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.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

str00dles1 wrote:
Doing just a rough guess, it seems for Power Level games its 50/100/150 for up to 1k, 1-2k, 2-3k games.

Made a 985 AdMech list for a 1k game and power lvl wise it came to 49. someone mentioned on average 1 power =20 points.

The average does get thrown out the window by things like 1 Power Inquisitorial Agents who are 8ppm, or Repentia who are 1 power each at 17ppm but DCA are 2 to a power at 17ppm.

Yea I got 109 for my 2K Rubric list, but I didn't max on upgrades.

Power is -supposed- to be the cost of a model plus half their upgrades (avg of no upgrades and full upgrades). But then we have situations like above where it falls apart.

I'm sure that's how it worked for the big armies, but it feels like the smaller armies (Sisters, Inquisition for example) didn't get a proper look to get that set up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 axisofentropy wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Are they blind pack boxes, or is there a hint on what is in each box?

they're blind, because apparently the Japan market loves this.

sprues say copyright 2017 so these are new sculpts

Well to be fair, Gacha is a thing over thing for a reason.

Um... they invalidated Deathwatch Devestators and all-cyclone termies.

The Inquisition and an order militant are getting shafted then.

 NivlacSupreme wrote:
Um... they invalidated Deathwatch Devestators and all-cyclone termies.

The Inquisition and an order militant are getting shafted then.

To be fair Deathwatch is more about Kill Teams than it is about units that make sense.

That said, the Inquisition and it's buddies do feel off compared to where they were. I'm not going to go off on a rant about it regarding Sisters (already did that in General), but it feels like if you work with the big =I=, it's not your time to shine. At least not at launch. We'll see if some erratas shake out of the inevitable negative reactions to the changes.

Speaking of Sisters - YMDC - multiple priests give multiple attacks? or is it non-cumlative?

im having a problem digesting the word any as all inclusive or individual

 RegulusBlack wrote:
Speaking of Sisters - YMDC - multiple priests give multiple attacks? or is it non-cumlative?

im having a problem digesting the word any as all inclusive or individual

'within 6" of any' is non-cumulative.

Dark Imperium unboxing and Rules Review Part 2

Somebody else pissed about the new Eldars?

1. The Serpent is so cheap With 2 Lasercannons it is much cheaper than a Falcon for example and has +1 Wound and its shield How is this balanced? I also did not find something similar strong in other factions...am I missing something?

2. Ynnari broke the game in the 7th edition. And now they are back with unlimited soulburst again (no command point nescessary...).

How is this possible? How did this make it trough playtesting?

Do You know That weapon must be pay ? Not only the model

Falcon price has the Pulse Laser baked into it. Still seems a bit off though.

I don't understand why they nerfed Vaul's Wrath batteries so hard. They're over 3 times as expensive for a unit of 3 vibro cannons, and they're T5 instead of T7 now, with a 4+ save instead of 3+.

I feel like the price must be a mistake.

Hoping for a day 1 errata on the deathwatch. Why are only our storm shields 15 points each you guys specifically made it so none of our characters can get it anyway...... It strikes me as a typo

The more I look at the stuff that we're seeing, the more I feel like GW is going to get absolutely hammered with requests to erratta things once the entire community gets everything in their hands.

That said, I feel like we probably need to step back and try things out before sending rage mail at GW. Things might shake out being more balanced than we thought once we've got them on the table and are playing games. Things on paper don't always play as well as they look. I recall Draigowing and the Death Company Star in 5th and neither of those lived up to their reputation in games. Mostly because having 1/3 of the models of your opponent is never a good plan, even if they have extra wounds or have power weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Leth wrote:
Hoping for a day 1 errata on the deathwatch. Why are only our storm shields 15 points each you guys specifically made it so none of our characters can get it anyway...... It strikes me as a typo

None of the character kits have them, so they took the option away. Not the first time they pulled that gak before.

That said, codexes might fix it in the future.

taetrius67 wrote:
Do You know That weapon must be pay ? Not only the model

I know. It still is much cheaper than a falcon. I also know that the falcon has one "free" weapon in his point costs...but it still does not add up

Melionodr wrote:
Somebody else pissed about the new Eldars?

