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.

I'm not sure it's quite as strong as the 7th ed Eldar Codex. Close though. Probably more akin to the necron codex. Pretty OP, and a sign of things to come.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
This reminds me very much of Skaab Ruinator from MTG's Innistrad block. It was widely considered to be the game-defining card and shot up to 20-30 bucks before it was even released.

Two weeks after the release, it dropped down to 3 bucks because everyone realized that despite it's horrific stats, it's requirement of 3 corpses in the graveyard to summon was pretty easy to counter, even in a deck dedicated to dumping corpses into the graveyard (and innistrad was all about the graveyard). Ironically, Geist of Saint Traft, a card no one even cared about, became the meta-defining card, even long after the block rotated out.

I don't get it. How does this remind you of that? You are describing something that is overrated. What is going on in this codex is the index was overpowered and everyone knew it and proved it with huge win rates - then everything in the codex got buffed. It's nothing like you are recalling. It's more like this. Geist of Saint Traft is the best card in the block...and then they bring it back in the next block and it's better in every way while it's counters get worse. I often refer to magic when talking about 40k balance. 40k conscripts are kind of like getting 3 1/1 white creatures for 1 mana and they even have an ability (if more than 2 conscripts are slain - return any additional conscripts slain to play immediately). How good do you think that would be in competitive magic?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Darsath wrote:
I'm not sure it's quite as strong as the 7th ed Eldar Codex. Close though. Probably more akin to the necron codex. Pretty OP, and a sign of things to come.

In comparison to what has already been released. It is very much more powerful than 7th eldar was...unless you can't recall...eldar did not win tournaments. That was strictly a daemon/spacewolf/and gladius thing.

 Xenomancers wrote:
eldar did not win tournaments.

A 3 second google search shows this to be patently false.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
eldar did not win tournaments.

A 3 second google search shows this to be patently false.

PFFF - a 3 second google search will easily confirm my statement. Not that an eldar army never won a major event but it was usually daemons/gladius/space wolves.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
eldar did not win tournaments.

A 3 second google search shows this to be patently false.

PFFF - a 3 second google search will easily confirm my statement. Not that an eldar army never won a major event but it was usually daemons/gladius/space wolves.

That's weird, because you said

 Xenomancers wrote:
eldar did not win tournaments.

But in fact, they did win tournaments. Quite a few in fact. Going off the stats on Blood of Kittens, they won in similar amount to those other armies you listed, if not more.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
eldar did not win tournaments.

A 3 second google search shows this to be patently false.

It's Xenomancer, what did you expect?

I honestly share the sentiment that the IG codex is closer to the Necron one; it's gonna be one that's hard to shift and essentially "daring" the opponent to come to them.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
eldar did not win tournaments.

A 3 second google search shows this to be patently false.

PFFF - a 3 second google search will easily confirm my statement. Not that an eldar army never won a major event but it was usually daemons/gladius/space wolves.

That's weird, because you said

 Xenomancers wrote:
eldar did not win tournaments.

But in fact, they did win tournaments. Quite a few in fact. Going off the stats on Blood of Kittens, they won in similar amount to those other armies you listed, if not more.

Regardless of how many tournaments they won - which isn't many. 3 majors from what I can gather. AM/imperial soup which is (essentially AM) is winning them all - and any reasonable person sees that it wont stop. Making some silly comparison to 7th Ed eldar is laughable - 7th Ed eldar could lose and had actual weaknesses. AM has 0 weakness. They might release more powerful armies but if you go by what has been released already. It's safe to say AM is an outlier.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
eldar did not win tournaments.

A 3 second google search shows this to be patently false.

It's Xenomancer, what did you expect?

I honestly share the sentiment that the IG codex is closer to the Necron one; it's gonna be one that's hard to shift and essentially "daring" the opponent to come to them.

