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.

Tank Commanders were already unable to order themselves, so the "nerf" was mostly to clarify that Pask could not order himself (which might have been implied but never clearly stated). So I don't really mind that.

But I also think the nerf to Flyers was actually pretty cool, and I definitely support it. Too bad for the people who run a lot of them, but I agree that fliers as well as superheavies should be limited to a supporting role instead of armies in and of themselves.

The flyer spam solution is inventive indeed! I like it. Also, oh, the drama of ITC where one flyer spam list sets it's couple characters cowardly crawling out of los and desperately tries to MURDER the couple characters from another flyer spam list cowardly crawling out of los. Like half of the lists there are flyer spam.

Titanicus wrote:
I'm definetly very salty about this faq and I probably won't be playing much of 8th because of it.

I run a mobile strike corsairs force, and 75% of my army is fliers, pheonix bomber, pair of nightwing and a vampire. The rest is jetbikes elements with a farseer pretending to be a prince because they took that option from me already. But now I'm on a situation where I lose just a few jetbikes I auto lose the game. It would have been much more just to knock down the op flyers and then say they can't grab objectives auto losing is just awful.

I play what I feel is a very thematic list and not just 5 empty buffed stormravens but now I'm going to be tabled every game turn 1 or turn 2.

Sorry to say I don't think many people are gonna feel sorry for you. No matter how much you think your mostly flier army is thematic, it's really not. The justification in the FAQ is exactly as it should be - fliers cannot hold ground themselves, nor should they be able to do so.

Glad flyers got nerfed in this way. It is clear from the way Chapter Tactics don't interact with tanks or flyers that they are meant more to support boots on the ground and not be your army. Yes, some people's armies will need to change because of this, but you should have seen this coming honestly. From the very beginning GW has said they want more troops on the table and they are doing everything they can to support that notion. Flyers aint no troops.

Kinda sad my Helldrake is in that category though, it should really be a fast attack and not a flyer like my Kharybdis is.

Tempest hammer got nerfed.
Ragnar can take his doggies into transports now and has a point cost for them.
Scion Command Squads can now take medipacks and vox casters in addition to their hothot-lasguns by paying for the pistol as a tax,

And the Custodes still haven't regained their teleportarium priviledges.

Haven't combed through all of the Index specific additions, but the flyer change seems elegant. Stormravens are still overpriced but this really hits the 4+ raven lists that were just silly. The understrength unit one is a great change too.

I don't like the Necron morale change. I am all for morale meaning more and too many armies are largely immune to it (get rid of ATSKNF imo). Plus reanimation protocols are annoying when combined with Ghost Arks and Resurrection Orbs. However it complicates the process of rolling for RP.

Points of Purestrain Stealers changed again. Now they're 15ppm

Great to see GW doing this. Very positive sign.

Yay, no more 10 ppm Purestrain Genestealers, 7 ppm Razorwing flocks, and the Monolith got it's BS3+ back.

Nay, Dire Avengers are still 17 ppm...

sossen wrote:

They count as being deployed on the battlefield when applying the tactical reserves rule.

I think everyone is playing it this way but it doesn't appear to be RAW. People seem to think that the tactical reserves rules only intend to hit deep strikers. But we don't have any reason to think that embarked units are supposed to stop you from being tabled, so why not play that RAW?

It's impossible for you to be "tabled" when all you have are ground transports; the ground transports aren't fliers to begin with, and therefor this ruling doesn't apply to them.

People who are painting up 100 brim stones or conscripts, consider this your warning. You will get nerfed. It's inevitable at this point.

Anyone who thinks conscripts will suddenly become BS/WS6+, 6+ save, T2, S2, Ld2 for 4 points apiece is an idiot.

At most, conscripts need a nerf to their ability to receive orders.

The only real way to nerf conscripts is to remove orders like Melissia said or to limit the amount you can take in an army like they did with command squads. Same goes for brimstones, they could make it so you can't take brimstones at all and only let you have them from blues that die.

I would point out, there's nothing STOPPING you from taking those mass flyer lists, it would be just you intentionally nerfing yourself. I much rather this change vs a hard limit or a massive points increase on all flyers.

