are not a top popular army so no suprize there that these got hit.
- SM's don't suffer from it since they can use their own pods.

I can't use an AD to bring in a Drop Pod for my Gladius Grav-Centurions anymore, I'll have to play 55pts more for a 2nd Scout Squad at very least - and I cannot bring other Chapters in that way, e.g. Iron Hands Gladius with Red Scorpions AD w/ Drop Pod. That entire built doesn't really work anymore (Caveat: This is based on my assumption that the BB transport ruling will also extend to Vanilla Chapters allied each other, which seems to be the FAQs intention. It is not in the FAQ that way right now).

On the IC's smuggling in Close combat with the Skyhammer Annihilation force.
- The Skyhammer Annihilation force isn't dead its still just as killy as before as are the IC's you just can't max its power lvs as much as you or others would like to.
This is in no way a fair comparison to what happened to the less popular books.

It's not gone but the army list doesn't work that way. Just like you have to find something else to compensate for the changes mentioned/whined about in this very thread.

My point isn't that white scars are a "gimmick" my point is that GW is likely to feth your army over if you are doing something creative unless you play a popular army then you might even expect a boon.

Ignoring that SM get hit by nerfs just like other armies do. Yes, SM gets too many new toys by comparison, I'd rather have seen AM,Ork and Tyranid Codex Updates / Supplements instead of the Angels of Death book, and I'm a SM player. I tried playing a Tyranid player last week, brought 10-man tactical Squads, assault marines, regular termis, a land raider and honour guard in a simple CAD - and I still shredded him to tiny, pitiful pieces. It's not fun to win that way at all, I love the look of Nids on the table, but I can't have an interesting match with them as a SM player.

Behold my fiddle.

It is so very large.

Yeah man, I hate when they close the loopholes that let me turn my gak up to eleven...

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

Behold my fiddle.

It is so very large.

As I've said before - I'm not complaining about those nerfs. The claim was "everyone but space marines gets nerfed". They do get nerfed, it's just that they're on a high power level even after being nerfed (and in some builts at ridiculous levels before those nerfs). The point is simply that there are SM lists that were "invalidated" by the FAQ, it's just that SM have enough alternate lists that still work and that the basic power level of SM is much higher than e.g. Orks or Nids.

I am failing to see a problem here, a lot of power builds where hit hard. If you want to turn things up to 11, well, you still can. You just have to think a little harder and tailor your list to suit your opponents army.

 Lord Corellia wrote:
Yeah man, I hate when they close the loopholes that let me turn my gak up to eleven...

That's not fair at all.

The white dwarf said that the Genestealer cultists were treated like Tyranids in the allies matrix, which many people interpreted to mean they were battle brothers to tyranids (some said they were come the apocalypse) however under no interpretation of the rule was I lead to believe allies of convenience. This wasn't an FAQ, this was an errata. I wasn't exploiting a loop-hole, I was playing based on the only information available. Sure it was turned up to 11, with 100% of the army infiltrating, but what time of day was an army of almost purely genestealers considered powergaming? It was a fun dynamic that changed the kind of game the opponent played, changing every game from a mission into a scenario. Claiming i was exploiting a loop-hole feels like you are doing me a disservice.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
That's not fair at all.

The white dwarf said that the Genestealer cultists were treated like Tyranids in the allies matrix, which many people interpreted to mean they were battle brothers to tyranids (some said they were come the apocalypse) however under no interpretation of the rule was I lead to believe allies of convenience. This wasn't an FAQ, this was an errata. I wasn't exploiting a loop-hole, I was playing based on the only information available. Sure it was turned up to 11, with 100% of the army infiltrating, but what time of day was an army of almost purely genestealers considered powergaming? It was a fun dynamic that changed the kind of game the opponent played, changing every game from a mission into a scenario. Claiming i was exploiting a loop-hole feels like you are doing me a disservice.

Sorry, it wasn't directed at you. It was directed at the "le sigh, I can't do a Superfriends Ultramarines grav Centurions made invisible by a scouting White Scars Librarian Conclave on bikes riding a Flesh Tearers Drop Pod and supported by Space Wolves Thunderwolf Cavalry!" camp. Allied shenanigans can be brutally ridiculous like my example, or they can be cool and fluffy like yours.

