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.

SilverAlien wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
1) the gap is probably not as wide as you think right now, and most of your data is based on the tournament scene, which we've already established you're judging mostly based on the performance of abnormal Soup lists you won't see in the local scenes you're concerned about.

2) The inequalities are likely to be better fixed by systemic changes through rules shifts like Chapter Approved rather than by individual nerfs to guard units, because I would bet that given the similarities in their mechanics (big hordes backed up by buffer characters with morale-ignoring abilities) factions like Orks and Nids would most likely be in a similar spot to Guard, post-codex, if nothing were done to balance out the system.

I'll say it again, guard was already beating the codex armies and this is an increase to the strength. I don't think you realize how good index guard could be

Also, nids and orks aren't the right sort of hordes for this edition. They go in for dangerous hordes over sturdy hordes, and hordes are doing well based on their toughness not their offensive power. If orks are going to be strong either gretchin are going to go down to 2ppm, or orks go down to 4ppm. Nids are similar, hormaguants need to be cut in half for that to work.

I imagine that unless Tyranids get a complete crap codex (admittedly this is very possible), we may see little Nids get some manner of defensive buffs that could make them nearly as infuriating as today's Conscripts, perhaps a big -1 to hit blanket from Venomthropes, psychic shenanigans, etc. Orks would probably require KFF and Painboy rules to be significantly better than they are now to be as durable (I mean, Every Other Buff Ever only needs 1 model from a unit in range, but the KFF needs every last one of them inside a relatively small bubble)

...Although the easiest way to make Tyranids utterly OP is to give Termagants and/or Hormagants and/or Gargoyles a 5+ save...

My main issue with the AM codex is how it's going to affect casual play; I'm afraid we're going back to what we had in 7th.
In 7th, if a CWE or Tau player made a fluffy army list, with a little bit of everything and models they liked, and played against an Ork or Tyranid player that did the same in terms of army composition, the Ork/Tyrannid didn't stand a chance, because there was a huge power gap between codex. It made playing casual games much harder.

Currently, we don't really have that in 8th ed. Sure, Girlyman + parking lot + conscript screen + celestine is a decent list, and will usually wreck any casual list. But this type of list is clearly the result of min maxing, and as soon as you have just a few units (out of the hundreds GW sells) that are OP, you'll be able to make lists that are miles above casual stuff.
8th ed has clear balance issues at the competitive level, but at the casual level it's much better than in 7th.

The AM codex might be the first one to break the casual balance.

Nids can already compete with Guard just fine. I win and lose against them like most armies. My nids struggle against marines and chaos, not hordes of guardsmen.
People just have not adapted well to the changes of 8th edition. They want to keep just throwing their models forward and expecting to straight out overpower their enemies. There is a little more nuance than that now.
A lot of the playtime I've had in AoS has made me a much better 8th edition 40k player because I'm used to hordes of unbreakable units, minute and very critical choices during melee and playing the scenario rather than trying to table my opponent.
I've won many games with well less then half the models that my opponent has had left. I don't need to kill everything, just neutralize the parts I have to. Nids are great at this. They have mobility, a lot of firepower with a lot of bodies and a whole ton of tricks.
Out of the indexes, I saw Nids as the powerhouse, not Guard. If their codex gives them anything remotely like the others have, the Nids will be wrecking guard face in no time.
I also believe Orks are strong, just in a completely different way. Their infantry is rather pathetic, which is a shame. Their strength is from their big gunz and dakka jets as well as their walkers.
The point I'm making is that you have to adapt how you build your lists and play the game with this edition. That stubborn refusal to do so is why so many people are feeling hopeless against certain armies. There will always be uphill battles: Guard vs marines, nids vs dark eldar, etc. That will never change, but that doesn't mean the battles are unwinnable if you try to fight from a different angle.
Someone said it very well above, the problems are to beat some armies, you have to play your list in a way you didn't want to play them. That's tactics for you. If your not willing to make changes to win, then stop complaining it isn't possible.

Nids should never struggle vs marines. Never in 8th.