That said, I do hope ITC offers list revisions.

The Ynnari change is a big one. Must take one of the characters to be Ynnari. Changes my list I played the last 2 games, but needed to bump to 2000pts anyway, so will probably drop Yriel and add Yvraine.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
I would point out, there's nothing STOPPING you from taking those mass flyer lists, it would be just you intentionally nerfing yourself. I much rather this change vs a hard limit or a massive points increase on all flyers.

That said, I do hope ITC offers list revisions.

What are you talking about?! I hope it doesn't.

 koooaei wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
I would point out, there's nothing STOPPING you from taking those mass flyer lists, it would be just you intentionally nerfing yourself. I much rather this change vs a hard limit or a massive points increase on all flyers.

That said, I do hope ITC offers list revisions.

What are you talking about?! I hope it doesn't.

I certainly hope they don't... People should have a REASON to think about not taking abusive lists when they are pondering what they will bring to large events. Allowing revision just tells people "You keep cheesing out as much and as hard as you can, there will never be any repercussions"

Wow, I didn't think punishing people for playing wrong bad was so important *in a fething tournament*.

People get very grumpy about tournament players actually playing to win. If the game isn't balanced, that's no ones fault but GW, and all anger should be directed at them.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

SilverAlien wrote:

 Niiai wrote:
May I just say I love this from GW. Quick repsonses on rules questions and unbalanced units. This is really really impressive by them.

Sorta? Some of these are more "the game isn't quite working how we thought due, better FAQ to make the rules match our intent better". It's hard to argue razorflocks were a more pressing issue than say conscripts or brimstones were, in the really cheap and hard to kill department, for example.

Or necrons not being able to reanimate from morale losses, creating another set of units more or less discouraged from taking anything more than the smallest unit possible. Someone on the design team really doesn't want people to use large squads, and I can't for the life of me figure out why.

That's because they aren't slain. Isn't difficult to figure out. It makes they don't reanimate.

It really isn't that complicated. In 3rd ed there were ways of cancelling WBB and you had to separate them out. Just knock down the ones that can come back and put aside the ones that aren't. Or have a separate pile.
Large units are still ideal for necrons to make the most out of RP.
I don't know why people think morale hurts large squads more than small squads. If you lost 4 soldiers and you lose another due to morale with a 10 man squad, you have 5 left.
If you lost 4 soldiers and lose another with a 5 man squad, you have 0 left. That's possibly first blood, and your opponent knows they don't have to waste firepower on killing that last guy.

SilverAlien wrote:
People get very grumpy about tournament players actually playing to win. If the game isn't balanced, that's no ones fault but GW, and all anger should be directed at them.

The Casual Gaming Mafia is nothing if not completely serious about how not serious they are about their plastic toys.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

It really isn't that complicated. In 3rd ed there were ways of cancelling WBB and you had to separate them out. Just knock down the ones that can come back and put aside the ones that aren't. Or have a separate pile.
Large units are still ideal for necrons to make the most out of RP.
I don't know why people think morale hurts large squads more than small squads. If you lost 4 soldiers and you lose another due to morale with a 10 man squad, you have 5 left.
If you lost 4 soldiers and lose another with a 5 man squad, you have 0 left. That's possibly first blood, and your opponent knows they don't have to waste firepower on killing that last guy.

You're sort of ignoring the potential massive downside to having a larger unit, which is that you can lose more models total.

A unit of 5 Ratlings is not very vulnerable to morale, despite being Ld 5. I believe that your expected losses to morale actually decrease when the fourth Ratling dies. A unit of 10 Ratlings is ridiculously vulnerable to morale -- kill 5 of them and a bunch more are going to run. Nobody's too worried about first blood because so many armies will pretty much always get it if they go first, whether or not you're taking max or min squads.