1. The Serpent is so cheap With 2 Lasercannons it is much cheaper than a Falcon for example and has +1 Wound and its shield How is this balanced? I also did not find something similar strong in other factions...am I missing something?

2. Ynnari broke the game in the 7th edition. And now they are back with unlimited soulburst again (no command point nescessary...).

How is this possible? How did this make it trough playtesting?

Falcon has 3 hard points instead of 2.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melionodr wrote:

taetrius67 wrote:
Do You know That weapon must be pay ? Not only the model

I know. It still is much cheaper than a falcon. I also know that the falcon has one "free" weapon in his point costs...but it still does not add up

Think of it this way - the "real cost" of the Pulse Laser is around 50 points.

A Reaper Launcher can do 1 S8 -2 3D at 48" for 31 points. Pulse Laser can do 2 S8 -3 3D at 48". So it seems roughly in line with expectations.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

That said, I feel like we probably need to step back and try things out before sending rage mail at GW. Things might shake out being more balanced than we thought once we've got them on the table and are playing games.

How could the following work out on the tabletop:

Triple a mediocre unit's price.(Vaul's Wrath Batteries)
-2T
-1 armour save penalty

I simply don't see how such a thing can NOT be a mistake. But despite things like this being obvious mistakes, GW almost NEVER owns up to it being a mistake, and so a unit gets relegated to the annals of history by being typo'd out of existence. This reminds me of the change to orbs of despair from being S10 with one use at 25 points to being S1, one use, Instant death at the same 25 points. GW claimed it wasn't a typo.

3 Vaul's Wrath Batteries with vibro-cannons used to cost 90 points. Now they nerfed them(T7 to T5 with 4+ instead of 3+), and they want to charge 291 points for them.

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

That said, I feel like we probably need to step back and try things out before sending rage mail at GW. Things might shake out being more balanced than we thought once we've got them on the table and are playing games.

How could the following work out on the tabletop:

Triple a mediocre unit's price.(Vaul's Wrath Batteries)
-2T
-1 armour save penalty

I simply don't see how such a thing can NOT be a mistake. But despite things like this being obvious mistakes, GW almost NEVER owns up to it being a mistake, and so a unit gets relegated to the annals of history by being typo'd out of existence. This reminds me of the change to orbs of despair from being S10 with one use at 25 points to being S1, one use, Instant death at the same 25 points. GW claimed it wasn't a typo.

3 Vaul's Wrath Batteries with vibro-cannons used to cost 90 points. Now they nerfed them(T7 to T5 with 4+ instead of 3+), and they want to charge 291 points for them.

Well, what rules can they benefit from? I'm not looking at the Eldar stuff right now, but I'd have to say there is probably more going on than JUST the statline in terms on how things are priced.

everyone in this thread wrote:How is this possible? How did this make it trough playtesting?

Playtesting, y'know, by people, and not, y'know, by someone reading some stats and jumping to a conclusion

 judgedoug wrote:

everyone in this thread wrote:How is this possible? How did this make it trough playtesting?

Playtesting, y'know, by people, and not, y'know, by someone reading some stats and jumping to a conclusion

Agreed. I'm not jumping the gun here, but I have a strong feeling that the stats are only part of the equation. Army rules they can use, weapon types, changes to how weapons work, stat changes, ect, ect, ect. And then a lot of things got a lot of play testing. I'm sure some more niche armies didn't get as much focus (Custodes, SoS, SoB,=I= ect, ect), but the main armies like Eldar and Marines definitely saw a lot of table time. Which means there was something that pushed those points costs up.

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

That said, I feel like we probably need to step back and try things out before sending rage mail at GW. Things might shake out being more balanced than we thought once we've got them on the table and are playing games.

How could the following work out on the tabletop:

Triple a mediocre unit's price.(Vaul's Wrath Batteries)
-2T
-1 armour save penalty

I simply don't see how such a thing can NOT be a mistake. But despite things like this being obvious mistakes, GW almost NEVER owns up to it being a mistake, and so a unit gets relegated to the annals of history by being typo'd out of existence. This reminds me of the change to orbs of despair from being S10 with one use at 25 points to being S1, one use, Instant death at the same 25 points. GW claimed it wasn't a typo.