 Lord Corellia wrote:

Sorry, it wasn't directed at you. It was directed at the "le sigh, I can't do a Superfriends Ultramarines grav Centurions made invisible by a scouting White Scars Librarian Conclave on bikes riding a Flesh Tearers Drop Pod and supported by Space Wolves Thunderwolf Cavalry!" camp. Allied shenanigans can be brutally ridiculous like my example, or they can be cool and fluffy like yours.

There is no such camp. I'm not at all complaining about the changes, I'm just commenting on the claim that everyone BUT Space Marines gets nerfed and SM never do. We got nerfed, end of story. We deserved it, and the FAQ rulings , especially the BB thing, makes way more sense fluffwise than how it was before.

But hey, since I play a popular codex and said anything on nerfs, I must be whining about them. That I've repeatedly said "the nerfs that affected SM are fine/deserved" can be ignored, right?

All I'm saying is "deal with it", don't blame other PLAYERS for rule changes made by GW that negatively affect your army list. If your army list is "invalidated", deal with it: Change your list so it works once again. SM players have to do this just like any other players do.

On the whole, I like most of the FAQ changes (bar the grenades one, but... meh).

Poor DE though... they lost just about the best thing they had going for them.

I for one really, really hope they are listening, and will sort the tier 3 codices out ASAP.

GW may have thrown terrain completely out of the window in terms of emphasis and rules, but our still-sane friends at FW push terrain density in 30k if anyone wants modern precedence

The thing is, DE have a right to complain about Jink and passengers but it's not as if letting them fire at full BS magically fixes DE because they are still a pile of gak that only became a Codex because Eldar stopped being able to use their Raiders/WWP in Wave Serpents.

 Frozocrone wrote:
The thing is, DE have a right to complain about Jink and passengers but it's not as if letting them fire at full BS magically fixes DE because they are still a pile of gak that only became a Codex because Eldar stopped being able to use their Raiders/WWP in Wave Serpents.

DE are only bad because of superheavies and bull gak MCs like the riptide. If those things didn't exist, DE would be fine. Lances + everything having poison would make them basically effective against everyone else.

Codexes were fine until the most efficient way to play was to stop using them; any faction that can't cherry pick via detachments, formations and allies (or player that finds it distasteful) will have a bad time

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:
Codexes were fine until the most efficient way to play was to stop using them; any faction that can't cherry pick via detachments, formations and allies (or player that finds it distasteful) will have a bad time

that statement perfefectly summerizes the current power meta

if we look at the bottom dexes what do we find? lack of ability to cherrypick units (orks, tyranids, classic CSM, guard)
and even with those... beeing competitive at higher point games just means min maxing with multiple CAD's

RedNoak wrote:

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:
Codexes were fine until the most efficient way to play was to stop using them; any faction that can't cherry pick via detachments, formations and allies (or player that finds it distasteful) will have a bad time

that statement perfefectly summerizes the current power meta

if we look at the bottom dexes what do we find? lack of ability to cherrypick units (orks, tyranids, classic CSM, guard)
and even with those... beeing competitive at higher point games just means min maxing with multiple CAD's

BA can cherry pick and are still ghastly. To make them playable, you have to replace all the BA units with good vanilla ones. Taking units from other lists doesn't make your list good. It just lets you play another list, which you could have done already.

 Traditio wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
The thing is, DE have a right to complain about Jink and passengers but it's not as if letting them fire at full BS magically fixes DE because they are still a pile of gak that only became a Codex because Eldar stopped being able to use their Raiders/WWP in Wave Serpents.

DE are only bad because of superheavies and bull gak MCs like the riptide. If those things didn't exist, DE would be fine. Lances + everything having poison would make them basically effective against everyone else.

It really doesn't. Even if that were true they aren't "fine".