That said, yes, people will still take 20-man Warrior blobs. Necrons were rarely taking many morale losses anyway. If your squad takes only a few casualties, they pass on Ld 10. If the squad takes a bunch of casualties, which will typically only happen to 1 squad because your opponent wants to focus them down, you use 2 CP to auto-pass the test and save them. Not much has changed unless you were playing against people who are only killing like 7 Warriors per turn.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
It really isn't that complicated. In 3rd ed there were ways of cancelling WBB and you had to separate them out. Just knock down the ones that can come back and put aside the ones that aren't. Or have a separate pile.
Large units are still ideal for necrons to make the most out of RP.
I don't know why people think morale hurts large squads more than small squads. If you lost 4 soldiers and you lose another due to morale with a 10 man squad, you have 5 left.
If you lost 4 soldiers and lose another with a 5 man squad, you have 0 left. That's possibly first blood, and your opponent knows they don't have to waste firepower on killing that last guy.

For many armies, it's not exactly likely to lose a guy to morale even with 4 losses. Many can get leadership 8, plus rerolls for space marines.

To illustrate where larger units are weaker, consider that taking 7 casualties in a single unit is virtually guaranteed to kill the unit off at least a couple of the unit in question in the morale phase. Taking 5 in one and 2 in the other, or even 4 in one and 3 in another, is unlikely to take any addition casualties from morale.

MSU squads are far less vulnerable to morale. By a large margin.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's because they aren't slain. Isn't difficult to figure out. It makes they don't reanimate.

Well, most of assumed they didn't literally run away being mindless automatons, outside characters who don't face morale issues. Which is dumb.

Thus picture sums up my feelings on GW and how it's handling 8th edition:



That flier Nerf was simply BRILLIANT. Yeah, you run your 6+ flyers while I kill your 10 troops and win. TOP. KEK. This puts more weight on my theory that conscripts will either get squad size reduction (30 models max) or inability to take orders...

 Niiai wrote:
May I just say I love this from GW. Quick repsonses on rules questions and unbalanced units. This is really really impressive by them.

agreed, they're really doing the FAQ thing well


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
Wow, I didn't think punishing people for playing wrong bad was so important *in a fething tournament*.

if GW moves quick to close loop holes that go outside the spirit of the game, and a few WAAC people get caught at it maybe we'll see less people abusing loop holes and a stronger focus on tactics are tournies. thats only a good thing.

SilverAlien wrote:
People get very grumpy about tournament players actually playing to win. If the game isn't balanced, that's no ones fault but GW, and all anger should be directed at them.

Exalted

I can understand an faq/errata being a positive development to some but we haven't even seen the first codex yet. How a brand new edition needing this much faq'ing isn't PR nightmare is beyond me. I'm not sure if it speaks to tolerance or sadism at this point, le sigh

Don't hate the playa, hate the game.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Niiai wrote:
May I just say I love this from GW. Quick repsonses on rules questions and unbalanced units. This is really really impressive by them.

agreed, they're really doing the FAQ thing well


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
Wow, I didn't think punishing people for playing wrong bad was so important *in a fething tournament*.

if GW moves quick to close loop holes that go outside the spirit of the game, and a few WAAC people get caught at it maybe we'll see less people abusing loop holes and a stronger focus on tactics are tournies. thats only a good thing.

The problem is that if they don't do this consistently, they're just making tournaments a gamble. Sure, now mass flyer and Razorwing spam won't work (this is another reason why locked-in tournaments won't use the FAQ -- it makes some lists outright illegal), but Horror spam and Conscript spam still work. You're not beating Horror spam with a regular list either. If you want to win you've got to take one of the cheesy lists and then hope it's not one they screw with before the tournament.

Yes, it's "ugly" that they have to FAQ their game. But I would much rather they own up to it now, instead of waiting 4 years for the new edition or codex for them to make changes. GW being more reactive with their rule-set is a win in my opinion.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
Wow, I didn't think punishing people for playing wrong bad was so important *in a fething tournament*.

if GW moves quick to close loop holes that go outside the spirit of the game, and a few WAAC people get caught at it maybe we'll see less people abusing loop holes and a stronger focus on tactics are tournies. thats only a good thing.

It's an international tournament, there shouldn't be anyone competing who isn't WAAC. It's literally designed as a place for really good WAAC players to put themselves against one another. WAAC isn't an issue when all sides both expect and want their opponents to have such a mindset.

Also, abusing loopholes? Like what? They weren't abusing loopholes they were finding the best rules for units as written.