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.

It's pretty much a consensus that the new AM FAQ failed.

This thread is for discussing how to fix the 8th Edition AM Codex, keeping in mind these 4 goals:

1) Keep the Spirit of the Fluff.
2) Keep the game easy to play.
3) Balance the AM Codex in Relation to other Codices.
4) Keep the game fun.

Okay, to kick things off . . .

Summary Execution

Rule in Codex: Astra Militarum units within 6" of a friendly Commissar can never lose more than one model as the result of any single failed Morale test.

Proposed Change: Instead of rolling a morale test, an Astra Militarum unit within 6" of a friendly Commissar may instead lose 1 model. No unit may be affected by Summary Execution more than a single time per battle.

Proposed Change: A Commissar may use the Summary Execution ability once per battle.

Proposed Change: A Lord Commissar may use the Summary Execution ability twice per battle.

Proposed Change: Commissar Yarrick may use the Summary Execution ability three times per battle.

Grinding Advance

Rule in Codex: The Leman Russ tank's sturdy frame allows it to keep up a fearsome rate of fire even as it advances on the foe. If this model moves under half speed in its Movement phase (i.e. it moves a distance in inches less than half of its current Move characteristic) it can shoot its turret weapon twice in the following Shooting phase (the turret weapon must target the same unit both times). Furthermore, hit rolls for this model's turret weapon do not suffer the penalty for moving and shooting a Heavy weapon. The following weapons are turret weapons: battle cannon, eradicator nova cannon, exterminator autocannon, vanquisher battle cannon, demolisher cannon, executioner plasma cannon and punisher gatling cannon.

Proposed Change: The Leman Russ tank's sturdy frame allows it to keep up a fearsome rate of fire even as it advances on the foe. If this model moves under half speed in its Movement phase (i.e. it moves a distance in inches less than half of its current Move characteristic) hit rolls for this model's turret weapon do not suffer the penalty for moving and shooting a Heavy weapon, in the following Shooting phase. If this model does not move in its Movement phase, it can shoot its turret weapon twice in the following Shooting phase (the turret weapon must target the same unit both times). The following weapons are turret weapons: battle cannon, eradicator nova cannon, exterminator autocannon, vanquisher battle cannon, demolisher cannon, executioner plasma cannon and punisher gatling cannon.

Lord of War

Additional Requirement for Battle-forged Armies: One Lord of War may be included in your Battle-forged army for every 1000 Points/50 power (The Lord of War is inclusive to the 1000 points/50 power). (e.g. 1000 points allows 1 Lord of War, 1500 points allows 1 Lord of War, 2000 points allows 2 Lords of War, etc.)

Line of Sight

Addition rule for wargear that can hit targets not in view of the shooting unit: When this weapon shoots at enemy units that the bearer cannot see, it does so with a -1 to hit, unless another unit, friendly to the shooter, can see the targeted enemy unit.




These proposed changes are reasonable, meet the 4 goals stated above, and IMHO are necessary. They may or may not be enough. Also, there were several changes in the AM FAQ that worded other rules better, and are perfectly fine implementing. I personally prefer smaller changes over time, rather that huge, abrupt changes, as it helps everyone evaluate how the changes affect game play, without drastic swings in the meta.

Okay everyone, chime in, and try to keep it constructive.

Not to be that guy, but there is already a 28 page thread where people are discussing their opinions on the FAQ here:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/742710.page

You should post this in You Make Da Rules, it's more than a petition for a new errata.

I'm certain we'll see commissars in a FAQ about 6 months from now - that's about how long it'll take for the FAQ to become obvious that it all but extincted commissars.

Lol your commissar proposals completely miss the point of why the nerf happened and was necessary

I think your approach on summarry execution is totally wrong.

Conscripts being unaffected by morale for one turn is all one needs to win.
The counter to alpha strikes should be armies with most of their firepower in reserves.
The problem is you can't hide most of your points in reserves because AM can table the rest of your army even if you hide most of it behind terrain if you can't bring the reserves in on your second turn, while most of your reserves will be useless if the conscripts are still around.

So if you go first against AM, with your rule, the screen will still be around in turn 2, but you can't bring your reserve that turn because you have to kill the rest of it and DS on turn 3.
By that time, your army on the field will be gone.

