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.

 perilsensitive wrote:
Why is this so awful but Chaos Cultists + Iron Warriors character (auto-pass morale) not? Is it just the cost (Cultists are 5 ppm?)

Chaos can also use Mutant Rabble + Enforcer from the R&H list to do approximately the same thing (4ppm for Rabble, Enforcer does d3 instead of 1).

All that said, I would have no problems with limiting Conscripts to 1 unit per troop choice, and no Obj. Sec.

The former is a 4ppm unit with a 6+ save and a requires a warlord trait, so one bubble per army. Cultists went down to 4 ppm in the codex just fyi.

The latter is a 4ppm with a 6+ save and slightly inferior commissar that deals d3 morale losses. It can get toughness 4 1/3rd of the time, or lose models during deployment.

Conscripts are a 3ppm squad with a 5+. Even if they got bumped up to 4ppm, they'd still have the superior save, making them slightly better. That's a big gulf between units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Did you read the thread where this was debunked?

Nothing was ever debunked, you keep claiming this happened with no evidence or even just repeating the argument.

And here I am still just giggling because I'd never have imagined, through my many years of playing this game, that Imperial Guard conscripts would be such a big meta issue and power unit

Admittedly I think the big issue is super pals lists where you can slap just anything from anywhere together, and slap something like Guilleman in there behind a giant screen of weenie dudes in literally every game as long as you have the points.

Dont really have anything against the changed themselves though aside from the fact that limiting conscripts to 30 is an odd move given that theyve been able to be run in that size for many years and multiple editions, but doesnt bother me all that much.

Im just hoping that Russ tanks, Chimeras, and basic Infantry platoon units will be more functional.

 Purifier wrote:
This doesn't really fix them at all, if it's the only change. The reduced unit size is ok, I suppose, but then you just get two units instead and cluster them around the Commissar.

The problem was always the Commissar, so I guess we'll see if he is changed at all. My guess is no.

I agree, the Commissar really is the issue. You could probably even put down 50 if they could not ignore morale for -1 guy. Lets see if they change the commissar or change the points

 Vaktathi wrote:
And here I am still just giggling because I'd never have imagined, through my many years of playing this game, that Imperial Guard conscripts would be such a big meta issue and power unit

Admittedly I think the big issue is super pals lists where you can slap just anything from anywhere together, and slap something like Guilleman in there behind a giant screen of weenie dudes in literally every game as long as you have the points.

People keep saying this, and you know what's funny? Guilliman isn't the thing all those soup lists have in common. They don't all use plasma scions, they don't all use Celestine, or SoB, or SM, or really any single power unit across every list.

The connecting thread is conscripts. Because all those power units have equivalents in other armies, but conscripts are unique.

Because BS4+, a usable Ld score, and the ability to take heavy weapons mean nothing apparently. Cultists are knockoff guardsmen, not conscripts. They just trade -1 armor for a larger squad size and stronger sergeant model. Which is why they share their cost with guardsmen, not conscripts.

As far as trying to balance IG using grots as the yardstick, are grots even worth 3 points in the first place? Why should we base our whole army on a unit everyone considers overcosted anyway, that would just make us overcosted as a faction.

Points sould be doubled for everything in the game. That way you could have 7ppm Conscripts, 5ppm Grots and 8ppm IG infantry.

SilverAlien wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
And here I am still just giggling because I'd never have imagined, through my many years of playing this game, that Imperial Guard conscripts would be such a big meta issue and power unit

Admittedly I think the big issue is super pals lists where you can slap just anything from anywhere together, and slap something like Guilleman in there behind a giant screen of weenie dudes in literally every game as long as you have the points.

People keep saying this, and you know what's funny? Guilliman isn't the thing all those soup lists have in common. They don't all use plasma scions, they don't all use Celestine, or SoB, or SM, or really any single power unit across every list.

The connecting thread is conscripts. Because all those power units have equivalents in other armies, but conscripts are unique.

Within just the IG army itself however, conscripts dont present the same issue. Youre right, they dont all use Guilliman (hence why I said "something like" when referring to him), however theyre generally multifaction armies centered around some sort of supporting unit from another faction, at least, thats been my perception.

The armies and units within them are all still basically designed and balanced as self contained forces, with multifaction synergy possibilities being an afterthought. This issue will plague GW for as long as they continue to design armies in that manner while allowing lists that combine many factions to function as a single army. It was a major problem in 7E, and still appears to be an issue in 8E.

 ross-128 wrote:

How is needing twice as many commissars (assuming you were bringing more than two squads in the first place) who proceed to execute twice as many models "no effect"?