I've fielded 12 different lists so far in 8th. Next I'll be told I didn't stick with any of them long enough. But I should still be changing.

Damn Rowboat that always gets me. I can't get rid of him and I can't let him walk through my army either. I'm sure I'll figure it out one day, but every since marines got their codex, that stratagem that lets someone fight after i killed them has been a thorn in my side.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Nids should never struggle vs marines. Never in 8th.

I've fielded 12 different lists so far in 8th. Next I'll be told I didn't stick with any of them long enough. But I should still be changing.

What army are you playing that your struggling so much with Guard?

Ignore him and kill all the stuff he's buffing. WAY easier to deal with than IG. Because every unit you take out in a marine list HURTS, whereas 75% of the models in an IG list are throwaway timewasters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"What army are you playing that your struggling so much with Guard?"

Blood Angels. They're really bad. Really, really bad. Again.

Yeah, Blood Angles really need their codex. The index was a pretty bad entry for them. Too much emphasis on assault and using characters to buff units, but once you buy the buffing characters, there aren't enough units.

The codex won't help at all. Mark my words. Just as the codex didn't REALLY help marines. People just think it did. It's still all about Girlyman.

fresus wrote:
8th ed has clear balance issues at the competitive level, but at the casual level it's much better than in 7th.

The AM codex might be the first one to break the casual balance.

Personally, I am weirded out by the idea that casual and competitve balance should be considered different things. Of course, I'm more bothered about how a majority of "tactics" discussion focuses more on "what units" to take, rather than actual play. If 8th is more "casual-balanced", this is because of the flatlining of unit defense values (ymmv if this is a good thing) as well as making cover mostly irrelevant, as well as removing/replacing a fair few decisions.

Either way, it has already been stated that the changes to AOEs was a buff to conscripts, as well as the durability of characters and impracticality of Snipers as an all-comer choice (that, and not every army gets access to them). However, other changes such as the defender getting to allocate all casualties, or pile-in/consolidate being optional on a model-per-model basis also add up. Even with vehicles being relatively fragile, Tank Shock was also still an option to forcibly push units around (and lest you say "but Scatpacks and Riptides kill Rhinos/Razorbacks and just hang back," those weren't the armies that did horde builds).

What I'm hoping will help is the new scenarios in Chapter Approved where you score objectives at the end of each turn. It will mean that you can tie things up to get those points and those gunlines will have to move.

SilverAlien wrote:

No, I actually don't think vanilla space marines have access to deepstriking plasma in any great amount. You either use drop pods, which are not cost effective, or get the single plasma on a HQ/sarge. It's one of the things that distinguishes CSM and SM right now. Our raptors can run three per squad and our terminators can have combi plasma on every member, neither of which vanilla SM can do. Blood angels can slap jump packs on units which do have access to plasma and space wolf wolf guard can load up on combi plasma, but I'm relatively sure that normal SM don't have similar options.

While I agree that it can be difficult to judge things, we also have a few months of the entire community playtesting and discussing the game as a whole, unlike the playtesters closed environment. As a whole we do have a better understanding of the game right now then playtesters did at launch, just as playtesters and designers are learning from community feedback. It is also easy to see what certain changes accomplish, with our understand or the current game's state. IG was already amongst the strongest single armies, better than some codex armies. A strong durable unit didn't lose its durability, and the firepower of the things it bubble wrapped went up across the board, even some of the better options, at the cost of less effective deepstriking plasma. The end result of that is pretty clear, outside the edge case that weakened deepstriking plasma outweighs every other buff the codex gave.

Eh I don't want to continue to stray off target here... but uhh, there's a good reason you don't see regular Assault squads with their 2 plasmaguns in "competitive" BA lists... they're just not worth it. But again, Plasma-spam Nor StormRaven-spam are the reasons for the perceived "OP-ness" that FLG bestowed on Blood Angels. The OP-ness was based on assault and buff characters, which funny enough are the major weakness of the army at the moment - it had nothing to do with plasma, scions or stormravens.

