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.

He/She isn't saying it's not balanced, as in Deathwatch is OP, if I'm comprehending correctly. It's that there is too much randomness.

With that said, can't that hit things locked in combat too? It's not a shooting attack.

Nobody with a half-sane mind could possibly think GW was going to start balancing 40k after the releases of the last year and a half or so. They've gone out of their way to do the opposite to push new sales via absurdly overpowered rules and random tables just for its own sake.

 Voidwraith wrote:
Random tables aren't killing 40k. An overpowered shooting phase, GW's inability to correctly point cost units, and high volume grav being great against almost everything (especially immobilizing vehicles) is what's killing 40k.

Random tables are definitely a part of that. Nested random results inside of random tables further complicates things. Yes all the other stuff you mentioned matters too, but random tables definitely are also a problem.

Hell even the Cadian Warlord Traits aren't that different

1 Master Orator: Warlord gains Zealot.
2 Dead-eye Shot: Warlord gets +2 BS, his unit gets +1 BS.
3 Artillery Veteran: Orbital strike
4 Unflappable Stoicism: units within 12" of warlord don't take morale tests for suffering 25% or more casualties.
5 Above the Thundering Gun: one more command each turn
6 Staunch Traditionalist: must issue and accept challenges and can re-roll failed to hit and to wound in challenges.

Extra rolls 1,5,6
Free weapon 3

Or the eldar ones

1 Ambush of Blades: Single use. all units within 12" to re-roll 1s To Wound for a whole phase
2 An Eye on Distant Events: You can give D3 units the Scout special rule
3 Falcon's Swiftness: The Warlord and his unit get +3" when running.
4 Fate's Messenger: The Warlord can re-roll all saving throws of 1.
5 Mark of the Incomparable Hunter: The Warlord gets Split Fire.
6 Seer of the Shifting Vector: Deep Striking Eldar won't scatter if they land within 12" of the Warlord. nonetheless

Extra rolls on 1,2,4
And the other buffs are just better then a 12" crappy weapon.

Zoggy. It has NOTHING to do with power levels. At all.

This

 Selym wrote:
Zoggy. It has NOTHING to do with power levels. At all.

totally contradicts this

If anyone hoped GW was going to start balancing 40k... Nope.

Balance is has everything to do with power lvs.
So what is it ? You seem to have an aversion for extra die rolls (or warlord trait tables in general) but the DW they doesn't really add that much extra die rolls than the INQ, IG or Eldar ones and allmost all of them have some kind of extra weapon.

It's more the randomness. Randomness is being used as an excuse to avoid balance hence the issue. Or at least that's what I think it is.

But why'd the OP think that the DW book was suddenly going to reverse the trend of two editions?

It just seems like a bizarre and arbitrary point to make an argument that most are already aware is a problem and it isn't even a particularly egregious example of how random=balanced in the current edition.

We have psychic powers for that.

Yeah or those tactical objective cards...

Much of this discussion assumes that GW is motivated to find balance in the game.

That they are concerned that your ITC Super Bowl invitational might be "ruined" because Timmy brought that army with the Warlord table that makes everyone salty, etc.

It is quite possible that they are simply unconcerned w/ sportshammer players and don't care to entertain their demands. Sales seem to be good and the tourney crowd makes their own FAQs and rules up now anyways so why should GW bother really?

Sales are good?

You mean you class the years of contraction of revenue, and the fact that it was an essentially one off payment from a successful license that stopped them posting a massive drop in profits as good?!

GW have heard the issues people have with the game, there's any amount of evidence to support that, and are changing to reflect it.

Your point simply has no basis in fact.

 CT GAMER wrote:
Much of this discussion assumes that GW is motivated to find balance in the game.
That they are concerned that your ITC Super Bowl invitational might be "ruined" because Timmy brought that army with the Warlord table that makes everyone salty, etc.
It is quite possible that they are simply unconcerned w/ sportshammer players and don't care to entertain their demands. Sales seem to be good and the tourney crowd makes their own FAQs and rules up now anyways so why should GW bother really?

Thats an other discussion. The point is that the DW warlord traits don't really seem to be that unbalanced at all when you compare them with the other warlord traits out there.
Sure you could argue that warlord traits as a whole are a flawed mechanism, but these specificly aren't worse than most warlord trait tables out there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I also don't think that GW doesn't care that much about balance. Sure they did a while back but the huge success of them rebalancing AoS suggests that they do care enough to make the switch.
The DW codex just isn't the place to balance 40k. What did you expect. A DW codex with mandatory nerfs for all broken things in 40k ?

 oldzoggy wrote:
This

 Selym wrote:
Zoggy. It has NOTHING to do with power levels. At all.

totally contradicts this

If anyone hoped GW was going to start balancing 40k... Nope.

Balance is has everything to do with power lvs.

My post is not about the DW codex's power level. It is to do with the ability to balance the game and make it playable. DW could be either the most or least powerful codex, but when GW puts out gak like this, it makes having a fair game impossible.

But how's it different from literally every other codex since CSM 6th Ed?

The fact that it isn't is the issue.