And so what if the Valhallans have a faction specific buff to conscripts? If we nerf them to the point that even Valhallans are reluctant to take them, what do you think that will do to all the other regiments?

What does "balanced" even look like to you?

Twice as many commissars would be a worthwhile tax, if commissars weren't dirt cheap compared to options in any other army.

Twice as many executed models would also be a good change, if the original number wasn't "1".

Commissars and conscripts make for very cheap bubblewrap units that protect all the stuff that you want to keep alive, while also being capable of outputting a surprising amount of damage. This isn't even that bad in itself for Imperial Guard armies, but the issue gets worse because they're available to all Imperium armies. Which means an elite army of grey knight, with expensive powerful models, can spend a pittance in points to screen their elite units with a few conscripts.

Balance, to me, looks like the following:

Imperium player: Hmm, I need some troops units. What do I need them to do? If A, I'll get some A. If B, I'll get some B. All are good choices in different situations, and in fact I could just use C because I like them, they'll still do the job.

What the game looks like right now:

Imperium Player: Hmm, I need some troop units. I'll get a bunch of conscripts. They protect everything and cost nothing. I don't even play imperial guard.



AGAIN this wouldn't be an issue, if the other armies in the game had the same option. But they don't. Eldar are an elite army (so, like space marines and grey knight etc), that would seriously benefit from a cheap bubblewrap unit to protect their units and fill detachment slots for CP. Do they have one? Nope, not even close, their cheapest option is super expensive and actually overpriced.
They *used to* have a good bubblewrap option, but it got nerfed into the group because of imperial crybabies (the irony) and now is expensive and totally unusable on the table.

Much the same story for all the Xenos. And so this is why everyone cries for conscript nerfs. They're all tired of imperium getting all the good toys.


Serious answer as to what I would find balanced, is basically what I said in the jokey example above. Conscripts should be a good, usable option. But it shouldn't be the ONLY option. A space marine player should be able to go "hmm, I could get some scouts, or I could go IG and get some conscripts. Both choices will work, with different pros and cons, so I will pick the one I would prefer to paint and play with".

Is that so unreasonable?

Why are Space Marine players deciding between scouts and conscripts? They perform vastly different roles. It's like comparing a Rhino to a Basilisk and complaining that the Rhino has insufficient firepower.

I personally think the Commissar/Conscript combination is fine, but if a change is absolutely needed, what if it was 1 model shot for every 5 in the unit left?

 Quickjager wrote:
Disappointing, simply disappointing.

I said before in other threads that a roll to see if orders passed would be the worst balance they could do.

Well GW well played, you proved me right. You could have just made it so certain orders don't work so players could actually use strategy as they would know what to expect. You could have nerfed the actually OP part of conscripts, their insane efficent resiliency by reducing their armor save to a 6+. Nope, more random rolls. Hey Daemon players how did you feel about random rolls in 6th and 7th?

Their points cost won't change, Conscripts will still be the backbone of Imperial Soup. Just better now with regiment rules.

...Which they can't get in imperial soup lists. Unless you're not getting the benefit of Conscripts being your army's troop choices.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SilverAlien wrote:

fresus wrote:
They're still as hard to remove as before, but they pose less of a threat.
I think the intention is to let them be cheap effective screening units, which can't do much more.

At 4 ppm model they'd be the second most effective screening unit in the game, and even with these nerfs would have way better offensive potential than the best screening unit (brimstones).

Well, third best. Blue Horrors probably edge them out, the only reason you dont' see them is because Brims are so good and like, if you've got one, you might as well have the other instead...

You've also got poxwalkers plus Typhus, Plaguebearers, Ork Boyz, Renegade Mutant Rabble...it's not that hard to get something about the durability of a conscript (or better) for about the same cost.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Disappointing, simply disappointing.

I said before in other threads that a roll to see if orders passed would be the worst balance they could do.

Well GW well played, you proved me right. You could have just made it so certain orders don't work so players could actually use strategy as they would know what to expect. You could have nerfed the actually OP part of conscripts, their insane efficent resiliency by reducing their armor save to a 6+. Nope, more random rolls. Hey Daemon players how did you feel about random rolls in 6th and 7th?

Their points cost won't change, Conscripts will still be the backbone of Imperial Soup. Just better now with regiment rules.

...Which they can't get in imperial soup lists. Unless you're not getting the benefit of Conscripts being your army's troop choices.

Yes they can? The idea detachments make it difficult to mix and match is silly. Take a battalion of IG and you still have two full detachments to fill out as needed.

