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.

interesting one in case was missed

matched play you have to have a common faction KW across the army!

no more chaos and orks
eldar and tau

etc

 Therion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Therion wrote:


The Wraithknight has 4 attacks. It can fight a monster or a vehicle, yes, but against infantry units, of which you will see plenty of, he won't do anything. Before he would've stomped around, now he has his 4 attacks.

Check again. The wraithknight can take 12 S8 -2 D3 attacks versus infantry.

Yeah my mistake. Yet, it's still nothing when you factor the 502 point price tag. 41 points per attack? Yeah...

The Wraithknight could be overpriced as much as 100 points.

A tac marine with a power fist provides 1 S8 -3 D3 attack for 33 points. With T4 and no invuln.
A terminator gets 2 for 51 points.

Both with -1 to hit.

Think it over some more...

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Therion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Therion wrote:


The Wraithknight has 4 attacks. It can fight a monster or a vehicle, yes, but against infantry units, of which you will see plenty of, he won't do anything. Before he would've stomped around, now he has his 4 attacks.

Check again. The wraithknight can take 12 S8 -2 D3 attacks versus infantry.

Yeah my mistake. Yet, it's still nothing when you factor the 502 point price tag. 41 points per attack? Yeah...

The Wraithknight could be overpriced as much as 100 points.

A tac marine with a power fist provides 1 S8 -3 D3 attack for 33 points. With T4 and no invuln.
A terminator gets 2 for 51 points.

Both with -1 to hit.

Think it over some more...

You find other ineffective fighters to prove the point that yet another isn't? Just tell me if you went through every unit in the game and those two were the best ones you could find, and then we can continue this conversation.

Thanks.

And without the ability to disengage from melee and shoot either

Avadar wrote:
Doesn't the Tau Plasma Rifle costs 11 versus the Space Marine's Plasma Gun's 13? or am I missing something?

2p difference doesn't justify 1 Strength less

BertBert wrote:
Storm of Fire should work with the Mont'Ka Commander ability though, right? It seems like the T'au offensive will be all about that one turn where everything comes together.

Yeah, but the enemy will not wait for me to prepare such magical star conjunction. An entire army cannot be tied to a single (ahem) stratagem!

 Therion wrote:


You find other ineffective fighters to prove the point that yet another isn't? Just tell me if you went through every unit in the game and those two were the best ones you could find, and then we can continue this conversation.

Thanks.

You're dead set on not processing anything outside your viewpoint so there isn't much more I can do.

If you can't see the advantages of a T8 wraithknight that can shoot some tanks, charge some infantry, and then walk over that infantry, shoot another tank and charge something else without penalty...well...just don't take it.

Has anyone the Militarum Tempestus' bits?

Daedalus81 wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:


It literally dumpstered my army.

I now have 3 Terminator Squads, a squad of Obliterators with attendant warp smith, a squad of Raptors with attendant jump lord and 2 havoc squads who now get to awkwardly not fit in the army at all.

Ah well, since there's no real perks to running specific precise armies yet it means I'm just going to say screw it and throw in a few things like Fabulous Bill. We'll just run Chaos and regret the fact that our army was actually rather fluffy and themed well. They could have literally put a page or a table of Legion (and Chapter) traits in the respective books :(

These are temporary get you by rules. They level set everything (as best as they are able, anyway).

I mean my exalted sorcerers look fairly useless right now - they don't even have any weapon options!

More than that, did anyone really expect Death Guard armies to just be "Chaos Space Marines units with new Poxwalkers, Bloat Drones, etc"?

Look at what we got with the Thousand Sons list. Expect that for Death Guard; new units with maybe a few things here and there crossing over.

 Latro_ wrote:
interesting one in case was missed

matched play you have to have a common faction KW across the army!

no more chaos and orks
eldar and tau

etc

Funny. There goes my third-party melee support for Tau... and I even had some fluff prepared! Damn.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Therion wrote:


You find other ineffective fighters to prove the point that yet another isn't? Just tell me if you went through every unit in the game and those two were the best ones you could find, and then we can continue this conversation.

Thanks.

You're dead set on not processing anything outside your viewpoint so there isn't much more I can do.

If you can't see the advantages of a T8 wraithknight that can shoot some tanks, charge some infantry, and then walk over that infantry, shoot another tank and charge something else without penalty...well...just don't take it.