And especially STormraven-spam only became a problem after the dice started rolling, it was largely unforeseen... which is more to the point of - sometimes you just don't know and you have to give it time so see where things land.

 SideshowLucifer wrote:
What I'm hoping will help is the new scenarios in Chapter Approved where you score objectives at the end of each turn. It will mean that you can tie things up to get those points and those gunlines will have to move.

They're already moving. That proposal will change nothing. The conscripts are engulfing 4/6 objectives with dozens of bodies by turn 2/3. If you kill EVERY SINGLE conscript, there is still 1600 pts of IG on the table. That's the big issue.

Martel732 wrote:
The codex won't help at all. Mark my words. Just as the codex didn't REALLY help marines. People just think it did. It's still all about Girlyman.

I have to disagree, perhaps the unit entries didn't change / improve much but the auxiliary choices make a big difference, especially the stratagems.

Martel732 wrote:
The codex won't help at all. Mark my words. Just as the codex didn't REALLY help marines. People just think it did. It's still all about Girlyman.

Well, Codexes weren't supposed to be better than the index. Marine Codex mostly did what it was supposed to do. Add flavour without breaking the game. Had it added 100 points or so to Guilliman and made the Raven Guard chapter tactics a bit tamer, it would've been near perfect in line with the average of the index.

Of course, after that, the too-good-in-the-index armies such as Guard, pretty much everything Tzeentch, everything with pointy ears. Tau Commanders and a few other bits and pieces really needed different degrees of notable nerfs to be in line with Khorne Daemons, fluffy non-Guard Genestealer Cult, non-Commander-Spam Tau, Blood Angels, Footdar without Ynnari, etc.., etc,

 Gunzhard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The codex won't help at all. Mark my words. Just as the codex didn't REALLY help marines. People just think it did. It's still all about Girlyman.

I have to disagree, perhaps the unit entries didn't change / improve much but the auxiliary choices make a big difference, especially the stratagems.

I don't have much respect for them. It's still very much a mirror match against my BA. I don't fear their stratagems, or their body count. They can't turn off my deep strikes like a horde, they can't take the casualties like a horde, they don't have the shots of a horde. The codex didn't change that much. Strategems are finite and don't alter the fundamental math of the situation. They're still marines and still give up mass points to plasma/melta/grav. Bonus points for me if they are dumb enough to use Primaris.

I'd rather take on any vanilla list than Nids or IG atm.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MagicJuggler wrote:

fresus wrote:
8th ed has clear balance issues at the competitive level, but at the casual level it's much better than in 7th.

The AM codex might be the first one to break the casual balance.

Personally, I am weirded out by the idea that casual and competitve balance should be considered different things. Of course, I'm more bothered about how a majority of "tactics" discussion focuses more on "what units" to take, rather than actual play. If 8th is more "casual-balanced", this is because of the flatlining of unit defense values (ymmv if this is a good thing) as well as making cover mostly irrelevant, as well as removing/replacing a fair few decisions.

Either way, it has already been stated that the changes to AOEs was a buff to conscripts, as well as the durability of characters and impracticality of Snipers as an all-comer choice (that, and not every army gets access to them). However, other changes such as the defender getting to allocate all casualties, or pile-in/consolidate being optional on a model-per-model basis also add up. Even with vehicles being relatively fragile, Tank Shock was also still an option to forcibly push units around (and lest you say "but Scatpacks and Riptides kill Rhinos/Razorbacks and just hang back," those weren't the armies that did horde builds).

Because ~60% of the game is decided in list building. That IS the tactic.

Martel732 wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:

fresus wrote:
8th ed has clear balance issues at the competitive level, but at the casual level it's much better than in 7th.

The AM codex might be the first one to break the casual balance.

Personally, I am weirded out by the idea that casual and competitve balance should be considered different things. Of course, I'm more bothered about how a majority of "tactics" discussion focuses more on "what units" to take, rather than actual play. If 8th is more "casual-balanced", this is because of the flatlining of unit defense values (ymmv if this is a good thing) as well as making cover mostly irrelevant, as well as removing/replacing a fair few decisions.