I don't think any existing list will struggle with this.

Breng77 wrote:

 Kap'n Krump wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
You end up needing more officers (they ain't free you know), more commissars (also not free) and have to execute twice as many models.
.

Well, lets look up what 'not free' constitutes.

Oh, shucks. 31 points for 6" bubble of immunity to morale. Warbossess are more than double that, at their very, VERY cheapest, and do D3 wounds instead of 1.

And commanders are 30 points for 2 orders.

At the very worst, one could argue they made it so that you have to bring an extra commander to have a similar (granted, only 50/50 odds) effect on 2x conscript squads, so they added 30 points. That's almost the price of one power klaw. Technically, not free, but it's not exactly expensive, either.

The better comparison is the Runt Herd, an elite choice (like the commissar), only helps with Morale on Gretchin (same cost as Conscripts, worse unit), does not buff their LD, and kills D3 models. Costs 5 points less than the commissar.



As for everyone saying "well Brims..." so another unit being too good means no balance for conscripts is ok. Just clarifying that is what you are saying?

No, I'm saying they're in a pretty good spot after the nerf. They're solid, useful screen units that are often taken because the thing that buffs them also buffs the actual problematic units in the army (Magnus and AlphabetSoup) but you don't see them sweeping tournaments.

They have over double the defenses of conscripts for about half the offense (1/3 of a chance of dealing a mortal) - before orders. Conscripts with orders get FOUR times the offense of brims, making them super powerful. Hence the offense nerf.

 perilsensitive wrote:
Why is this so awful but Chaos Cultists + Iron Warriors character (auto-pass morale) not? Is it just the cost (Cultists are 5 ppm?)

Chaos can also use Mutant Rabble + Enforcer from the R&H list to do approximately the same thing (4ppm for Rabble, Enforcer does d3 instead of 1).

All that said, I would have no problems with limiting Conscripts to 1 unit per troop choice, and no Obj. Sec.

As was stated for Cultists, they are worse models (75% as durable, at 25% more cost), They are slightly more potent offensively if you don't include orders, but when you consider points a squad of (at current costs Cultists deal 0.028 more hits per point). Cultists can take some very poor heavy weapons, but almost never do because the options are fairly terrible. Further morale buff characters are less plentiful, cost quite a bit more, and they don't buff the LD of the unit as well.

the_scotsman wrote:
Well, third best. Blue Horrors probably edge them out, the only reason you dont' see them is because Brims are so good and like, if you've got one, you might as well have the other instead...

You've also got poxwalkers plus Typhus, Plaguebearers, Ork Boyz, Renegade Mutant Rabble...it's not that hard to get something about the durability of a conscript (or better) for about the same cost.

Blue horrors are less durable than conscripts, particularly against AP 0, as the point cost increase and lack of morale rules outweighs the better save. Even at 4ppm for conscripts it'd be a tie, conscripts doing worse vs AP and blues doing worse against AP 0.

Lmao, you just said poxwalkers and typhus. Oh yeah, the 170 point model devoted to buffing my cheap chaff. That's sure to be point efficient.

You listed off a bunch of things that don't come close to conscripts in durability currently, and would be inferior to 4ppm conscripts. Units that are being outperformed even when the original unit is given a hypothetical 33% point hike aren't close. Everything you mentioned is garbage compared to current conscripts. Lmfao.

Don't forget unless AM has some wierd new rules a commissar can't join a regiment without losing all the buffs.

Regardless these changes along with buffed combined squad infantry will limit conscript spam considerably. I can't see anyone taking more then 4 squads of conscripts which is just over the size of 2 squads prenerf. Smaller conscript squads does a lot to limit Congo lines and unit buff spreading along with less buff efficiency.

 ross-128 wrote:
Because BS4+, a usable Ld score, and the ability to take heavy weapons mean nothing apparently. Cultists are knockoff guardsmen, not conscripts. They just trade -1 armor for a larger squad size and stronger sergeant model. Which is why they share their cost with guardsmen, not conscripts.

As far as trying to balance IG using grots as the yardstick, are grots even worth 3 points in the first place? Why should we base our whole army on a unit everyone considers overcosted anyway, that would just make us overcosted as a faction.

Except they have (and always have) functioned more like knock of conscripts, no options for special/heavy weapons beyond a heavy stubber or flamer, hardly similar to guardsmen as far as options.