Everything he can do is fine and dandy, it's the points cost I have a problem with. You're refusing to even discuss the points cost, which funnily enough is the balancing factor of every unit in the game. I don't care if Abaddon the Despoiler has 200 attacks at S200 for 200 wounds each, as long as he's priced based on those stats. My argument is that the Wraithknight is overpriced. It neither has the firepower or survivability to justify the price point. I can approach it's points cost from any angle, and it falls short. It neither provides enough wounds, or enough lascannons, or enough close combat attacks, or any combination of the three to get to its price point. Especially in a world where it doesn't fight at full effectiveness when it has the last wound remaining, but degrades immediately starting from turn one. It's also a giant model and a giant target for a plethora of very points efficient ranged weapons in the game that have a very real chance of taking it out in short order in a points efficient fashion.

The fact you don't even entertain the possibility that the price is wrong is pure insanity. You're automatically assuming that the price that the balance team came up with was correct, when the track record from GW shows that sometimes they price units even as much as 40% too high or too low. To me, the only debate is how much it is priced wrong. Is it 100 points too expensive or 50? You're just not the one to debate the subject with.

Cheers.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:


It literally dumpstered my army.

I now have 3 Terminator Squads, a squad of Obliterators with attendant warp smith, a squad of Raptors with attendant jump lord and 2 havoc squads who now get to awkwardly not fit in the army at all.

Ah well, since there's no real perks to running specific precise armies yet it means I'm just going to say screw it and throw in a few things like Fabulous Bill. We'll just run Chaos and regret the fact that our army was actually rather fluffy and themed well. They could have literally put a page or a table of Legion (and Chapter) traits in the respective books :(

These are temporary get you by rules. They level set everything (as best as they are able, anyway).

I mean my exalted sorcerers look fairly useless right now - they don't even have any weapon options!

More than that, did anyone really expect Death Guard armies to just be "Chaos Space Marines units with new Poxwalkers, Bloat Drones, etc"?

Look at what we got with the Thousand Sons list. Expect that for Death Guard; new units with maybe a few things here and there crossing over.

To be fair, the Thousand Sons list acknowledges that new units have been added since the 3.5 Codex.

The Death Guard list looks like a horrible and bizarre copy past job that forgot Chosen, Havocs and Terminators to say the least.

 Vector Strike wrote:

Avadar wrote:
Doesn't the Tau Plasma Rifle costs 11 versus the Space Marine's Plasma Gun's 13? or am I missing something?

2p difference doesn't justify 1 Strength less

Possibly not (have not made any analysis on that); but Raikoh mentioned that the Imperium plasma costs less; which is what I was responding to.

Well crap, the death guard army list has no bikers, raptors, terminators, heldrakes, mauler fiends,havoks, or chosen which I have models for. I guess just make up some random renegade chapter in the meantime?

 Therion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Therion wrote:


You find other ineffective fighters to prove the point that yet another isn't? Just tell me if you went through every unit in the game and those two were the best ones you could find, and then we can continue this conversation.

Thanks.

You're dead set on not processing anything outside your viewpoint so there isn't much more I can do.

If you can't see the advantages of a T8 wraithknight that can shoot some tanks, charge some infantry, and then walk over that infantry, shoot another tank and charge something else without penalty...well...just don't take it.

Everything he can do is fine and dandy, it's the points cost I have a problem with. You're refusing to even discuss the points cost, which funnily enough is the balancing factor of every unit in the game. I don't care if Abaddon the Despoiler has 200 attacks at S200 for 200 wounds each, as long as he's priced based on those stats. My argument is that the Wraithknight is overpriced. It neither has the firepower or survivability to justify the price point. I can approach it's points cost from any angle, and it falls short. It neither provides enough wounds, or enough lascannons, or enough close combat attacks, or any combination of the three to get to its price point. Especially in a world where it doesn't fight at full effectiveness when it has the last wound remaining, but degrades immediately starting from turn one. It's also a giant model and a giant target for a plethora of very points efficient ranged weapons in the game that have a very real chance of taking it out in short order in a points efficient fashion.

The fact you don't even entertain the possibility that the price is wrong is pure insanity. You're automatically assuming that the price that the balance team came up with was correct, when the track record from GW shows that sometimes they price units even as much as 40% too high or too low. To me, the only argument is how much it is priced wrong. Is it 100 points too expensive or 50? You're just not the one to debate the subject with.