Either way, it has already been stated that the changes to AOEs was a buff to conscripts, as well as the durability of characters and impracticality of Snipers as an all-comer choice (that, and not every army gets access to them). However, other changes such as the defender getting to allocate all casualties, or pile-in/consolidate being optional on a model-per-model basis also add up. Even with vehicles being relatively fragile, Tank Shock was also still an option to forcibly push units around (and lest you say "but Scatpacks and Riptides kill Rhinos/Razorbacks and just hang back," those weren't the armies that did horde builds).

Because ~60% of the game is decided in list building. That IS the tactic.

Arguably more like 80%, another 10% being what to deploy or reserve, another 10% being mathhammering Stratagem efficiency for die-rolls and movement being "forward onto dem objectives."

Really, you could play fantasy football (I don't mean Blood Bowl) and not lose that much decision-making.

Jancoran has convinced me that it's probably closer to 60%. Which is still HUGE, I might add. That means more than half the time, the game is decided by lists.

Martel732 wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The codex won't help at all. Mark my words. Just as the codex didn't REALLY help marines. People just think it did. It's still all about Girlyman.

I have to disagree, perhaps the unit entries didn't change / improve much but the auxiliary choices make a big difference, especially the stratagems.

I don't have much respect for them. It's still very much a mirror match against my BA. I don't fear their stratagems, or their body count. They can't turn off my deep strikes like a horde, they can't take the casualties like a horde, they don't have the shots of a horde. The codex didn't change that much. Strategems are finite and don't alter the fundamental math of the situation. They're still marines and still give up mass points to plasma/melta/grav. Bonus points for me if they are dumb enough to use Primaris.

I'd rather take on any vanilla list than Nids or IG atm.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MagicJuggler wrote:

fresus wrote:
8th ed has clear balance issues at the competitive level, but at the casual level it's much better than in 7th.

The AM codex might be the first one to break the casual balance.

Personally, I am weirded out by the idea that casual and competitve balance should be considered different things. Of course, I'm more bothered about how a majority of "tactics" discussion focuses more on "what units" to take, rather than actual play. If 8th is more "casual-balanced", this is because of the flatlining of unit defense values (ymmv if this is a good thing) as well as making cover mostly irrelevant, as well as removing/replacing a fair few decisions.

Either way, it has already been stated that the changes to AOEs was a buff to conscripts, as well as the durability of characters and impracticality of Snipers as an all-comer choice (that, and not every army gets access to them). However, other changes such as the defender getting to allocate all casualties, or pile-in/consolidate being optional on a model-per-model basis also add up. Even with vehicles being relatively fragile, Tank Shock was also still an option to forcibly push units around (and lest you say "but Scatpacks and Riptides kill Rhinos/Razorbacks and just hang back," those weren't the armies that did horde builds).

Because ~60% of the game is decided in list building. That IS the tactic.

What do Nids have that is so scary to your BA? Admittedly, I like to take wacky stuff in my Nidzilla list, but I don't see how anything other than maybe Genestealers and the Exocrine (and definitely the Swarmlord, but he's a fluff abomination so I ignore him) are threatening to power armor.

Numbers.

They spam mass mortal wounds. At range. CHEAPLY , I might add. Something that would be completely ineffective against a horde, of course.

And have tons and tons of shots from harpies. And Exocrines are hard to kill for BA. Genestealers are just stormbolter fodder they are irrelevant.

Martel732 wrote:
They spam mass mortal wounds. At range. CHEAPLY , I might add. Something that would be completely ineffective against a horde, of course.

And have tons and tons of shots from harpies. And Exocrines are hard to kill for BA. Genestealers are just stormbolter fodder they are irrelevant.

Yeah, I guess Biovore spam would cause problems. I'm still disappointed that Carnifexes suck. Anyway, sorry for the tangent.

No, it's illustrative of how its hard to prepare for both nids and IG. IG are very tough, but they also exist in a sea of non-trivial problems. Why people think Girlyman even holds a candle is beyond me. He's still buffing crappy marine units. He just makes them less crappy. But they're still crap.