Why don't you respond to my reply to your magic analogy? Instead of trying to gang up on me in some fruitless argument in which I am 100% right and resort to personal attacks. 7th Eldar were very much beatable and were more or less a balanced competition army.

@ Xenomancer: I could, but then you'd just move the goalposts like you did with Blacksails. I could point out how the Skaab Ruinator thing is only different because of hindsight, or how when people were arguing why Skaab Ruinator was awesome were using the exact same arguments as the people arguing IG is OP (Low cost and high power), or I can deconstruct how comparing conscripts to a hyperbolic set of stats just makes your argument less likely to be taken seriously (if conscripts are 3 1/1 for 1 mana with a positive ability, then grots would be 3 1/1s for 1 mana with a negative ability. In MTG, the Grots would still be insanely broken due to Red's various "sacrifice creature" abilities, like goblin grenade, which is not how they are in 40k).

But Blacksail kinda proved the overreaction in your argument with far less words than I could.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Regardless of how many tournaments they won - which isn't many. 3 majors from what I can gather.

More than that. Closer to 4 times that.

Its not helping your case if you're making claims that aren't true. How are we to trust in your analysis that Eldar had weaknesses but IG has none if you can't even figure out how many tournament Eldar won?

Excellent internal balance with broken Conscripts and OP Scions.

It's actually kinda funny because IG conscript blobs (the only real thing people fears) does have a weakness, just not one easily counterable by some armies (sniper the Commissar), whereas 7th ed Scatbikes and Wraithknights were hated specifically because they had no counters (anything that could kill scatbikes did so at a far higher cost, while nothing short of spamming D-Weapons of your own could bring down a Wraithknight, and the only way to spam D-weapons efficiently was.....also eldar).

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
But Blacksail kinda proved the overreaction in your argument with far less words than I could.

He might be wrong about eldar, but you are wrong about the MTG thing. Because, again, we've been playing with conscripts and guard for 3 months now. We aren't prejudging, we know how and why the unit is good, and how/why the unit will remain good, and how/why buffing the army as a whole will play into that.

the_scotsman wrote:
No, Silveralien seems to be evolving into Dakka's version of Alex Jones.

Step 1: Claim everything is OP broken and going to ruin the game.

Step 2: wait for something to win tournaments

Step 3: Is it one of the things you said was OP broken and going to ruin the game? Therefore you were right, you predicted it, and now you are the authority on everything going forward.

Things I claimed were OP: conscripts, followed by normal guardsmen also being way to good for cost relative to them. Followed by scions and heavy weapon teams also being really cost effective. Also manticores and a lot of FW artillery being really good for cost

Frankly I was right about at least 3/5 of those, and even normal guardsmen are still directly superior to most existing 4ppm infantry. The artillery is still good, but apparently the amount of LoS block terrain I see is a bit abnormal. Plus I think I was comparing it to a lot of guards other options and seeing what a huge gap there was, without realizing just how awful russes were. I should've done more comparisons outside the army for sure.

I didn't jump the gun on bezerkers, genestealers, or orks (because glass cannon melee didn't look like a winning combination to me and I was right). Didn't get upset about necrons because wiping a unit seemed really easy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
It's actually kinda funny because IG conscript blobs (the only real thing people fears) does have a weakness, just not one easily counterable by some armies (sniper the Commissar), whereas 7th ed Scatbikes and Wraithknights were hated specifically because they had no counters (anything that could kill scatbikes did so at a far higher cost, while nothing short of spamming D-Weapons of your own could bring down a Wraithknight, and the only way to spam D-weapons efficiently was.....also eldar).

Except... the only thing which counters them, snipers, do so at much higher cost except in the singular case of... guard. Yes guard is the only army that can really spam cheap sniper weapons.