Cheers.

Gotta be honest, any whining about Eldar units is going to fall on 99% deaf ears. They've had it so good for so long that every unit in their army could be 100 pts overpointed and most peeps would only think "About damn time".

str00dles1 wrote:

Charax wrote:
This is what I feared when they said the ITC were involved in 8e playtesting.

Wholesale gutting of options (The boxed set Nurgle models don't have ANY options for ANYTHING)

Mark of Chaos does nothing whatsoever (so no more T5 Relentless Havoks, we just get T4 havoks that are identical to every other Chaos Havok)

No Relics

No flavour

Before you make ill-informed conclusions, you should look at what is going on with Age of Sigmar.

They released the books so everyone had points and options, then they released Battletomes AKA codexes with more fluff, and many more ways to customize your army.

This will happen with 8th. First will be Primaris Book then Nurgle, then whatever else they feel like doing. (Id guess Khorne as they love Khorne) Each will add relics, options, special rules, special psychic powers, etc.

Just to be clear:
The initial release of Age of Sigmar books(the "Grand Alliance" books) did not have points or options. It was the web lists, rejigged to feature only models still being sold(anything that was no longer available went from it). It then featured the new stuff as well(Stormcast Eternals, Everchosen, etc) and a small collection of the stuff that was in the campaign books.

I do think that you're spot on as to why they've done it this way though. To ensure everyone can at least have their basic lists even if they can't really do much with them.

 Latro_ wrote:
interesting one in case was missed

matched play you have to have a common faction KW across the army!

no more chaos and orks
eldar and tau

etc

This sucks quite a bit. 7th Edition so strongly encouraged cross faction armies that I saw no problem buying, assembling and painting ~750 points of Skitarii, ~1000 points of Necrons, ~750 points of Harlequins, etc. I bought and painted what looked cool, knowing that I could always field them together.

Now, I can't field them together. In fact, I'm not sure that I'll be able to field any ~2k list with a common faction keyword.

Ork army? You get Orks only.
Tau army? Tau only.
Necrons army? Necrons only.
Imperium army? You get Space Marines, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Grey Knights, Astra Militarum, Adepta Sororitas, Officio Assassinorum, Adeptus Telepathica, Imperial Knights, Adeptus Mechanicus, etc, etc, etc.

That's totally fair and balanced.

I call shenanigans.

Forging the narrative with Taudar is now firmly in the Narrative and Open play box. Not matched play.

And i'm ok with that

 Therion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Therion wrote:


You find other ineffective fighters to prove the point that yet another isn't? Just tell me if you went through every unit in the game and those two were the best ones you could find, and then we can continue this conversation.

Thanks.

You're dead set on not processing anything outside your viewpoint so there isn't much more I can do.

If you can't see the advantages of a T8 wraithknight that can shoot some tanks, charge some infantry, and then walk over that infantry, shoot another tank and charge something else without penalty...well...just don't take it.

Everything he can do is fine and dandy, it's the points cost I have a problem with. You're refusing to even discuss the points cost, which funnily enough is the balancing factor of every unit in the game. I don't care if Abaddon the Despoiler has 200 attacks at S200 for 200 wounds each, as long as he's priced based on those stats. My argument is that the Wraithknight is overpriced. It neither has the firepower or survivability to justify the price point. I can approach it's points cost from any angle, and it falls short. It neither provides enough wounds, or enough lascannons, or enough close combat attacks, or any combination of the three to get to its price point. Especially in a world where it doesn't fight at full effectiveness when it has the last wound remaining, but degrades immediately starting from turn one. It's also a giant model and a giant target for a plethora of very points efficient ranged weapons in the game that have a very real chance of taking it out in short order in a points efficient fashion.

The fact you don't even entertain the possibility that the price is wrong is pure insanity. You're automatically assuming that the price that the balance team came up with was correct, when the track record from GW shows that sometimes they price units even as much as 40% too high or too low. To me, the only debate is how much it is priced wrong. Is it 100 points too expensive or 50? You're just not the one to debate the subject with.

Cheers.

You're going in presuming it's incorrect. Which is silly.