3 Vaul's Wrath Batteries with vibro-cannons used to cost 90 points. Now they nerfed them(T7 to T5 with 4+ instead of 3+), and they want to charge 291 points for them.

And double the wounds. With no chance of ID.

Vibro cannons used to be 1 damage - at S7 (then 8 and 9 they would rarely ID something useful. Now they are D3.

Instead of upping it's strength it now adds to the wound roll, which is way better than upping S.

If it was +1S up to +3S you could get to S10 and wound T10 on a 4+, right?
Well, now you wound T10 on a 3+.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 judgedoug wrote:

everyone in this thread wrote:How is this possible? How did this make it trough playtesting?

Playtesting, y'know, by people, and not, y'know, by someone reading some stats and jumping to a conclusion

Agreed. I'm not jumping the gun here, but I have a strong feeling that the stats are only part of the equation. Army rules they can use, weapon types, changes to how weapons work, stat changes, ect, ect, ect. And then a lot of things got a lot of play testing. I'm sure some more niche armies didn't get as much focus (Custodes, SoS, SoB,=I= ect, ect), but the main armies like Eldar and Marines definitely saw a lot of table time. Which means there was something that pushed those points costs up.

The typical problems are from the previous edition lens being applied to new rules.

Daedalus81 wrote:
The typical problems are from the previous edition lens being applied to new rules.

Which is why I think we'd all be better off starting off playing a few games at the Patrol scale before we look to jump into larger games.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:
The typical problems are from the previous edition lens being applied to new rules.

Which is why I think we'd all be better off starting off playing a few games at the Patrol scale before we look to jump into larger games.

Almost certainly. It's also almost certainly not going to happen.

 LunarSol wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:
The typical problems are from the previous edition lens being applied to new rules.

Which is why I think we'd all be better off starting off playing a few games at the Patrol scale before we look to jump into larger games.

Almost certainly. It's also almost certainly not going to happen.

Yup! Instead of easing into a new edition I'm awaiting watching everyone jumping into the deep end with weights on their ankles. And then blaming the game for being broken because they didn't play it correctly.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:
The typical problems are from the previous edition lens being applied to new rules.

Which is why I think we'd all be better off starting off playing a few games at the Patrol scale before we look to jump into larger games.

No way! I'm going in full bore!

Oh, also I think vibro last edition required a hit didn't it? This requires the unit to simply have been fired at by a vibro cannon.

Twin Multimelta doesn't have melta rule in Adepta Ministorum ranged weapons??? Typo???

 Twoshoes23 wrote:
Twin Multimelta doesn't have melta rule in Adepta Ministorum ranged weapons??? Typo???

Definitely a typo.

I am working on building a Genestealer Cult list, but I can't find the points for Cult Icon anywhere? Is this a free upgrade like all of the sergeants? Do daemons get free banners or instruments, I hadn't really check them out yet?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:
The typical problems are from the previous edition lens being applied to new rules.

Which is why I think we'd all be better off starting off playing a few games at the Patrol scale before we look to jump into larger games.

That is the plan here. Basically:
Wolf Guard Battle Leader + a Grey Hunter Pack and a Blood Claw Pack vs a Generic Marine Captain and two Tactical Squads.

 Twoshoes23 wrote:
Twin Multimelta doesn't have melta rule in Adepta Ministorum ranged weapons??? Typo???

its listed fine on the Immolator Data sheet.?

 Twoshoes23 wrote:
Twin Multimelta doesn't have melta rule in Adepta Ministorum ranged weapons??? Typo???

It does in the Immolator entry.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:
The typical problems are from the previous edition lens being applied to new rules.

Which is why I think we'd all be better off starting off playing a few games at the Patrol scale before we look to jump into larger games.

That is the plan here. Basically:
Wolf Guard Battle Leader + a Grey Hunter Pack and a Blood Claw Pack vs a Generic Marine Captain and two Tactical Squads.

I was looking at the Get Started boxes and they're basically perfect for a small Patrol game. 1 HQ, 1 Troop, 1 Other.