Not sure why Russ tanks need toning down. It's not like theyre running roughshod over anything and even with the current Grinding Advance half of them are never going to see the table...(Eradicator, Vanquisher, Exterminator, Demolisher). Pretty much the only usable ones are the Battle Tank, Executioner, and Punisher, and these arent exactly top end power units either.

I think the IG FAQ was actually great. A lot of clarifications, some nerfs for things that needed them. I think the Commisar one should have been made different, but your alternative is pretty bad. One, because the "X numbers per battle" isn't really good, because it doesn't makes any sense, and two, because it is again a free morale inmunity to an army that shouldn't have that, at least without conter play, and in a so easy and cheap manner.

The only real sore point was the Commissar nerf. Everything else was was more or less glossed over.

As for "fixing" that, it should just have the commissar returned to pre-FAQ condition and then have Conscripts get a rule that goes "This unit cannot be affected by Summary Execution"

1. The Russ does not need to be nuked if anything 2-3 variants need a cost adjustment/ power increase so we have more decent options

2.your suggested change makes conscripts too good again. IMO just change the new rule to either "only applies to conscripts" or "You can choose the lowest result of the 2D6 you roll for moral"

90% of people agree the ability was too strong...... At the same time, we don't want to throw out the usefulness of conscripts with small squads.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, change "send in the next wave" it was such a cool fluffy rule... Up the CP cost but don't make it absolutely 100% useless

Can't say I like any of these.

To fix Commissars you need to make it so that their relationship with conscripts is nerfed without making them crap for everything else.

To accomplish this I propose two things

1. Allow the re roll part to be optional ( perhaps even some kind of roll 2 pick one scenario)
2 Have the BLAMed guy count as one of the guys lost to moral.

These two changes will still give a massive nerf to the commissar/conscript combo by going from saving all but 1 to saving an average of about 4 guys (we are at around 3 with the current faq). He also won't be the liability he is to other troops because you won't have to worry about him killing more guys than you would have lost without the commissar.



The only changes I would even consider making to the Leman Russ would be to the internal balance to give all of their turrets a use (the Vanquisher thread has some discussion about this).

With the introduction of the Eldar Codex, the double fire mechanic is looking like it will be much more widespread than just the Russ. I expect the Tau and Ork codecies in particular to benefit from something similar. ( I think Knights could go on that list as well. )

duWhee wrote:
It's pretty much a consensus that the new AM FAQ failed.

The funny thing is half the people who feel that way feel like it wasn't enough, and the other half feel like it was too much.

Grinding Advance

Rule in Codex: The Leman Russ tank's sturdy frame allows it to keep up a fearsome rate of fire even as it advances on the foe. If this model moves under half speed in its Movement phase (i.e. it moves a distance in inches less than half of its current Move characteristic) it can shoot its turret weapon twice in the following Shooting phase (the turret weapon must target the same unit both times). Furthermore, hit rolls for this model's turret weapon do not suffer the penalty for moving and shooting a Heavy weapon. The following weapons are turret weapons: battle cannon, eradicator nova cannon, exterminator autocannon, vanquisher battle cannon, demolisher cannon, executioner plasma cannon and punisher gatling cannon.

Proposed Change: The Leman Russ tank's sturdy frame allows it to keep up a fearsome rate of fire even as it advances on the foe. If this model moves under half speed in its Movement phase (i.e. it moves a distance in inches less than half of its current Move characteristic) hit rolls for this model's turret weapon do not suffer the penalty for moving and shooting a Heavy weapon, in the following Shooting phase. If this model does not move in its Movement phase, it can shoot its turret weapon twice in the following Shooting phase (the turret weapon must target the same unit both times). The following weapons are turret weapons: battle cannon, eradicator nova cannon, exterminator autocannon, vanquisher battle cannon, demolisher cannon, executioner plasma cannon and punisher gatling cannon.

So then LRs go back to being more expensive and worse than Punishers, and simply get COMPLETELY replaced by basilisks and manticores like the index days.