The number of attacks is one thing, the ranged potential is another, the durability is another, the fact you can get out of combat and then shoot or charge is another. Then how all those things synergize together is another thing entirely.

Is it too much? Is it right? Is it too little? I don't know and nor do you.

MaxT wrote:

 Therion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Therion wrote:


You find other ineffective fighters to prove the point that yet another isn't? Just tell me if you went through every unit in the game and those two were the best ones you could find, and then we can continue this conversation.

Thanks.

You're dead set on not processing anything outside your viewpoint so there isn't much more I can do.

If you can't see the advantages of a T8 wraithknight that can shoot some tanks, charge some infantry, and then walk over that infantry, shoot another tank and charge something else without penalty...well...just don't take it.

Everything he can do is fine and dandy, it's the points cost I have a problem with. You're refusing to even discuss the points cost, which funnily enough is the balancing factor of every unit in the game. I don't care if Abaddon the Despoiler has 200 attacks at S200 for 200 wounds each, as long as he's priced based on those stats. My argument is that the Wraithknight is overpriced. It neither has the firepower or survivability to justify the price point. I can approach it's points cost from any angle, and it falls short. It neither provides enough wounds, or enough lascannons, or enough close combat attacks, or any combination of the three to get to its price point. Especially in a world where it doesn't fight at full effectiveness when it has the last wound remaining, but degrades immediately starting from turn one. It's also a giant model and a giant target for a plethora of very points efficient ranged weapons in the game that have a very real chance of taking it out in short order in a points efficient fashion.

The fact you don't even entertain the possibility that the price is wrong is pure insanity. You're automatically assuming that the price that the balance team came up with was correct, when the track record from GW shows that sometimes they price units even as much as 40% too high or too low. To me, the only argument is how much it is priced wrong. Is it 100 points too expensive or 50? You're just not the one to debate the subject with.

Cheers.

Gotta be honest, any whining about Eldar units is going to fall on 99% deaf ears. They've had it so good for so long that every unit in their army could be 100 pts overpointed and most peeps would only think "About damn time".

The funny thing is, I don't own an Eldar army. None of my friends do. I'm not invested in any way in their power level. I'm simply looking at the leaks that we have and at units and their points costs, and trying to figure out a formula in how the points are allocated. It's a pretty simple process that every even remotely competitive 40K gamer has done for every new release. Where's the cheese? What's underpriced? What's overpriced?

To me it seems there's a number of units that are wildly overpriced. Many of them are large models. At this moment nobody seems to care, but eventually they'll do, when the 'OMG LEAKS' wears off and the 'Why does X unit suck so bad' sets in.

 Kanluwen wrote:

str00dles1 wrote:

Charax wrote:
This is what I feared when they said the ITC were involved in 8e playtesting.

Wholesale gutting of options (The boxed set Nurgle models don't have ANY options for ANYTHING)

Mark of Chaos does nothing whatsoever (so no more T5 Relentless Havoks, we just get T4 havoks that are identical to every other Chaos Havok)

No Relics

No flavour

Before you make ill-informed conclusions, you should look at what is going on with Age of Sigmar.

They released the books so everyone had points and options, then they released Battletomes AKA codexes with more fluff, and many more ways to customize your army.

This will happen with 8th. First will be Primaris Book then Nurgle, then whatever else they feel like doing. (Id guess Khorne as they love Khorne) Each will add relics, options, special rules, special psychic powers, etc.

Just to be clear:
The initial release of Age of Sigmar books(the "Grand Alliance" books) did not have points or options. It was the web lists, rejigged to feature only models still being sold(anything that was no longer available went from it). It then featured the new stuff as well(Stormcast Eternals, Everchosen, etc) and a small collection of the stuff that was in the campaign books.

I do think that you're spot on as to why they've done it this way though. To ensure everyone can at least have their basic lists even if they can't really do much with them.

Right. I should have stated when points were released. I consider that the actual start of AoS, as before that it wasn't really a game we played. (Though tried with the various "point" systems.)

After points came out, armies started to get their specific battletomes with extra stuff in it

MaxT wrote:
Forging the narrative with Taudar is now firmly in the Narrative and Open play box. Not matched play.

And i'm ok with that

Bingo. You want a narrative army? Play a narrative game. You want a balanced army? You are constrained by rules via matched play.

GW probably realized they couldn't have both without lots of issues.