Guard counters guard better than almost anything else, to a hilarious degree.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
It's actually kinda funny because IG conscript blobs (the only real thing people fears) does have a weakness, just not one easily counterable by some armies (sniper the Commissar), whereas 7th ed Scatbikes and Wraithknights were hated specifically because they had no counters (anything that could kill scatbikes did so at a far higher cost, while nothing short of spamming D-Weapons of your own could bring down a Wraithknight, and the only way to spam D-weapons efficiently was.....also eldar).

Killing Scatpacks wasn't the problem: Push comes to shove, its 3 Marine wounds. With Leadership 8, they also were Psychic Shriek fodder (and contrary to popular perception, Eldar armies did not go Psyker-Heavy. Alex Harrison took one mandatory Farseer for Nick Nanivati's Nova list didn't take any). The real issues came from how they were a cheap glass cannon, could jump-shoot-jump, but most importantly that they were a dirt-cheap Obsec Jetbike that could hide in Reserves, pop up, and grab an Objective, without any interrupts if your opponent didn't run Intercept weapons. Depending on tournament scoring format, you could avoid fighting your opponent and just play a glorified game of Rocket Tag. You could lock down cover and force them into the open, counter with DS shooting, or even attempt to bruteforce your way past if you had a tough enough unit to cast Invisibility on. There "were" options, however unpleasant they might be.

With Conscripts, your options are: Get in melee with a killy unit that probably costs more than it, and hope your opponent rolls "average" for Overwatch (since higher base amounts of dice=more chance to roll hot), play an army that has access to snipers and hope you're playing on planet Bowling Ball so you can actually snipe the commissar, or...that's it really. Want to move them off an objective? You pretty much have to kill the entire unit, since they allocate casualties at will, and you can't "force-kite" them with Pile-In rules like you could in previous editions.

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
It's actually kinda funny because IG conscript blobs (the only real thing people fears) does have a weakness, just not one easily counterable by some armies (sniper the Commissar), whereas 7th ed Scatbikes and Wraithknights were hated specifically because they had no counters (anything that could kill scatbikes did so at a far higher cost, while nothing short of spamming D-Weapons of your own could bring down a Wraithknight, and the only way to spam D-weapons efficiently was.....also eldar).

Killing Scatpacks wasn't the problem: Push comes to shove, its 3 Marine wounds. With Leadership 8, they also were Psychic Shriek fodder (and contrary to popular perception, Eldar armies did not go Psyker-Heavy. Alex Harrison took one mandatory Farseer for Nick Nanivati's Nova list didn't take any). The real issues came from how they were a cheap glass cannon, could jump-shoot-jump, but most importantly that they were a dirt-cheap Obsec Jetbike that could hide in Reserves, pop up, and grab an Objective, without any interrupts if your opponent didn't run Intercept weapons. Depending on tournament scoring format, you could avoid fighting your opponent and just play a glorified game of Rocket Tag. You could lock down cover and force them into the open, counter with DS shooting, or even attempt to bruteforce your way past if you had a tough enough unit to cast Invisibility on. There "were" options, however unpleasant they might be.

With Conscripts, your options are: Get in melee with a killy unit that probably costs more than it, and hope your opponent rolls "average" for Overwatch (since higher base amounts of dice=more chance to roll hot), play an army that has access to snipers and hope you're playing on planet Bowling Ball so you can actually snipe the commissar, or...that's it really.

Exactly on the Scatbikes. Individually they were easily killed, but the problem was that they were cheap for what they brought. It was easy to kill a single one, but what could kill them without being shot to pieces often cost more than they do, meaning, at best, you were taking a deficit to your army just to stop his basic troops. For Conscripts, get rid of the commissar will render them a non-issue. But again, not all armies can do it easily. But it is a counter and a weakness that can be exploited. For Scatbikes, there is no difference in removing them and removing, say, Terminators (high volume of fire is all you really got), just that one has far higher mobility and firepower and the other was overcosted at the time.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
(since higher base amounts of dice=more chance to roll hot)

That's not how dice work.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Regardless of how many tournaments they won - which isn't many. 3 majors from what I can gather.