Lord of War

Additional Requirement for Battle-forged Armies: One Lord of War may be included in your Battle-forged army for every 1000 Points/50 power (The Lord of War is inclusive to the 1000 points/50 power). (e.g. 1000 points allows 1 Lord of War, 1500 points allows 1 Lord of War, 2000 points allows 2 Lords of War, etc.)

That applies to Baby Emperor too, right? Or just IG because reasons?

I think I've seen zero baneblades doing anything significant in the competitive scene. I really don't think they're as bad as you think they are.

Line of Sight

Addition rule for wargear that can hit targets not in view of the shooting unit: When this weapon shoots at enemy units that the bearer cannot see, it does so with a -1 to hit, unless another unit, friendly to the shooter, can see the targeted enemy unit.

Yeah, I'm actually okay with this one. So long as it's a general rule for everyone that has LOS ignoring units, not just IG.

I don't see why the commisar ability can't stay both ways.

When dealing with anything but conscripts, bam - shoot one, pass moral automatically.

When dealing with conscripts, bam - shoot one, reroll your moral test.

Make it a special rule on the conscripts that the execution works different because they are not as well trained. Sticks to the fluff.

Would anyone have an issue with that?

(Full disclosure, I am a guard player who does not use conscripts, and is still running commisars because I think they are fluffy and my army has always ran them, so it shall continue to do so. I don't really care if it stays the same or changes, but I know others who do)

The 28 page (and growing) thread is wandering all over the place, is difficult to follow, and the tone is decidely foul.

I didn’t post this in You Make Da Rules, because I thnk it deserves a lot of discussion before any rules can be properly presented.

As for a limited number of uses per model, there are plenty of similar 1 time or few time uses through out the game, which my suggestion follows. My suggestion significantly limits the use of Summary Execution, while still letting it “flavor” the game. The current rule can effect every unit, but only 1 time per battle for each unit. Three units could be affected by a single commissar on turn 1. My version would require 3 commissars for turn 1, but then after turn one, those Commissars couldn’t use Summary Execution at all.

I am suggesting the toned down LRBT because it seems to be OP in small games (1000 points and under). In larger games, it’s just really good for the points IMO.

Conscripts aren’t “unaffected by morale”, under my example. They either Pass, Fail or Skip at the cost of 1 Guardsman, and they can only skip if they haven’t done so before, and if the Commissar hasn’t already used up his ability. Under the Index or Codex, they still had to lose 1. Poxwalkers are unaffect by morale.

Commisars are too cheap and too reliable and difficult to kill to give a HORDE (like, morale was a tool to fight hordes) army the hability to just ignore morale without problems.

(And I'll repeat that the new Commisar rule is pretty bad, but with "Ignore morale" you just make armies like Night Lords useless. And yes, the new Eldar trait that makes them inmune to more than 1 morale loses is bad too.)

And yet still I'm astounded that I don't hear more about Scions.

I mean, conscripts were a manifestation of what Guard always did best. Scions are (still) a crazy amount of damage output for the price.

I mean, I have space marines, imperial guard, and grey knights (and tau and nids but that's not the point). Point is, I have a decent spread of imperial stuff. Frankly, the only thing I always want more of in any list I make at this point is Scions.

Are Scions still that bad after the Plasma price increase? I still think the deepstrike hability of Scions should be optional with a point cost. Maybe 2-3 points on top of the cost they have now. That way, when you play Scions on tauroxes you don't feel dumb.

The LRBT points drop was in the Codex, so it would stay.

 Galas wrote:
Are Scions still that bad after the Plasma price increase?

In my mind? Yeah. I can't imagine at least without at least 10 of them. I normally use at least 20. Hell, I have 40 made up, and frankly, sometimes I wish I had points for more.

Thing is, and I keep saying this, but there's absolutely NOTHING you can do to them that I can think of that would result in them not being as good as they are, but still make people want to take them even semi-competitively.

 daedalus wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Are Scions still that bad after the Plasma price increase?

In my mind? Yeah. I can't imagine at least without at least 10 of them. I normally use at least 20. Hell, I have 40 made up, and frankly, sometimes I wish I had points for more.

Thing is, and I keep saying this, but there's absolutely NOTHING you can do to them that I can think of that would result in them not being as good as they are, but still make people want to take them even semi-competitively.