As for grots they might not be worth 3 points, in reality though that is probably right for them and most other things are slightly undercosted. It is a problem when you get down to that level of points. At 2 points Grots feel almost too good, because they would be super cheap for their wounds (30 wounds for 60 points, 86 points with their morale buff character, seems a bit much) That would mean you could fill a brigade of troops for 360 points for 180 wounds worth of models, and then buff them with a couple characters to have 5++/6+++, and D3 morale losses. Now orks have very little worth screening compared to guard, but it would still be a ton of models to chew through.

At low points level every point in one direction is a huge shift, which is why points changes as a fix are hard to do. I'm not sure grots are overcosted, they just are when you compare them to the other 3 point models in the game (Conscripts and Brimstones). It is one of the reason I think fixing conscripts never should have involved a points increase, but instead a change to things like their save.

IMO just make conscripts only available to all guard armies. Conscripts are not an issue imperial soup is. I really wish there was a heavy tax for combining imperium forces. you can always find a broken combo when taking the very best units from multiple books.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Why are Space Marine players deciding between scouts and conscripts? They perform vastly different roles. It's like comparing a Rhino to a Basilisk and complaining that the Rhino has insufficient firepower.

Wow. Talk about cherry picking.

Clearly, obviously, I was just taking a random example. I could have said "Troops Choice A" vs "Troops Choice B" but I decided to say scouts, because space marines have scouts. My post was crystal clear that it was simply a theoretical example, not a direct comparison.

Though you're right about them doing different roles. I guess I should have said Tactical Squads, as they're probably the closest thing space marines have, but then you would say "but tactical squads are expensive garbage". Which would be making my point for me. Space marine players should have the option of NOT picking conscripts, and still be competitive.

OR all the other armies in the game should be given the option of a unit that is similar in price and ability to conscripts. So that balance happens. Chaos already has this to a degree, if they take daemon allies, but noone else does.
Edit: Eldar used to, but GW nerfed the option by -doubling- the points cost of the unit.

Well, I guess we'll see. In my eyes, I hate to see something beaten down to uselessness because people are sick of seeing it(Wraithknights, Riptides) and I hate to see something already problematic not touched or even made stronger when it couldve had a balance pass (Guilliman, Cawl, Kastelans).

Hit them with a nerf, see how tournament results pan out, then adjust points in Chapter Approved if need be. That's the way it should be.

Conscripts will likely still be solid in all-guard lists because there are plenty of gunlines for them to screen for, and the gunline is strong enough to warrant being the core of a list. Other screening units, like Termagants or Brims or what have you, might not be seen as much because they don't play in a static gunline style. If you define "useful chaff unit" as ONLY something that must stand in front of a gunline and ONLY something taken in 20+ man squads and ONLY high model count and not multi-wound, oh and you'll only consider one unit with its common buffs alongside it and you will only compare it with other units in an absolute vacuum...then yep, you're going to be able to move those goalposts to wherever you like and arrive at the conclusion you want.

I think the smart thing to do is realize that if an argument on the internet goes on for more than 1 or 2 replies, the people arguing are probably talking past each other and it's not going to get anything useful done. So, have fun boys.

Niiru, this is in reply to you, but I am not going to quote your post because I actually generally agree with you about Marines not having crappy choices. They do need good choices. Also, this is a general contribution to the thread.


Anyways, I think part of the reason conscripts are so good is the absolutely essential need for screens in this edition. They're not so good offensively (they aren't bad either, but they're no Manticore), and they're rather slow and ungainly. BUT with 1st Turn Charges and crazy pin-point superweapon deepstrikes, screening went from "something gunlines did" to "something EVERYONE has to do."

So armies that traditionally had no screening units (e.g. Marines) could play around them in earlier editions: ensure firepower was concentrated enough to stop enemy armies, be durable enough to endure what few deepstrikers could arrive on a turn (most I've seen I think was 4 drop-pods worth of marines), or simply strike first.

Now, however, deepstrike is 100% accurate, 100% predictable, and 100% of it can happen on the first turn. Also, you no longer have the guarantee of being able to shoot your opponent before they punch your face in. Therefore, the only way to ensure the survival of your important units is to physically interdict enemy deep-strikers or assaulters.

Armies with screening units can do this alright, but armies without them have to look elsewhere.

Throughout the history of Warhammer 40k, the quintessential screening unit was conscripts. Now, in the age of "screening units are an absolute necessity", I am not surprised they're OP compared to units which are not the quintessential screening units.