More than that. Closer to 4 times that.

Its not helping your case if you're making claims that aren't true. How are we to trust in your analysis that Eldar had weaknesses but IG has none if you can't even figure out how many tournament Eldar won?

I was wrong about the amount of wins. They still wernt winning everything like AM is and will continue to. Which is my point. 7th edition eldar were strong - no one would argue that. This AM stuff is unbeatable.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Exactly on the Scatbikes. Individually they were easily killed, but the problem was that they were cheap for what they brought. It was easy to kill a single one, but what could kill them without being shot to pieces often cost more than they do, meaning, at best, you were taking a deficit to your army just to stop his basic troops. For Conscripts, get rid of the commissar will render them a non-issue. But again, not all armies can do it easily. But it is a counter and a weakness that can be exploited. For Scatbikes, there is no difference in removing them and removing, say, Terminators (high volume of fire is all you really got), just that one has far higher mobility and firepower and the other was overcosted at the time.

Right, just play guard so you have access to the only cost effective sniper unit in the game. Or play guard so you have access to the best high volume low str shooting in the game. So many ways to counter guard when you play guard!

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

More than that. Closer to 4 times that.

Its not helping your case if you're making claims that aren't true. How are we to trust in your analysis that Eldar had weaknesses but IG has none if you can't even figure out how many tournament Eldar won?

I was wrong about the amount of wins. They still wernt winning everything like AM is and will continue to. Which is my point. 7th edition eldar were strong - no one would argue that. This AM stuff is unbeatable.

It's quotes like this that make it so hard to discuss the actual "power level" of an army. Hyperbole has it's place but it's not here.

IG is absolutely NOT unbeatable. I beat IG with my CSMs two nights ago playing against a downright bastard with a tough list. Just kept my Kharybdis Assault Claw eating vehicles and he ran out of big guns by the fourth turn. His infantry was a joke and my CSMs enjoyed killing them.

Their Codex is OP but all that really means is they will win more games on average than other armies because of their ruleset. They can still be beaten, even at tournaments.

I think the reason why very few people actually take it seriously is because one or two very vocal people are shouting end of the world so much that it's making sentinels sound like an unassailable bastion of hate and pain. The fact that lots of this is backed up by misconstrued facts (or outright false facts) doesn't help the matter.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Regardless of how many tournaments they won - which isn't many. 3 majors from what I can gather.

More than that. Closer to 4 times that.

Its not helping your case if you're making claims that aren't true. How are we to trust in your analysis that Eldar had weaknesses but IG has none if you can't even figure out how many tournament Eldar won?

I was wrong about the amount of wins. They still wernt winning everything like AM is and will continue to. Which is my point. 7th edition eldar were strong - no one would argue that. This AM stuff is unbeatable.

Thank you for admitting that.

And yes, IG is strong, but time will tell if they're supposedly 'unbeatable'.

 techsoldaten wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

More than that. Closer to 4 times that.

Its not helping your case if you're making claims that aren't true. How are we to trust in your analysis that Eldar had weaknesses but IG has none if you can't even figure out how many tournament Eldar won?

I was wrong about the amount of wins. They still wernt winning everything like AM is and will continue to. Which is my point. 7th edition eldar were strong - no one would argue that. This AM stuff is unbeatable.

It's quotes like this that make it so hard to discuss the actual "power level" of an army. Hyperbole has it's place but it's not here.

IG is absolutely NOT unbeatable. I beat IG with my CSMs two nights ago playing against a downright bastard with a tough list. Just kept my Kharybdis Assault Claw eating vehicles and he ran out of big guns by the fourth turn. His infantry was a joke and my CSMs enjoyed killing them.

Their Codex is OP but all that really means is they will win more games on average than other armies because of their ruleset. They can still be beaten, even at tournaments.