Probably lowering the amount of Plasma they can take, making the deep-strike hability a add-on you pay for (Because a Scion with a plasmagun in a Taurox shouldn't worth the same as a deep-striking plasma Scion), etc...
Those two things don't need to go together, I think the best is to make the deep-strike rule an add-on, for more fine tuning balance.

In the Fluff, the unit that would need Commissars the most are Conscripts. The more experienced troops, the more elite troops would have less of a need for Commissars, because it is assumed that they have greater discipline to remain on the battlefield. So how do you do this without bringing along a big pile of rules and exceptions? Well, the way I structured it, if you wanted to bolster 6 units of Conscripts (30x6 or 180 Conscripts, which would be on the worse end of the Conscript spam) you would need 6 Commissars (156 points), 3 Lord Commissars (162 points) or some combination with Yarrick (Yarrick + 3 Commissars = 220 points). Under the current scheme, you could conceivably have 1 commissar (31 points) riding herd on all 6 Conscript squads.

As an AM player, I will not deny that the Index Summary Execution was an awesome ability. People abused it, so it has to change. I'm trying to save some of that awesomeness. The current rule is just stupid. It's actually sadistic. There are plenty of instances where an ability can only be used once per battle; The Necron Overlord Resurection Orb, The Master of Ordinance Artillery Barrage, The Foul Blightspawn Unholy Death's Head, etc. If the number of uses is objectionable, then they can be trimmed back. Commissar 0, Lord Commissar 1, Yarrick 2. Frankly, a Commissar without Summary Execution is more appealing than one with it, as it now stands.

As to Scions, how exactly would you buff/nerf the unit to make it play more fair?

Make scions pay for deep strike. Done.

Make Commissars reduce Morale casualties by D6, with a minimum of 1.

duWhee wrote:
In the Fluff, the unit that would need Commissars the most are Conscripts. The more experienced troops, the more elite troops would have less of a need for Commissars, because it is assumed that they have greater discipline to remain on the battlefield. So how do you do this without bringing along a big pile of rules and exceptions? Well, the way I structured it, if you wanted to bolster 6 units of Conscripts (30x6 or 180 Conscripts, which would be on the worse end of the Conscript spam) you would need 6 Commissars (156 points), 3 Lord Commissars (162 points) or some combination with Yarrick (Yarrick + 3 Commissars = 220 points). Under the current scheme, you could conceivably have 1 commissar (31 points) riding herd on all 6 Conscript squads.

As an AM player, I will not deny that the Index Summary Execution was an awesome ability. People abused it, so it has to change. I'm trying to save some of that awesomeness. The current rule is just stupid. It's actually sadistic. There are plenty of instances where an ability can only be used once per battle; The Necron Overlord Resurection Orb, The Master of Ordinance Artillery Barrage, The Foul Blightspawn Unholy Death's Head, etc. If the number of uses is objectionable, then they can be trimmed back. Commissar 0, Lord Commissar 1, Yarrick 2. Frankly, a Commissar without Summary Execution is more appealing than one with it, as it now stands.

As to Scions, how exactly would you buff/nerf the unit to make it play more fair?

How much anti infantry shooting do you plan to bring to significantly damage more than 2 squads of conscripts so the AM players needs more than 2 commisars? The AM players loses nothing from a one-use-only commisar, except for AM vs. AM matches, so neither does the 150+ points tax actually apply nor does it nerf the commisars significantly.

Compare scions to raptors/assalt marines, SM bikes and the like and you will see quite clearly what is needed.

Raptors, Assault Marines ans Scions are not played in my group, so a description/explanation without hyperbole would be appreciated.

duWhee wrote:
In the Fluff, the unit that would need Commissars the most are Conscripts. The more experienced troops, the more elite troops would have less of a need for Commissars, because it is assumed that they have greater discipline to remain on the battlefield. So how do you do this without bringing along a big pile of rules and exceptions? Well, the way I structured it, if you wanted to bolster 6 units of Conscripts (30x6 or 180 Conscripts, which would be on the worse end of the Conscript spam) you would need 6 Commissars (156 points), 3 Lord Commissars (162 points) or some combination with Yarrick (Yarrick + 3 Commissars = 220 points). Under the current scheme, you could conceivably have 1 commissar (31 points) riding herd on all 6 Conscript squads.