I'm pretty disappointed with Nurgle Daemons. Even after reading through most of the other leaks so I could compare survivability and such.
Nurglings seem to be the worst hit, even with how meh they were in the last edition - they seemed to get even worse. They lost 1s and 1T and went up in point cost. I have 21 bases of these suckers and I'm not sure if I'll be able to use them anymore.

Epidimius, I thought would finally figure out a good role, but it seems they forgot about him and made him worthless yet again. To get any bonus you'll have to destroy 3 units first and he doesn't even get the basic bonuses for being a herald.

No cross play between DG and Daemons (or any Chaos and Daemons) has me disapointed as well.


EDIT: ohh, and GUO having the same survivability as a KOS..
ok.

Vorian wrote:

 Therion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Therion wrote:


You find other ineffective fighters to prove the point that yet another isn't? Just tell me if you went through every unit in the game and those two were the best ones you could find, and then we can continue this conversation.

Thanks.

You're dead set on not processing anything outside your viewpoint so there isn't much more I can do.

If you can't see the advantages of a T8 wraithknight that can shoot some tanks, charge some infantry, and then walk over that infantry, shoot another tank and charge something else without penalty...well...just don't take it.

Everything he can do is fine and dandy, it's the points cost I have a problem with. You're refusing to even discuss the points cost, which funnily enough is the balancing factor of every unit in the game. I don't care if Abaddon the Despoiler has 200 attacks at S200 for 200 wounds each, as long as he's priced based on those stats. My argument is that the Wraithknight is overpriced. It neither has the firepower or survivability to justify the price point. I can approach it's points cost from any angle, and it falls short. It neither provides enough wounds, or enough lascannons, or enough close combat attacks, or any combination of the three to get to its price point. Especially in a world where it doesn't fight at full effectiveness when it has the last wound remaining, but degrades immediately starting from turn one. It's also a giant model and a giant target for a plethora of very points efficient ranged weapons in the game that have a very real chance of taking it out in short order in a points efficient fashion.

The fact you don't even entertain the possibility that the price is wrong is pure insanity. You're automatically assuming that the price that the balance team came up with was correct, when the track record from GW shows that sometimes they price units even as much as 40% too high or too low. To me, the only debate is how much it is priced wrong. Is it 100 points too expensive or 50? You're just not the one to debate the subject with.

Cheers.

You're going in presuming it's incorrect. Which is silly.

The number of attacks is one thing, the ranged potential is another, the durability is another, the fact you can get out of combat and then shoot or charge is another. Then how all those things synergize together is another thing entirely.

Is it too much? Is it right? Is it too little? I don't know and nor do you.

It's silly to presume it's incorrect? How's that? If the possible variation of the points cost is from 1 to let's say 1000 points, there's 1000 different answers of which only one can be correct, and I'm being silly when based on my comparisons with other units I'm making the assumption that the exact figure of 502 points might not be the correct one?

You're right that I don't know what the correct number is, but I'm 99,9% certain that it isn't 502.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

MaxT wrote:
Forging the narrative with Taudar is now firmly in the Narrative and Open play box. Not matched play.

And i'm ok with that

Bingo. You want a narrative army? Play a narrative game. You want a balanced army? You are constrained by rules via matched play.

GW probably realized they couldn't have both without lots of issues.

So they restricted Tau and Eldar from hanging out, but Imperium and Chaos keywords are hunky dory? There's nothing about "Imperium" that makes things easy to balance. "Chaos" isn't as bad, but still lumps in more units than the others. Then if you include Forgeworld, oh boy...

They shoehorned narrative play into matched play in order to let all the Imperium guys ally together, but then used that same argument to not let the other Factions do the same. Dumb.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

str00dles1 wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 Latro_ wrote:
interesting one in case was missed

matched play you have to have a common faction KW across the army!

no more chaos and orks
eldar and tau

etc

This sucks quite a bit. 7th Edition so strongly encouraged cross faction armies that I saw no problem buying, assembling and painting ~750 points of Skitarii, ~1000 points of Necrons, ~750 points of Harlequins, etc. I bought and painted what looked cool, knowing that I could always field them together.

Now, I can't field them together. In fact, I'm not sure that I'll be able to field any ~2k list with a common faction keyword.

