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:
There's pentaflyrant. Don't forget pentaflyrant.

Is that still a thing? I would think people wouldn't complain about that anymore.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
There's pentaflyrant. Don't forget pentaflyrant.

Is that still a thing? I would think people wouldn't complain about that anymore.

It still messes with you when you don't have much AA.

pm713 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
There's pentaflyrant. Don't forget pentaflyrant.

Is that still a thing? I would think people wouldn't complain about that anymore.

It still messes with you when you don't have much AA.

Eh, Tau easily have AA, Space marines can grav it out of the sky, Eldar have so many shots it doesn't matter, and Necrons can ignore them. Hence why I haven't heard of many people complaining about Flyrant spam.

 krodarklorr wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
There's pentaflyrant. Don't forget pentaflyrant.

Is that still a thing? I would think people wouldn't complain about that anymore.

It still messes with you when you don't have much AA.

Eh, Tau easily have AA, Space marines can grav it out of the sky, Eldar have so many shots it doesn't matter, and Necrons can ignore them. Hence why I haven't heard of many people complaining about Flyrant spam.

None of my armies can deal with it. Granted I'm pretty casual though.

 krodarklorr wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
There's pentaflyrant. Don't forget pentaflyrant.

Is that still a thing? I would think people wouldn't complain about that anymore.

It still messes with you when you don't have much AA.

Eh, Tau easily have AA, Space marines can grav it out of the sky, Eldar have so many shots it doesn't matter, and Necrons can ignore them. Hence why I haven't heard of many people complaining about Flyrant spam.

BA can do nothing but endure it.

SemperMortis wrote:
GW has made these FAQ DRAFTS with the goal of fixing problems in the game currently.

Well, there's your problem.

FAQs are not supposed to be changes, they're clarifications.

I have no idea why you expected that FAQs would make any significant changes.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
A counter that no one can afford, because it will likely just be shot off the table by a scatterbike.

*sigh* Not everyone has scatterbikes. In fact, only Eldar have those.

Not every Eldar player spams Scatbikes. Only the super-serious hardcore WAAC tournament (usually) players.

 Happyjew wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
A counter that no one can afford, because it will likely just be shot off the table by a scatterbike.

*sigh* Not everyone has scatterbikes. In fact, only Eldar have those.

Not every Eldar player spams Scatbikes. Only the super-serious hardcore WAAC tournament (usually) players.

And ones who can't play. That's why I have to deal with them now.

 Happyjew wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
A counter that no one can afford, because it will likely just be shot off the table by a scatterbike.

*sigh* Not everyone has scatterbikes. In fact, only Eldar have those.

Not every Eldar player spams Scatbikes. Only the super-serious hardcore WAAC tournament (usually) players.

It's a really obvious thing to take in the book. Why take a heavy support choice when you can take more obj sec troops that shoot like heavy support?

Martel732 wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
A counter that no one can afford, because it will likely just be shot off the table by a scatterbike.

*sigh* Not everyone has scatterbikes. In fact, only Eldar have those.

Not every Eldar player spams Scatbikes. Only the super-serious hardcore WAAC tournament (usually) players.

It's a really obvious thing to take in the book. Why take a heavy support choice when you can take more obj sec troops that shoot like heavy support?

Fun, fairness, variety, theme, I don't own many jetbikes. That kind of thing.

This thread makes me think of basically every time each edition gets their FAQs out. It's the same thread and the same responses and complaints. GW is nothing if not consistently inconsistent.

pm713 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
A counter that no one can afford, because it will likely just be shot off the table by a scatterbike.

*sigh* Not everyone has scatterbikes. In fact, only Eldar have those.

With Martel it makes little difference. If he isn't facing Eldar it seems to be cheese Tau or SM cheese. His meta is.....not casual.

The main problem with his meta is his opponents being idiots/dicks when it comes to terrain and setting up giant firing lanes so there's no LOS blocking cover on the board.

We have some. But it doen't help because eldar can move 12" to get the angle. Los works vs immobile gun lines only.

Alcibiades wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:
"Every model gets to use a grenade" = "all 4+ save MCs die in close combat"

Now the Toxicrene can function.

and the Toxicrene gets AP2, because...

Reasons!

There is no way on the Empra's brown earth that thing should be AP2. Grenades are the tiniest of counters.

The same reason every MC gets AP2. It's huge, er, monstrous. Twice the size of a Carnifex!