The Harpies drop bombs, too. And the burrowing things pop up and cause mortal wounds.

Martel732 wrote:
No, it's illustrative of how its hard to prepare for both nids and IG. IG are very tough, but they also exist in a sea of non-trivial problems. Why people think Girlyman even holds a candle is beyond me. He's still buffing crappy marine units. He just makes them less crappy. But they're still crap.

The Harpies drop bombs, too. And the burrowing things pop up and cause mortal wounds.

Harpies seem pretty good, agreed. But the Mawloc is garbage. He pops up, causes 3 mortal wounds if very lucky, and then is stuck there and gets shot to death. Even if he survives to get into combat, he's incredibly toothless, with no AP on his attacks and hitting on 4+s (maybe 5+s considering he's probably degraded).

I was excited by the Nids index at first, but the sheen has very much worn off. The codex will be interesting to see.

Mawloc seems bad, but is disruptive to marine lists. It's garbage vs hordes for sure. There are a LOT of units that are effective vs marines that do nothing vs hordes. Kind of a theme in 8th that we are highlighting in this thread.

What you've brought in your list governs what strategic choices you'll have at any time, and how effective those choices are for you if you make them.

Therefore, it's best to start with list building. If the lists are unequal, then the conclusion will be forgone, because the opposition will not be able to execute the required counters effectively.

Once the lists are equal in power and have the tools inside them to confront most threatening strategies, the tactics on the table top take precedence. Where my Razorbacks are moving to to get optimal sight lines isn't relevant if I don't have Razorbacks, as it were.



Also, Tyranids are very good. I fully expect the Tyranids to end up on the same level as the Guard on their own once they get their codex, especially with strategems that will probably allow them to recycle units, replace casualties, and suppress enemy shooting. I'd also note that reserving Genestealers and Hormagaunts using Cult Ambush and Trygons is very powerful, and can lead to a devastating T1 strike that can rip through screening hordes and still make it into combat with the vehicles behind.

I'm not going to disagree.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
What you've brought in your list governs what strategic choices you'll have at any time, and how effective those choices are for you if you make them.

Therefore, it's best to start with list building. If the lists are unequal, then the conclusion will be forgone, because the opposition will not be able to execute the required counters effectively.

Once the lists are equal in power and have the tools inside them to confront most threatening strategies, the tactics on the table top take precedence. Where my Razorbacks are moving to to get optimal sight lines isn't relevant if I don't have Razorbacks, as it were.



Also, Tyranids are very good. I fully expect the Tyranids to end up on the same level as the Guard on their own once they get their codex, especially with strategems that will probably allow them to recycle units, replace casualties, and suppress enemy shooting. I'd also note that reserving Genestealers and Hormagaunts using Cult Ambush and Trygons is very powerful, and can lead to a devastating T1 strike that can rip through screening hordes and still make it into combat with the vehicles behind.

I don't think the evidence is there to say Tyranids are in a good place. They've been pretty unsuccessful at a tournament level. Casually, they have some good stuff -- the codex has a lot more internal balance than it used to, but they're still lacking in many ways. Hormagaunts may be good at roping in dudes, but they're not very good at killing them (I do think Genestealers are great -- definitely the best thing Tyranids have right now). Mostly, I'm disappointed that Nidzilla just isn't viable. I don't get why the big beasties have to hit on 4+s.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
What you've brought in your list governs what strategic choices you'll have at any time, and how effective those choices are for you if you make them.

Therefore, it's best to start with list building. If the lists are unequal, then the conclusion will be forgone, because the opposition will not be able to execute the required counters effectively.

Once the lists are equal in power and have the tools inside them to confront most threatening strategies, the tactics on the table top take precedence. Where my Razorbacks are moving to to get optimal sight lines isn't relevant if I don't have Razorbacks, as it were.



Also, Tyranids are very good. I fully expect the Tyranids to end up on the same level as the Guard on their own once they get their codex, especially with strategems that will probably allow them to recycle units, replace casualties, and suppress enemy shooting. I'd also note that reserving Genestealers and Hormagaunts using Cult Ambush and Trygons is very powerful, and can lead to a devastating T1 strike that can rip through screening hordes and still make it into combat with the vehicles behind.