Just look at the comparison to Grots, I think that's a fair comparison - they're both their army's "signature screening unit". I think the Grots are overpriced, and perhaps should drop to 2.5 per model (25 pts for 10) or even 2.

the_scotsman wrote:
Well, I guess we'll see. In my eyes, I hate to see something beaten down to uselessness because people are sick of seeing it(Wraithknights, Riptides) and I hate to see something already problematic not touched or even made stronger when it couldve had a balance pass (Guilliman, Cawl, Kastelans).

Oh yeah, we know how badly Cawl and kastalens are dominating the tournament scene. Heh.

But really, beaten down to uselessness is not the same as put on literally the same level as almost every compareable unit, in fact remaining slightly superior to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

gungo wrote:
Don't forget unless AM has some wierd new rules a commissar can't join a regiment without losing all the buffs.

Regardless these changes along with buffed combined squad infantry will limit conscript spam considerably. I can't see anyone taking more then 4 squads of conscripts which is just over the size of 2 squads prenerf. Smaller conscript squads does a lot to limit Congo lines and unit buff spreading along with less buff efficiency.

????

It'll probably be worded such that only one <regiment> per detachment to gain the benefits, and everything has to have the astra militarum keyword.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Niiru, this is in reply to you, but I am not going to quote your post because I actually generally agree with you about Marines not having crappy choices. They do need good choices. Also, this is a general contribution to the thread.


Anyways, I think part of the reason conscripts are so good is the absolutely essential need for screens in this edition. They're not so good offensively (they aren't bad either, but they're no Manticore), and they're rather slow and ungainly. BUT with 1st Turn Charges and crazy pin-point superweapon deepstrikes, screening went from "something gunlines did" to "something EVERYONE has to do."

So armies that traditionally had no screening units (e.g. Marines) could play around them in earlier editions: ensure firepower was concentrated enough to stop enemy armies, be durable enough to endure what few deepstrikers could arrive on a turn (most I've seen I think was 4 drop-pods worth of marines), or simply strike first.

Now, however, deepstrike is 100% accurate, 100% predictable, and 100% of it can happen on the first turn. Also, you no longer have the guarantee of being able to shoot your opponent before they punch your face in. Therefore, the only way to ensure the survival of your important units is to physically interdict enemy deep-strikers or assaulters.

Armies with screening units can do this alright, but armies without them have to look elsewhere.

Throughout the history of Warhammer 40k, the quintessential screening unit was conscripts. Now, in the age of "screening units are an absolute necessity", I am not surprised they're OP compared to units which are not the quintessential screening units.

Just look at the comparison to Grots, I think that's a fair comparison - they're both their army's "signature screening unit". I think the Grots are overpriced, and perhaps should drop to 2.5 per model (25 pts for 10) or even 2.

This post deserves permalink.

Also, albeit I like a lot of it, I do wonder if this edition has some very basic design flaw.

the_scotsman wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

SilverAlien wrote:

fresus wrote:
They're still as hard to remove as before, but they pose less of a threat.
I think the intention is to let them be cheap effective screening units, which can't do much more.

At 4 ppm model they'd be the second most effective screening unit in the game, and even with these nerfs would have way better offensive potential than the best screening unit (brimstones).

Well, third best. Blue Horrors probably edge them out, the only reason you dont' see them is because Brims are so good and like, if you've got one, you might as well have the other instead...

You've also got poxwalkers plus Typhus, Plaguebearers, Ork Boyz, Renegade Mutant Rabble...it's not that hard to get something about the durability of a conscript (or better) for about the same cost.

None of these things come close to Conscripts in durability Point for point,

Ork boyz per model are slightly more durable (2.4 bolter hits kills a boy, 2.25 kills a conscript), but taking points into account if you pay 120 point for both squads, it will take 48 hits to kill those 20 boyz, and 67.5 to kill those 30 conscripts (at 4ppm). So conscripts per point at 4 points would be 40% more durable than boyz.

For Blue horrors, they would be slightly better for durability. The 4++ save makes a big difference in durability (it is the major issue with brims)

Pox walkers unless you include typhus (which is a lot of cost) have essentially identical durability to conscripts at twice the cost.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Niiru, this is in reply to you, but I am not going to quote your post because I actually generally agree with you about Marines not having crappy choices. They do need good choices. Also, this is a general contribution to the thread.


Anyways, I think part of the reason conscripts are so good is the absolutely essential need for screens in this edition. They're not so good offensively (they aren't bad either, but they're no Manticore), and they're rather slow and ungainly. BUT with 1st Turn Charges and crazy pin-point superweapon deepstrikes, screening went from "something gunlines did" to "something EVERYONE has to do."