Lances and Poison are outdated. Back in 5th, they were good to decent. 6th came and high strength/high rate of fire were what you needed to deal with vehicles. 7th made vehicles tougher and DE got left behind.

The best weapons now are small doses of poison and lance to supplement Haywire and Disintegrators. Cluster Caltrops if you go with Reavers which are...D6 S6. So high strength (and potentially high rate of fire). Dark Lances are terrible in 7th. Ravagers got a kick in the teeth by losing Aerial Assault. Not to mention the streamlining of the Codex.

Even more infuriating for DE players, they lost a lot of fluff, characters and interesting components because GW couldn't be fething bothered to make some models for them (don't quote Chapter House, because Tyranids got the Tyrannocyte to make up for the Mycotic Spore and Genesteal Cult's provide a new take on Yrmgal variants). Heck, just the other day, I noticed that on Forgeworld, the Ravenwing Fighter, one of the only three DE models you can buy, got shifted to Last Chance to Buy.

I would not be surprised if DE got slowly phased out.

 Traditio wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
The thing is, DE have a right to complain about Jink and passengers but it's not as if letting them fire at full BS magically fixes DE because they are still a pile of gak that only became a Codex because Eldar stopped being able to use their Raiders/WWP in Wave Serpents.

DE are only bad because of superheavies and bull gak MCs like the riptide. If those things didn't exist, DE would be fine. Lances + everything having poison would make them basically effective against everyone else.

Please, please stop, you have no idea what you're talking about. Not just about this either, but every thread you start.

Drasius wrote:Please, please stop, you have no idea what you're talking about. Not just about this either, but every thread you start.

I've played against DE both before and after the FAQ. I have yet actually to win a game against DE.

If you disagree with me, then by all means, please explain my alleged error based on actual facts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frozocrone wrote:
Lances and Poison are outdated. Back in 5th, they were good to decent. 6th came and high strength/high rate of fire were what you needed to deal with vehicles. 7th made vehicles tougher and DE got left behind.

What you are saying is inconsistent. It's widely acknowledged that vehicles were much tougher in 5th than they are now. If lances were good in 5th against non-superheavy vehicles, then they're even better now.

And again, poison is just fine against everything else that's not: 1. a superheavy, 2. a GMC or 3. a bull gak MC like a riptide.

Yes, they don't get scatbikes, grav cannons, etc., but all of those things are OP. We need less OP bull gak in the game, not more.

 Frozocrone wrote:

I would not be surprised if DE got slowly phased out.

Your codex is newer than the current CSM codex.

Just saying.

The Raven going to last chance was probably an aesthetic choice. The model was based on the 3rd ed Dark Eldar design so if anything it was one of the most likely to get the chop. Plus, FW have stated that they discontinue models that don't sell the clear up space - sad but true. See also all the Chaos dreadnoughts that went with.

Don't forget, FW discontinued the Eldar Cobra and Scorpion and a few years later re-released them with an updated design aesthetic. So we might possibly see the Raven come back that way.

 Traditio wrote:

Drasius wrote:Please, please stop, you have no idea what you're talking about. Not just about this either, but every thread you start.

I've played against DE both before and after the FAQ. I have yet actually to win a game against DE.

If you disagree with me, then by all means, please explain my alleged error based on actual facts.

I'll take a swing at it.
The 7th Edition Dark Eldar codex, not counting the Covens units/supplement, is incredibly squishy. Squishier than IG, Nids, Orks, Eldar, or anything else. They also aren't as fast as several other armies. Biker armies, Eldar, and Corsairs (probably missing a few armies) are all more mobile, and pack far more durability and firepower than the Dark Eldar can reasonably bring, while being as fast, or faster than them.
Poison spam doesn't deal with 2+ MC's very well, and does almost nothing to GC's due to wounding on 6's. It also does nothing against deathstars, who almost always have invisibility and/or rerollable 2+/3+ saves, which render both poison and lance useless against them.
Lance spam, while possible, doesn't bring the ROF to deal with the sheer number of high durability units out there. 3 Triple Lance Ravagers won't kill a Knight or a WK, and won't be very good against MC's like Riptides and Dreadknights, due to their mobility, plus their invul saves. In older editions DE were sufficiently mobile and hit hard enough to make them a very high risk high reward army, but in the new edition with the increase in mobility for everyone else, and the rather insane increase in firepower that everyone brings means that DE are stuck as a high risk regular reward.
DE lacks ignores cover weapons that most armies have access to, and rely almost exclusively on cover saves, so hunters eye, markerlights, flamers (god, feth flamers), and all the rest of that Ignores Cover stuff feths DE harder than any other army, while having no access to it at all.
The FAQ didn't really change the power of the DE, as their main firepower comes from Scourges, Venoms (who don't need to jink often due to their range and invul) and Reavers, who usually do stuff with their HOW. This, while plenty of casual lists, is nowhere near enough to deal with most of the stuff that other dex's can throw.