Ork army? You get Orks only.
Tau army? Tau only.
Necrons army? Necrons only.
Imperium army? You get Space Marines, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Grey Knights, Astra Militarum, Adepta Sororitas, Officio Assassinorum, Adeptus Telepathica, Imperial Knights, Adeptus Mechanicus, etc, etc, etc.

That's totally fair and balanced.

I call shenanigans.

You left out all the stuff chaos gets. But I don't see a problem with this. If you want to buy what you think looks cool, they have a game called Shadow War for that/ Kill team/ Ruins of Herald Kill Team. It was split to stop the broken combos people often did by smashing the best of the best into one army. I much prefer the new way its separated.

Also that's why there is open play and narrative play.

 Swara wrote:
No cross play between DG and Daemons (or any Chaos and Daemons) has me disapointed as well.

What do you mean? You can have an army of both under the Chaos keyword or <God> keyword.

I'm surprised you're not mainly complaining about Nurgle units no longer getting Deep Strike and so they have to waddle across the board.

 Elbows wrote:


The Avatar...at a glance, sucks ass for his power level --- and has two oddly worded special rules which provide the same thing? (he has two things listing a 5+ invuln. save, though one blocks mortal wounds). The Avatar looks like he'll be a chump to massed basic shooting instead of heavy weapons.

Don't forget, they cannot target the Avatar directly unless he is closest, for he is a Character with less than 10 wounds.
Plus those 2 'same rules': 1 is just an invul save, the other is a 5+ ignore mortal wounds (vs which invul saves cannot be taken). So basically it guarantees that the Avatar will always have a 5+ vs any wound.

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Oh great, my AdMech army just got gutted for the most part. Thanks GW.
Rangers and vanguard received a huge nerf with massive leadership reduction and no longer being able to shield them with Dominus or Cawl. Not to mention that AP4 galvanic rifles now only get a whopping -1 AP on 6s to wound, while scout sniper rifles throw out mortal wounds.
Doctrina imperatives are no more, while canticles got reduced in power.
Ruststalkers and infiltrators did get a cost reduction, while having most of their neat special rules removed, which was the very point of taking them.
Servitors did get +1 wound, but got significantly more expencive. Not to mention that heavy arc rifle is now some sick joke of a weapon, wounding most of the vehicles on 5+, while torsion cannon is just a worse version of multimelta. So much for technological superiority I guess.
The only units that received a clear buff are the units that were fine in the first place - techpriest dominus, dunecrawlers and a certain unit of extremely ugly robots.
There is one exeption though. Ironstriders and dragoons are now viable. That was a good change.

I completely disagree, there is a lot of good stuff in there, and the best part is that they're one army now and you can run what you want

skarsol wrote:

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

MaxT wrote:
Forging the narrative with Taudar is now firmly in the Narrative and Open play box. Not matched play.

And i'm ok with that

Bingo. You want a narrative army? Play a narrative game. You want a balanced army? You are constrained by rules via matched play.

GW probably realized they couldn't have both without lots of issues.

So they restricted Tau and Eldar from hanging out, but Imperium and Chaos keywords are hunky dory? There's nothing about "Imperium" that makes things easy to balance. "Chaos" isn't as bad, but still lumps in more units than the others. Then if you include Forgeworld, oh boy...

They shoehorned narrative play into matched play in order to let all the Imperium guys ally together, but then used that same argument to not let the other Factions do the same. Dumb.

Imperial forces consistently work together. Chaos too. Xenos? Not so much. Not enough to justify letting them consistently pair outside of narrative. While the Imperium and Chaos are very consistent in their pairings.

Don't be salty. It wasn't dumb, it was likely meant to curb stupid combos (be it for fluff or balance) in matched play.

skarsol wrote:

 Swara wrote:
No cross play between DG and Daemons (or any Chaos and Daemons) has me disapointed as well.

What do you mean? You can have an army of both under the Chaos keyword or <God> keyword.

I'm surprised you're not mainly complaining about Nurgle units no longer getting Deep Strike and so they have to waddle across the board.

All bonuses (tallyman, spells, auras) are all sub faction specific and not god specific.
It looks like I'll have to forget Tallyman and play a DG and Nurgle Daemons now.
As far as waddling, I'm used to that and played a drone heavy army.
Maybe I'm just not seeing the big picture, but I'll see...