So armies that traditionally had no screening units (e.g. Marines) could play around them in earlier editions: ensure firepower was concentrated enough to stop enemy armies, be durable enough to endure what few deepstrikers could arrive on a turn (most I've seen I think was 4 drop-pods worth of marines), or simply strike first.

Now, however, deepstrike is 100% accurate, 100% predictable, and 100% of it can happen on the first turn. Also, you no longer have the guarantee of being able to shoot your opponent before they punch your face in. Therefore, the only way to ensure the survival of your important units is to physically interdict enemy deep-strikers or assaulters.

Armies with screening units can do this alright, but armies without them have to look elsewhere.

Throughout the history of Warhammer 40k, the quintessential screening unit was conscripts. Now, in the age of "screening units are an absolute necessity", I am not surprised they're OP compared to units which are not the quintessential screening units.

Just look at the comparison to Grots, I think that's a fair comparison - they're both their army's "signature screening unit". I think the Grots are overpriced, and perhaps should drop to 2.5 per model (25 pts for 10) or even 2.

I agree with a lot of this, my only issue is that I feel like to some extent screening units should not last multiple turns against dedicated assault units (the size reduction for conscripts helps here). Especially with the fall back mechanic, needing to charge the same unit multiple times while eating fire in between makes screening a bit too strong for many units. I also think some of it is a soup issue, if marines were using tacticals/scouts as their screens/speed bumps things would be a bit better, as unlike IG they have decent counter charge units.

Breng77 wrote:
I agree with a lot of this, my only issue is that I feel like to some extent screening units should not last multiple turns against dedicated assault units (the size reduction for conscripts helps here). Especially with the fall back mechanic, needing to charge the same unit multiple times while eating fire in between makes screening a bit too strong for many units. I also think some of it is a soup issue, if marines were using tacticals/scouts as their screens/speed bumps things would be a bit better, as unlike IG they have decent counter charge units.

I don't think they will anymore. 30 conscripts (the max unit size) will evaporate much more quickly than 50 (the former max unit size). So you'll no longer have to worry about destroying the screening unit you hit.

Breng77 wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
Because BS4+, a usable Ld score, and the ability to take heavy weapons mean nothing apparently. Cultists are knockoff guardsmen, not conscripts. They just trade -1 armor for a larger squad size and stronger sergeant model. Which is why they share their cost with guardsmen, not conscripts.

As far as trying to balance IG using grots as the yardstick, are grots even worth 3 points in the first place? Why should we base our whole army on a unit everyone considers overcosted anyway, that would just make us overcosted as a faction.

Except they have (and always have) functioned more like knock of conscripts, no options for special/heavy weapons beyond a heavy stubber or flamer, hardly similar to guardsmen as far as options.

As for grots they might not be worth 3 points, in reality though that is probably right for them and most other things are slightly undercosted. It is a problem when you get down to that level of points. At 2 points Grots feel almost too good, because they would be super cheap for their wounds (30 wounds for 60 points, 86 points with their morale buff character, seems a bit much) That would mean you could fill a brigade of troops for 360 points for 180 wounds worth of models, and then buff them with a couple characters to have 5++/6+++, and D3 morale losses. Now orks have very little worth screening compared to guard, but it would still be a ton of models to chew through.

At low points level every point in one direction is a huge shift, which is why points changes as a fix are hard to do. I'm not sure grots are overcosted, they just are when you compare them to the other 3 point models in the game (Conscripts and Brimstones). It is one of the reason I think fixing conscripts never should have involved a points increase, but instead a change to things like their save.

If that's the stance you're taking on grots then you're looking at a much bigger project than nerfing conscripts. You're looking at overhauling the entire cost structure across all of 40k to make room for grots.

Or if you're lazy, only doing it to IG while leaving everyone else undercosted relative to the grotified guardsmen. Also known as "making IG suck".

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
I agree with a lot of this, my only issue is that I feel like to some extent screening units should not last multiple turns against dedicated assault units (the size reduction for conscripts helps here). Especially with the fall back mechanic, needing to charge the same unit multiple times while eating fire in between makes screening a bit too strong for many units. I also think some of it is a soup issue, if marines were using tacticals/scouts as their screens/speed bumps things would be a bit better, as unlike IG they have decent counter charge units.

I don't think they will anymore. 30 conscripts (the max unit size) will evaporate much more quickly than 50 (the former max unit size). So you'll no longer have to worry about destroying the screening unit you hit.