DarkStarSabre wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

I would not be surprised if DE got slowly phased out.

Your codex is newer than the current CSM codex.

Just saying.

The Raven going to last chance was probably an aesthetic choice. The model was based on the 3rd ed Dark Eldar design so if anything it was one of the most likely to get the chop. Plus, FW have stated that they discontinue models that don't sell the clear up space - sad but true. See also all the Chaos dreadnoughts that went with.

Don't forget, FW discontinued the Eldar Cobra and Scorpion and a few years later re-released them with an updated design aesthetic. So we might possibly see the Raven come back that way.

Yeah, I do feel for Chaos players. I don't actually play DE anymore, I just got so disheartened by the lack of support and the fact that Craftworlds do everything better that I decided to focus on Orks and Blood Angels (primarily for 30k purposes).

You would think that Chaos Space Marines would (and should) get a new Codex considering they have gone almost five years without a new one (only some new formations) whereas Eldar and SM get new ones. It's blows my mind, considering that Chaos is the main enemy of the Imperium. Heck there is a whole game devoted to Imperium vs Chaos! GW needs to get their priorities straight.

I am aware about stopping model ranges on FW part. I've asked about why some legions don't have Rhino doors and that was their response. It's just annoying that DE only have three vehicles down to two. Not to mention Corsairs which do Dark Eldar better lol.

Traditio wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frozocrone wrote:
Lances and Poison are outdated. Back in 5th, they were good to decent. 6th came and high strength/high rate of fire were what you needed to deal with vehicles. 7th made vehicles tougher and DE got left behind.

What you are saying is inconsistent. It's widely acknowledged that vehicles were much tougher in 5th than they are now. If lances were good in 5th against non-superheavy vehicles, then they're even better now.

And again, poison is just fine against everything else that's not: 1. a superheavy, 2. a GMC or 3. a bull gak MC like a riptide.

Yes, they don't get scatbikes, grav cannons, etc., but all of those things are OP. We need less OP bull gak in the game, not more.

Except that's not what I've said, in this thread and in other threads. Single shot weapons are bad in this edition and ever since Hull Points became a thing. Dark Lances are terrible anti-tank weapons. Against a Rhino they do a hull point 43% of the time and cause an explosion 7% of the time. Assuming you're not Snap-firing mind. To guarantee wrecking a 35 point Rhino, you need about 7 Dark Lances, or three Ravagers.

Poison is only good against high toughness, elite units (such as a Monstrous Creature). It's middling against everything else. Venom's only do 4 wounds on average per volley, or 2 wounds, 1.33 wounds and 0.64 wounds against 4+, 3+ and 2+ respectively, not accounting for FnP, rerollable saves etc etc. On such a frail platform, you expect more.

It's a glass hammer army that seems to have forgotten it's toolbox. The only part of your comment I agree with is less OP stuff, but considering the direction that GW is going in, this is unlikely to change.

 Frozocrone wrote:

DarkStarSabre wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

I would not be surprised if DE got slowly phased out.

Your codex is newer than the current CSM codex.

Just saying.

The Raven going to last chance was probably an aesthetic choice. The model was based on the 3rd ed Dark Eldar design so if anything it was one of the most likely to get the chop. Plus, FW have stated that they discontinue models that don't sell the clear up space - sad but true. See also all the Chaos dreadnoughts that went with.