Grenades are not the tiniest of counters against MCs. Every model in a large squad having a krak grenade is too effective against a large number of MCs. (10 guardsmen with krak grenades will kill the toxicrene in 2 or so turns, but lose only 4 or so guardsmen) and walkers (which is the important catehgory here!), but ineffective against the problem MCs of Wraithknights and Riptides, which will still barely feel it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
The counter is a power fist or other power weapon.

Isn't the Toxicrene one of the worst units the Tyranids have not counting grenades anyway? Plus how many 4+ Mountrous Creatures exist, really?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:
"Every model gets to use a grenade" = "all 4+ save MCs die in close combat"

Now the Toxicrene can function.

and the Toxicrene gets AP2, because...

Reasons!

There is no way on the Empra's brown earth that thing should be AP2. Grenades are the tiniest of counters.

The same reason every MC gets AP2. It's huge, er, monstrous. Twice the size of a Carnifex!

Grenades are not the tiniest of counters against MCs. Every model in a large squad having a krak grenade is too effective against a large number of MCs. (10 guardsmen with krak grenades will kill the toxicrene in 2 or so turns, but lose only 4 or so guardsmen) and walkers (which is the important catehgory here!), but ineffective against the problem MCs of Wraithknights and Riptides, which will still barely feel it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
The counter is a power fist or other power weapon.

Isn't the Toxicrene one of the worst units the Tyranids have not counting grenades anyway? Plus how many 4+ Mountrous Creatures exist, really?

I can think of three and two fly.

Swampmist wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
He's not wrong. Facebooks timeline is a bull crap place to be hosting rules for a game. Granted these are just the drafts and I am sure the website will be updated with the faqs when it's all said and done. But those rulings don't count for gak until they appear on the actual website.

Good to see what direction they are heading in. But we should all be waiting for the final versions.

Except, that's the opposite of what we should be doing. these are drafts; meaning that we should be testing them and finding out what works, what doesn't, and what needs further clarification. Ignoring them means that any inconsistencies that they have literally asked us to help them deal with will go unseen, and the rules will be worse off for it.

Problem with that is that the FAQ team gives everyone ONE WEEK to ask questions and then for what ever reason, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ASK ANYMORE. Can't understand why a time limit is ever put on, it should always be considered. It's almost like GW will not go back to FAQs again till next year when 8th edition comes out, if it comes out.

Scott-S6 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
GW has made these FAQ DRAFTS with the goal of fixing problems in the game currently.

Well, there's your problem.

FAQs are not supposed to be changes, they're clarifications.

I have no idea why you expected that FAQs would make any significant changes.

Funny how a lot of FAQs does change things significantly though. That is why people expect FAQs to change them because that is what GW does a lot of times.

I can think of one FAQ that's a significant change and that's the Warp Spider one. Which others are actual changes?

Quite, lots of the ones being cried about weren't changes.

We've certainly never seen GW try and use FAQs as a means to fix fundamental problems with a ruleset or balance issues.

pm713 wrote:
I can think of one FAQ that's a significant change and that's the Warp Spider one. Which others are actual changes?

And that one, I believe, is in the Errata section. And I agree, most of the FAQ's that surprised people were not actually changes if you re-read the original rule. GW expects too much out of it's readers.

The Psychic power limitation is a great example. One of the first sentences in the dang section was "The number of powers a psyker can use depends on the Mastery level"
Yet for some reason players thought they could keep casting until they ran out of powers or WC; which was a clause that was specifically referencing switching between psykers and did not overrule the previous limitation.
GW did not change how the powers work, they clarified everyone's failure at reading comprehension.

-

 Scott-S6 wrote:
Quite, lots of the ones being cried about weren't changes.

We've certainly never seen GW try and use FAQs as a means to fix fundamental problems with a ruleset or balance issues.

Well, way back when they used to do regular FAQ/Errata and occasionally would change things which needed changing.

In an old Dark Elf book for Fantasy they worked with a Dark Elf forum to identify problems and fixed them, including changing wargear and points costs. That was a long time ago, though.

 Galef wrote:


The Psychic power limitation is a great example. One of the first sentences in the dang section was "The number of powers a psyker can use depends on the Mastery level"
Yet for some reason players thought they could keep casting until they ran out of powers or WC; which was a clause that was specifically referencing switching between psykers and did not overrule the previous limitation.
GW did not change how the powers work, they clarified everyone's failure at reading comprehension.

-

That's an awful example, because the relationship between Mastery and number of powers cast is never defined.

As written, that rule doesn't define what that dependence is, is it 1 power per ML, 8? Banana?

People generally made the assumption that 1ML=1 power cast, but that was an assumption.

It remains an excellent example of wooly rules writing.

 Galef wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I can think of one FAQ that's a significant change and that's the Warp Spider one. Which others are actual changes?