That is likely true, I think the unreliable orders will help some as well given that the fall back and act normally order may or may not happen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ross-128 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
Because BS4+, a usable Ld score, and the ability to take heavy weapons mean nothing apparently. Cultists are knockoff guardsmen, not conscripts. They just trade -1 armor for a larger squad size and stronger sergeant model. Which is why they share their cost with guardsmen, not conscripts.

As far as trying to balance IG using grots as the yardstick, are grots even worth 3 points in the first place? Why should we base our whole army on a unit everyone considers overcosted anyway, that would just make us overcosted as a faction.

Except they have (and always have) functioned more like knock of conscripts, no options for special/heavy weapons beyond a heavy stubber or flamer, hardly similar to guardsmen as far as options.

As for grots they might not be worth 3 points, in reality though that is probably right for them and most other things are slightly undercosted. It is a problem when you get down to that level of points. At 2 points Grots feel almost too good, because they would be super cheap for their wounds (30 wounds for 60 points, 86 points with their morale buff character, seems a bit much) That would mean you could fill a brigade of troops for 360 points for 180 wounds worth of models, and then buff them with a couple characters to have 5++/6+++, and D3 morale losses. Now orks have very little worth screening compared to guard, but it would still be a ton of models to chew through.

At low points level every point in one direction is a huge shift, which is why points changes as a fix are hard to do. I'm not sure grots are overcosted, they just are when you compare them to the other 3 point models in the game (Conscripts and Brimstones). It is one of the reason I think fixing conscripts never should have involved a points increase, but instead a change to things like their save.

If that's the stance you're taking on grots then you're looking at a much bigger project than nerfing conscripts. You're looking at overhauling the entire cost structure across all of 40k to make room for grots.

Or if you're lazy, only doing it to IG while leaving everyone else undercosted relative to the grotified guardsmen. Also known as "making IG suck".

Yes 40k in general would benefit from being repointed at a more granular point system to differentiate between similar units. That said, in this general case I have previously said I think dropping Concscripts to a 6+ save fixes them quite a bit, and making horrors not have a 4++ (5++ for both brims and blues) and making Brims T2. would help them as well.

The problem with reducing conscript durability is you still need them to stick around.

Deepstrikers will still be at full strength on turn 2 or turn 3, so if all they need to do to invalidate your screen is evaporate it turn one, then you essentially might as well have not brought a screen at all. All you did was buy yourself a turn before everything important gets deleted from orbit with no recourse (or tied up in assault and either dead or useless).

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Niiru, this is in reply to you, but I am not going to quote your post because I actually generally agree with you about Marines not having crappy choices. They do need good choices. Also, this is a general contribution to the thread.


Anyways, I think part of the reason conscripts are so good is the absolutely essential need for screens in this edition. They're not so good offensively (they aren't bad either, but they're no Manticore), and they're rather slow and ungainly. BUT with 1st Turn Charges and crazy pin-point superweapon deepstrikes, screening went from "something gunlines did" to "something EVERYONE has to do."

So armies that traditionally had no screening units (e.g. Marines) could play around them in earlier editions: ensure firepower was concentrated enough to stop enemy armies, be durable enough to endure what few deepstrikers could arrive on a turn (most I've seen I think was 4 drop-pods worth of marines), or simply strike first.

Now, however, deepstrike is 100% accurate, 100% predictable, and 100% of it can happen on the first turn. Also, you no longer have the guarantee of being able to shoot your opponent before they punch your face in. Therefore, the only way to ensure the survival of your important units is to physically interdict enemy deep-strikers or assaulters.

Armies with screening units can do this alright, but armies without them have to look elsewhere.

Throughout the history of Warhammer 40k, the quintessential screening unit was conscripts. Now, in the age of "screening units are an absolute necessity", I am not surprised they're OP compared to units which are not the quintessential screening units.

Just look at the comparison to Grots, I think that's a fair comparison - they're both their army's "signature screening unit". I think the Grots are overpriced, and perhaps should drop to 2.5 per model (25 pts for 10) or even 2.

I appreciate the opening, it's nice that some people on here have a good discussion head on their shoulders!

And I agree with what you're saying, I think it's basically the same as what I was trying to say but from the other direction. I have no problem with conscripts staying the way they are now, if all the other armies gained buffs to their potential screening units so that they become equivalent (or at least in the same ballpark).

Grots should be dirt cheap. They're awful. If grots only lost 1 model when fleeing, and could fire twice each turn, then they would be worth their points. Right now they do none of these things, and so should be cheaper than conscripts. They're easily half as good, but for the same points. It's ridiculous. And thats in the Ork army, where most units are at least 50% overpriced anyway.