I don't think the evidence is there to say Tyranids are in a good place. They've been pretty unsuccessful at a tournament level. Casually, they have some good stuff -- the codex has a lot more internal balance than it used to, but they're still lacking in many ways. Hormagaunts may be good at roping in dudes, but they're not very good at killing them (I do think Genestealers are great -- definitely the best thing Tyranids have right now). Mostly, I'm disappointed that Nidzilla just isn't viable. I don't get why the big beasties have to hit on 4+s.

The problem as I see it is the 50% of the force that are starting on the board. My friend employed Hive Guard, Flyrants, and some additional Infantry as his on-board presence, to some effect. So far, in our games, he's had no real problem with my Conscripts and Artillery, the Hive Guard in particular were fairly okay at crippling my artillery units, but has choked on my Shadowsword, which has taken out his Synapse support and allowed me to rout his troops in short order and is immune to the melee lockdown effect.


Roping in dudes is amazing. You don't have to kill Manticores to turn them off, and the 6" pile-in and consolidate allows to you charge one unit, eliminate it with a different one of your units, pile in 6" to a new unit with the Hormagaunts, take a significant chunk out of that one, then consolidate into the tanks, completely preventing them from shooting and giving you total board control. Hormagaunts can threaten tanks 13" behind the front line.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
What you've brought in your list governs what strategic choices you'll have at any time, and how effective those choices are for you if you make them.

Therefore, it's best to start with list building. If the lists are unequal, then the conclusion will be forgone, because the opposition will not be able to execute the required counters effectively.

Once the lists are equal in power and have the tools inside them to confront most threatening strategies, the tactics on the table top take precedence. Where my Razorbacks are moving to to get optimal sight lines isn't relevant if I don't have Razorbacks, as it were.



Also, Tyranids are very good. I fully expect the Tyranids to end up on the same level as the Guard on their own once they get their codex, especially with strategems that will probably allow them to recycle units, replace casualties, and suppress enemy shooting. I'd also note that reserving Genestealers and Hormagaunts using Cult Ambush and Trygons is very powerful, and can lead to a devastating T1 strike that can rip through screening hordes and still make it into combat with the vehicles behind.

I don't think the evidence is there to say Tyranids are in a good place. They've been pretty unsuccessful at a tournament level. Casually, they have some good stuff -- the codex has a lot more internal balance than it used to, but they're still lacking in many ways. Hormagaunts may be good at roping in dudes, but they're not very good at killing them (I do think Genestealers are great -- definitely the best thing Tyranids have right now). Mostly, I'm disappointed that Nidzilla just isn't viable. I don't get why the big beasties have to hit on 4+s.

The problem as I see it is the 50% of the force that are starting on the board. My friend employed Hive Guard, Flyrants, and some additional Infantry as his on-board presence, to some effect. So far, in our games, he's had no real problem with my Conscripts and Artillery, the Hive Guard in particular were fairly okay at crippling my artillery units, but has choked on my Shadowsword, which has taken out his Synapse support and allowed me to rout his troops in short order and is immune to the melee lockdown effect.


Roping in dudes is amazing. You don't have to kill Manticores to turn them off, and the 6" pile-in and consolidate allows to you charge one unit, eliminate it with a different one of your units, pile in 6" to a new unit with the Hormagaunts, take a significant chunk out of that one, then consolidate into the tanks, completely preventing them from shooting and giving you total board control. Hormagaunts can threaten tanks 13" behind the front line.

I'll definitely admit that Hormas are probably better than I'm giving them credit for -- I haven't experimented with them very much in 8th, and those are powerful capabilities. SHVs terrify my Nids though -- hell, even Land Raiders are hard enough to pop. I'll rope myself back on topic by saying that the IG buffs to those big tanks are the only thing in the new codex that baffles me. Otherwise, I love the book, and I'm super happy for Guard players.

Ignore the shvs. They suck at winning.