And that one, I believe, is in the Errata section. And I agree, most of the FAQ's that surprised people were not actually changes if you re-read the original rule. GW expects too much out of it's readers.

The Psychic power limitation is a great example. One of the first sentences in the dang section was "The number of powers a psyker can use depends on the Mastery level"
Yet for some reason players thought they could keep casting until they ran out of powers or WC; which was a clause that was specifically referencing switching between psykers and did not overrule the previous limitation.
GW did not change how the powers work, they clarified everyone's failure at reading comprehension.

-

That wasn't a failure of reading comprehension. That was a failure of being specific in writing. I saw both sides, and played whatever people wanted, but you have to admit that "Depends on" does not mean "is equal to." They didn't put in the rulebook explicitly in what way the number of powers depended on mastery level. So some people assumed it to be a 1:1 ratio, which ended up being correct RAI. Others believed it to mean their mastery level plus psychic focus plus force weapons would determine their total numbers of powers known, which would determine how many powers they could cast each phase. Both still "depend on" the psyker's mastery level. "How many powers can a psyker cast?" "It depends."

Use a different example if you want to assert reading comprehension failure.

Edit: *Shakes fist* Azrael!!!

pm713 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:
"Every model gets to use a grenade" = "all 4+ save MCs die in close combat"

Now the Toxicrene can function.

and the Toxicrene gets AP2, because...

Reasons!

There is no way on the Empra's brown earth that thing should be AP2. Grenades are the tiniest of counters.

The same reason every MC gets AP2. It's huge, er, monstrous. Twice the size of a Carnifex!

Grenades are not the tiniest of counters against MCs. Every model in a large squad having a krak grenade is too effective against a large number of MCs. (10 guardsmen with krak grenades will kill the toxicrene in 2 or so turns, but lose only 4 or so guardsmen) and walkers (which is the important catehgory here!), but ineffective against the problem MCs of Wraithknights and Riptides, which will still barely feel it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
The counter is a power fist or other power weapon.

Isn't the Toxicrene one of the worst units the Tyranids have not counting grenades anyway? Plus how many 4+ Mountrous Creatures exist, really?

I can think of three and two fly.

Then this complaint is literally the most unreasonable thing I've heard in a while.

It all boils down to the fact if a giant monster crushes you... in no way should armour be particularly helpful...

By comparison an extremely cheap upgrade being able to kill already semi vulnerable creatures is not the way to go. It's just people moaning when it comes to specific MC's without realising there are other MC's out there.

 Baldeagle91 wrote:
It all boils down to the fact if a giant monster crushes you... in no way should armour be particularly helpful...

By comparison an extremely cheap upgrade being able to kill already semi vulnerable creatures is not the way to go. It's just people moaning when it comes to specific MC's without realising there are other MC's out there.

Most Monstrous Creatures have 3+. A Carnifex in melee with TEN Marines is taking one wound a turn. Krak Grenades are NOT killing it at a fast rate.

 Baldeagle91 wrote:
It all boils down to the fact if a giant monster crushes you... in no way should armour be particularly helpful...

By comparison an extremely cheap upgrade being able to kill already semi vulnerable creatures is not the way to go. It's just people moaning when it comes to specific MC's without realising there are other MC's out there.

Which makes sense if it charges you. If it just sits there and swings, it's not crushing anything.

 JimOnMars wrote:

 Baldeagle91 wrote:
It all boils down to the fact if a giant monster crushes you... in no way should armour be particularly helpful...

By comparison an extremely cheap upgrade being able to kill already semi vulnerable creatures is not the way to go. It's just people moaning when it comes to specific MC's without realising there are other MC's out there.

Which makes sense if it charges you. If it just sits there and swings, it's not crushing anything.

A giant monster stepping on you hurts whether it charged or not.

pm713 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I can think of three and two fly.

Technically the C'tans are in that boat.

 krodarklorr wrote:

pm713 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I can think of three and two fly.

Technically the C'tans are in that boat.

I'm not familiar with the C'Tan so I didn't include that in the list. I was referring to Tyranid monsters.

Seriously, how is everyone latching on the grenade thing (which is a very insignificant adjustment in the grand scheme of things) and ignoring all the awesome clarifications they delivered!?

Stopping special rules transferring to attached characters, stopping BB transport shenanigans, reigning in psychic powers, toning down warp spiders and coordinated firepower, nerfing cover rules for gargantuans..... it goes on and on. They toned down a lot of broken rules interactions, and clarified many other things very well. Please stop complaining about the contradicting 10% when 90% was great.