So yeh, nerf conscripts, or buff grots. But if you buff grots, you'd also need to buff... guardians, I guess. And kabalites. No idea what necrons get, scarabs maybe? Kroot.

From a game design perspective, it is probably easier to nerf one unit (conscripts) and see how the game balances out, than buffing 6 different units in different armies, as all that change could end up having knock-on effects an causing other synergies that leads to overpowered units elsewhere.

And noone wants to see a Xenos army overpowered. Salt as far as the eye can see.

Niiru wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Niiru, this is in reply to you, but I am not going to quote your post because I actually generally agree with you about Marines not having crappy choices. They do need good choices. Also, this is a general contribution to the thread.


Anyways, I think part of the reason conscripts are so good is the absolutely essential need for screens in this edition. They're not so good offensively (they aren't bad either, but they're no Manticore), and they're rather slow and ungainly. BUT with 1st Turn Charges and crazy pin-point superweapon deepstrikes, screening went from "something gunlines did" to "something EVERYONE has to do."

So armies that traditionally had no screening units (e.g. Marines) could play around them in earlier editions: ensure firepower was concentrated enough to stop enemy armies, be durable enough to endure what few deepstrikers could arrive on a turn (most I've seen I think was 4 drop-pods worth of marines), or simply strike first.

Now, however, deepstrike is 100% accurate, 100% predictable, and 100% of it can happen on the first turn. Also, you no longer have the guarantee of being able to shoot your opponent before they punch your face in. Therefore, the only way to ensure the survival of your important units is to physically interdict enemy deep-strikers or assaulters.

Armies with screening units can do this alright, but armies without them have to look elsewhere.

Throughout the history of Warhammer 40k, the quintessential screening unit was conscripts. Now, in the age of "screening units are an absolute necessity", I am not surprised they're OP compared to units which are not the quintessential screening units.

Just look at the comparison to Grots, I think that's a fair comparison - they're both their army's "signature screening unit". I think the Grots are overpriced, and perhaps should drop to 2.5 per model (25 pts for 10) or even 2.

I appreciate the opening, it's nice that some people on here have a good discussion head on their shoulders!

And I agree with what you're saying, I think it's basically the same as what I was trying to say but from the other direction. I have no problem with conscripts staying the way they are now, if all the other armies gained buffs to their potential screening units so that they become equivalent (or at least in the same ballpark).

Grots should be dirt cheap. They're awful. If grots only lost 1 model when fleeing, and could fire twice each turn, then they would be worth their points. Right now they do none of these things, and so should be cheaper than conscripts. They're easily half as good, but for the same points. It's ridiculous. And thats in the Ork army, where most units are at least 50% overpriced anyway.

So yeh, nerf conscripts, or buff grots. But if you buff grots, you'd also need to buff... guardians, I guess. And kabalites. No idea what necrons get, scarabs maybe? Kroot.

From a game design perspective, it is probably easier to nerf one unit (conscripts) and see how the game balances out, than buffing 6 different units in different armies, as all that change could end up having knock-on effects an causing other synergies that leads to overpowered units elsewhere.

And noone wants to see a Xenos army overpowered. Salt as far as the eye can see.

The problem is that those other screening units aren't doing their job though, not that conscripts are. I am of the opinion that a unit performing its "role" is a positive thing, and so the goal would be to make other units perform their role as well.

You would absolutely not have to buff guardians or kabalites; those aren't screening units. They're more similar to IG line infantry. A screening unit is a unit designed to be thrown away to no other purpose. The current screening units are:

Gaunts (though they're flexible and can buy upgrades to become a force in their own right, making them a bit too expensive for the role).
Grots (Arguably overpriced; I think they are).
Conscripts (Actually good at screening)
Kroot (Garbage)

No other armies have screening units that I can think of. This is a designed flaw (deliberate or otherwise) of those armies.

So, now that I've made my own little opinionated definition of a screening unit, I can see the problem. The problem is not that conscripts are over-performing as a screening unit; I think it's that their offensive firepower is out of whack. This tells me that a nerf to orders (not sure the 4+ is enough TBQH, would have been happier if they lost orders entirely) is a good solution.

The other half of the problem is Grots, Gaunts, and Kroot are underperforming in their task as screening units, though this is mitigated somewhat in the case of Grots and Gaunts because screening is less important for their armies. This means that, rather than crippling everyone's ability to screen by nerfing the ones doing their job, one should at least allow the armies who the designers intended to have screens to actually have those screens, which means buffing the relevant units. (Grots and Gaunts need a slight adjustment; Tau Kroot are just awful).