Okay so...conscripts are a joke now. My mind is literally blown here. I didn't know that conscripts sucked this whole time. I needed your unbelievable anecdote about beating IG with an assault drop pod from forge world and his infantry being easy to remove to the point it was enjoyable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I think the reason why very few people actually take it seriously is because one or two very vocal people are shouting end of the world so much that it's making sentinels sound like an unassailable bastion of hate and pain. The fact that lots of this is backed up by misconstrued facts (or outright false facts) doesn't help the matter.

The whole community that doesn't have a guard army is vocal about this. Maybe half of AM players are scratching their heads wondering if they will ever be able to play the army again without being labeled a mega power gamer and the other half is salivating from the mouth. There are no falsities being argued - it's only in your mind. When you take the best performing army (by a mile) and then you make that army stronger by making things cheaper and giving away free rules for stuff thats already too good. It becomes even better. The unassailable bastion of hate is real though - I think most players want a balanced game. This AM codex is maybe the worst possible news for anyone that was hoping GW could produce a balanced game.

The codex is allowing them to be Rock, Paper or Scissors - and possibly even two or all three at once. The main issue with that is that I do not see any of the other armies - short of perhaps SM - being able to do this, and SM's "weakness" is its spread thinly over all three.

 Peregrine wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
(since higher base amounts of dice=more chance to roll hot)

That's not how dice work.

I get "more dice" generally means less swinginess (and less chance for "Rubber Lance Syndrome" to use an old WHFB term), but it means you have a higher damage ceiling. And because I'm a statistics nerd...

We know that 3 dice hitting on a 3+, and 6 dice hitting on a 5+ will both produce an average of "2" hits. The question being, how are those averages distributed.

For this formula, let us define variables:
N=Number of dice rolled.
T=a success threshold. So hitting on 5+ is T=5.
r=The number of die rolls that make said threshold.

We know that 3 dice have 216 combinations. 6 have 46656. Hitting on 3+, there are 8 (2 to the power of 3) out of 216 possible rolls where all 3 shots miss (111, 112, 121, 211, 122, 212, 221, 222). By contrast, there are 4096 (4 to the power of 6) scenarios out of 46656 where nothing happens. A 3.7% chance of a fluke versus an 8.7% chance, as the changing threshold offsets the extra dice gained at this low a number.

However, go up the combinatoric chain and things get better. The odds of getting are hits of threshold T with N dice rolled can be roughly calculated as:

( (N! / ((N-r)!r!) * Pow(T-1, N-r) * Pow(6 - T, r)) ) / Pow(6, N).

As an example, the odds of 3 dice on 3+ failing to hit even once are:

(6! / ((6-0)!0!) * Pow(2, 3) * Pow(2, 0)) / 216

Or (1 * 8 * 1)/216=8 in 216, or about 3.7%

If you sum up all of the results from r=0...N, you will get an end result of 1. Multiply each percentage by are again, and the sum ends up equalling 2 again. You will notice that although 6 dice on 5+ is more likely to miss with all 6 shots compared to 3 dice hitting on 3+, it also has a higher chance of making 3 hits, and the damage potential just climbs from there.

I have stopped playing tournaments until AM get adjusted. Because every list is at least 50% AM. Seriously.

You'll see maybe a "pure" list here and there on the Imperium side, but that will be early, before they get swiss paired into the gakker.

You might see a Xeno or two, but that's unlikely because they can't hold a candle to AM in its current state. If you do, it'll be Tau commander spam, or maybe Ynnari.

You could see Daemons, or CSM, as well, but Brimstones and Malefic psychic BS are also pretty lame to play against, but at least it's not another game against AM.

Anyway, I'm going to focus on narrative campaigns until Guard get fixed. This game is stupidly imbalanced at the competitive level and is rapidly becoming less fun than 7th in that regard. Set your models up. Go second? AM devastates 80% of your list turn 1. GG.

Well it's not as good as chaos marines and doesn't do great vs all the -1 to shoot stuff.