Don't forget, FW discontinued the Eldar Cobra and Scorpion and a few years later re-released them with an updated design aesthetic. So we might possibly see the Raven come back that way.

Yeah, I do feel for Chaos players. I don't actually play DE anymore, I just got so disheartened by the lack of support and the fact that Craftworlds do everything better that I decided to focus on Orks and Blood Angels (primarily for 30k purposes).

You would think that Chaos Space Marines would (and should) get a new Codex considering they have gone almost five years without a new one (only some new formations) whereas Eldar and SM get new ones. It's blows my mind, considering that Chaos is the main enemy of the Imperium. Heck there is a whole game devoted to Imperium vs Chaos! GW needs to get their priorities straight.

I am aware about stopping model ranges on FW part. I've asked about why some legions don't have Rhino doors and that was their response. It's just annoying that DE only have three vehicles down to two. Not to mention Corsairs which do Dark Eldar better lol.

To be fair, Doom of Mymeara does everything better. Corsairs seem to be a better raiding force than DE and the Pale Courts battlehost allows Craftwords to do...well..craftworlds better.

CSM is basically the eternal scapegoat - there are still people who believe that Siren or Iron Warriors ruined 40k forever (in the era of Tau Fish of Fury, the first SM Bikestar lists, Nidzilla and Eldar Craftworld shenanigans) and will hyperventilate the moment Chaos get anything of value. I think part of the delay and hesitation is just that - well, that or plans to do a DE style range rework from the ground up.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

DarkStarSabre wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

I would not be surprised if DE got slowly phased out.

Your codex is newer than the current CSM codex.

Just saying.

The Raven going to last chance was probably an aesthetic choice. The model was based on the 3rd ed Dark Eldar design so if anything it was one of the most likely to get the chop. Plus, FW have stated that they discontinue models that don't sell the clear up space - sad but true. See also all the Chaos dreadnoughts that went with.

Don't forget, FW discontinued the Eldar Cobra and Scorpion and a few years later re-released them with an updated design aesthetic. So we might possibly see the Raven come back that way.

Yeah, I do feel for Chaos players. I don't actually play DE anymore, I just got so disheartened by the lack of support and the fact that Craftworlds do everything better that I decided to focus on Orks and Blood Angels (primarily for 30k purposes).

You would think that Chaos Space Marines would (and should) get a new Codex considering they have gone almost five years without a new one (only some new formations) whereas Eldar and SM get new ones. It's blows my mind, considering that Chaos is the main enemy of the Imperium. Heck there is a whole game devoted to Imperium vs Chaos! GW needs to get their priorities straight.

I am aware about stopping model ranges on FW part. I've asked about why some legions don't have Rhino doors and that was their response. It's just annoying that DE only have three vehicles down to two. Not to mention Corsairs which do Dark Eldar better lol.

To be fair, Doom of Mymeara does everything better. Corsairs seem to be a better raiding force than DE and the Pale Courts battlehost allows Craftwords to do...well..craftworlds better.

CSM is basically the eternal scapegoat - there are still people who believe that Siren or Iron Warriors ruined 40k forever (in the era of Tau Fish of Fury, the first SM Bikestar lists, Nidzilla and Eldar Craftworld shenanigans) and will hyperventilate the moment Chaos get anything of value. I think part of the delay and hesitation is just that - well, that or plans to do a DE style range rework from the ground up.

I pray that DE and CSM both get proper updates soon. Right now I'd love to play DE, but that book is just such a train wreck right now.

Frozocrone wrote:Except that's not what I've said, in this thread and in other threads. Single shot weapons are bad in this edition and ever since Hull Points became a thing.

Even with hullpoints, vehicles are still less durable than they were in 5th edition. Instead of getting the appropriate results on the vehicle damage table a certain number of times (which may be 3 or more times with a dark lance anyway), now you just need to get (usually no more than) 3 glancing hits to wreck a rhino.