I love this table. The idea of the lance strike feels more like a thunderhawk doing a straffing run, or the orbital bombardment nailing the whole battlefield.

*poops spore mines at Deathwatch Captain*

 Selym wrote:
The fact that it isn't is the issue.

What gave you the impression that a 7th edition codex would differ from all the other 7th (and 6th) edition codexes?

I think the way you phrased it was weird op. You made it sound like the DW was the problem and power creep. Not randomness. Next time put the main issue first and let us know its randomness than list the DW as an example and maybe one more.

I honestly thought you were talking about them being OP which they are not by any means. They are actually at a good level in my eyes.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Selym wrote:
The fact that it isn't is the issue.

What gave you the impression that a 7th edition codex would differ from all the other 7th (and 6th) edition codexes?

Nothing particularly. But you would hope that GW, what with the recent turnarounds, would have at least tried.

How could they? They're trapped in the format of the edition, like I've already said, we can't realistically look for substantive change until 8th hits.

 Azreal13 wrote:
How could they? They're trapped in the format of the edition, like I've already said, we can't realistically look for substantive change until 8th hits.

I agree with this - GW wouldn't back down on their current way in terms of the 40K TT game in an attempt to balance the game out. And that's if they even think the game is not balanced.

They clearly like the idea of random chance in the game, so much of it is a lot of chancing throughout, and that's before we touch on their love for tables to roll on for traits, psychic powers, gifts of Chaos etc. I wouldn't be surprised if 8th also has these. Let's just hope the actual things they write down next to those dice rolls makes more sense.

And don't worry Selym, we Blood Ravens have about 3000 drop pods that we can just throw at the enemy instead of waiting for those smoke signals to go off on a cloudy day. Or how about you try our new Terminator suits, fitted with what I like to call flip packs

G.A

 General Annoyance wrote:

And don't worry Selym, we Blood Ravens have about 3000 drop pods that we can just throw at the enemy instead of waiting for those smoke signals to go off on a cloudy day. Or how about you try our new Terminator suits, fitted with what I like to call flip packs

G.A

Bruvah, they are a hit!

 Selym wrote:
Bruvah, they are a hit!

Boreale would be so proud of us

 General Annoyance wrote:

 Selym wrote:
Bruvah, they are a hit!

Boreale would be so proud of us

Someone needs to model him with the Heavy Thunder Hammer from DW.

 Selym wrote:

Someone needs to model him with the Heavy Thunder Hammer from DW.

Consider it done... by me in the near future



Those Metal Bawkses won't know what hit 'em

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier and fluffier to resolve an orbital strike as a Barrage Blast of some sort?

No idea why they didn't just copypaste the Orbital Bombardment rules from the Chapter Master profile as a one-shot S10 AP2 Ordnance Barrage Large Blast.

Why is the Watch Captain's strike only limited to 12"? "Yes, call down an orbital strike here!" "++But sir, that's just a charge distance away from you! Won't you be caught in the blast?++" "NONSENSE! FIRE THE CANNONS!"

"Danger close" fire mission. There are protocols for it in current military doctrines.

Not really surprised. Chaos Daemons got these in their Warlord traits too. That Warp Tether is just comically insane compared to everything else on the Tzeentch Warlord table.

And don't even get me started on Psychic Powers.

Even under Rountree, GW might consider this edition to be a wash. Which also means that 8th is a completely blind crapshoot.

 chromedog wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier and fluffier to resolve an orbital strike as a Barrage Blast of some sort?

No idea why they didn't just copypaste the Orbital Bombardment rules from the Chapter Master profile as a one-shot S10 AP2 Ordnance Barrage Large Blast.

Why is the Watch Captain's strike only limited to 12"? "Yes, call down an orbital strike here!" "++But sir, that's just a charge distance away from you! Won't you be caught in the blast?++" "NONSENSE! FIRE THE CANNONS!"

"Danger close" fire mission. There are protocols for it in current military doctrines.

Bout our ordinance is a lot more accurate than that used in the 40K universe.

"Oh hey, Bobicus the Librarian, glad to see you on the battlefield today. How's about making us all strong with your space magic?"

"I can't do that."

"Why not? You did it less than 24 hours ago and it was awesome."

"Today I only know how to make you invisible. But if the battle continues tomorrow I might be able to make you all strong and tough. Maybe not. We'll see."

And Lance batteries aren't 100 km snipers. They are 40,000 km WMD's.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:

"Today I only know how to make you invisible. But if the battle continues tomorrow I might be able to make you all strong and tough. Maybe not. We'll see."

This stupidity is exactly why my DW Librarian is a Blood Raven. The fluff is that he mysteriously loots stuff, but is unhelpful af with his space magic.

Wtf is wrong with GW?

 Selym wrote:
And Lance batteries aren't 100 km snipers. They are 40,000 km WMD's.

At 100km ranges for snipers, I think the curve of the planet would make it so you're normally shooting through the planet and the enemy gets hit by a shot that comes out from the ground, even if you are using a laser weapon.

Side note, laser weapons would be good for snipers IRL if we can get a man-portable one to be lethal, due to the total lack of recoil due to lasers having no mass due to being made of light.