 Traditio wrote:
What you are saying is inconsistent. It's widely acknowledged that vehicles were much tougher in 5th than they are now. If lances were good in 5th against non-superheavy vehicles, then they're even better now.

No, it doesn't work like that. Vehicles are weaker overall than they were in 5th, that's not the same as being weaker against all weapon types. The primary difference in durability is mid-strength high-ROF weapons. In 5th those weapons were great for inflicting lots of glances and keeping a vehicle shaken or stunned all game but not very effective at killing it. In 6th those weapons keep their ability to glance a vehicle into a useless paperweight, but now they take away 1/3 of its HP with every glance and quickly kill it. High-strength low-ROF weapons actually got worse in 6th because their chance of a one-shot kill was significantly reduced (cut in half, for lances) and they don't really have the ROF to strip HP fast enough to matter.

And of course the other factor is that heavy vehicles, the things lances are supposed to be best at killing, have all but disappeared from the metagame in 7th. Lances were never all that great against AV 10-12 for their point cost because you pay for the ability to cut a Land Raider or LRBT down to AV 12. And now, with the lance rule marginal at best, they have no real advantage over the high-ROF weapons you took in 5th if you wanted to stop Rhino spam.

And again, poison is just fine against everything else that's not: 1. a superheavy, 2. a GMC or 3. a bull gak MC like a riptide.

IOW, "poison is fine as long as you don't include any of the things it isn't fine against." If you exclude the big units then poison weapons are just bolters (and, in fact, worse than bolters against T3 infantry). And haven't you complained an awful lot about how your bolter tactical marines aren't good enough?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
What you are saying is inconsistent. It's widely acknowledged that vehicles were much tougher in 5th than they are now. If lances were good in 5th against non-superheavy vehicles, then they're even better now.

No, it doesn't work like that. Vehicles are weaker overall than they were in 5th, that's not the same as being weaker against all weapon types. The primary difference in durability is mid-strength high-ROF weapons. In 5th those weapons were great for inflicting lots of glances and keeping a vehicle shaken or stunned all game but not very effective at killing it. In 6th those weapons keep their ability to glance a vehicle into a useless paperweight, but now they take away 1/3 of its HP with every glance and quickly kill it. High-strength low-ROF weapons actually got worse in 6th because their chance of a one-shot kill was significantly reduced (cut in half, for lances) and they don't really have the ROF to strip HP fast enough to matter.

And of course the other factor is that heavy vehicles, the things lances are supposed to be best at killing, have all but disappeared from the metagame in 7th. Lances were never all that great against AV 10-12 for their point cost because you pay for the ability to cut a Land Raider or LRBT down to AV 12. And now, with the lance rule marginal at best, they have no real advantage over the high-ROF weapons you took in 5th if you wanted to stop Rhino spam.

Points noted. I have no substantive comments at this time.

IOW, "poison is fine as long as you don't include any of the things it isn't fine against."

Except, that's literally what I said earlier. "DE suck because of x, y and z units." They aren't bad in general. They're bad because GW has taken a horrible turn for the worse from 6th edition onwards.

If you exclude the big units then poison weapons are just bolters (and, in fact, worse than bolters against T3 infantry). And haven't you complained an awful lot about how your bolter tactical marines aren't good enough?

Except, they're not. My tactical marines' bolters can't hurt carnifexes or wraithlords on 4s. They can't even hurt wraithknights on 6s.

 Traditio wrote:

Drasius wrote:Please, please stop, you have no idea what you're talking about. Not just about this either, but every thread you start.

I've played against DE both before and after the FAQ. I have yet actually to win a game against DE.

Which doesn't mean DE is good...

What you are saying is inconsistent. It's widely acknowledged that vehicles were much tougher in 5th than they are now. If lances were good in 5th against non-superheavy vehicles, then they're even better now.

Umm no. Just because they were tougher then doesn't mean it's better now. They are softer now because better way to take them out came out. Better way which btw does not involve high S low AP guns like dark lance...

Not to mention number of vechiles have gone up. Ability of dark lance to take out vechiles went down, ability of OTHER type of guns went up and numbers went up. Does not make dark lance better.