As an AM player, I will not deny that the Index Summary Execution was an awesome ability. People abused it, so it has to change. I'm trying to save some of that awesomeness. The current rule is just stupid. It's actually sadistic. There are plenty of instances where an ability can only be used once per battle; The Necron Overlord Resurection Orb, The Master of Ordinance Artillery Barrage, The Foul Blightspawn Unholy Death's Head, etc. If the number of uses is objectionable, then they can be trimmed back. Commissar 0, Lord Commissar 1, Yarrick 2. Frankly, a Commissar without Summary Execution is more appealing than one with it, as it now stands.

As to Scions, how exactly would you buff/nerf the unit to make it play more fair?

The thing is that most people don't want to run 6 units of conscripts. You just take one or two big(ish) ones to blunt your opponent's efforts to get at your dakka in the backfield. Here are the three big things to remember about pre-FAQ conscripts:

1. They are extremely points efficient. A 3 point model that has a 4+ save in cover and the same offense as a standard guardsman is so cheap that they will come out ahead in a straight up fire fight against most things because of how much less expensive they are than the thing they're shooting at. A tactical marine with a bolter costs about 4 times as much as a conscript. If you shoot something at them that kills them off faster than they kill it off, there is a good chance that the unit in question is such a big points investment that you're basically wasting its potential shooting at a 60 point unit of conscripts.

2. Orders amplify the problems with conscripts. If they were points efficient before, FRFSRF or Get Back in the Fight can make them even more so.

3. Making them immune to morale, even for a turn, basically ensures that they will do their job. Usually, you don't take them for their (efficient but unimpressive) killing power. You take them so that your opponent can't deepstrike near your tanks, has to go through a fearless speed bump before it can reach its real target, or has to clear off a bunch of 3 point bodies in order to claim an objective.

So if you make them immune to morale for a turn, it doesn't really matter if you kill them off on turn 2. At that point, your opponent has placed deepstrikers out of position or been forced to wait until turn 3 to bring them in. His assault units have either hit your conscript sponge and then been wiped out by dakka as they run away, or else they've been forced to waste at least one more turn not getting into the units they need to kill. He's committed an inefficient number of points into killing off a bunch of cheap models without doing anything about the more killy things behind them.

So I get that it's fluffy for conscripts to hang out with commissars. Let's make it even more fluffy and show them being ill-disciplined greenhorns that lose cohesion and discipline when their friends start exploding all around them.

It's worth mentioning that conscripts are still pretty decent even without being pseudo-fearless. For 60 points, I get 5 dire avengers. You get 20 conscripts. 20 bodies that your opponent has to go through. 20 bodies to spread out and screen against assaults and deepstrikes. Exposing them to the threat of morale just gives people a way to counter them, but they still have to take the time to pump anti-infantry shots into them in order to force a big enough morale test to wipe them out. Sir or Madame, if you do not wish to use your conscripts, kindly send them over to my codex so that I can.

As for the whole "use this X times per game" thing, I don't have anything against that mechanic in general, though I do think having different models using it a different number of times in a game sounds like a minor pain to track. Not a big deal overall though.

I don't find scions particularly problematic myself. Especially not after they got a small plasma price hike. They're mildly glass cannon-ish. You're pretty much guaranteed to get one good round of dakka out of them, and then your opponent will turn around and wipe them out. They aren't amazingly effective against armored targets (and have to kill a few of their own off with gets hot to be as effective as possible), and minding your positioning/using screening units can really blunt their effectiveness.

 Galas wrote:

 daedalus wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Are Scions still that bad after the Plasma price increase?

In my mind? Yeah. I can't imagine at least without at least 10 of them. I normally use at least 20. Hell, I have 40 made up, and frankly, sometimes I wish I had points for more.

Thing is, and I keep saying this, but there's absolutely NOTHING you can do to them that I can think of that would result in them not being as good as they are, but still make people want to take them even semi-competitively.

Probably lowering the amount of Plasma they can take, making the deep-strike hability a add-on you pay for (Because a Scion with a plasmagun in a Taurox shouldn't worth the same as a deep-striking plasma Scion), etc...
Those two things don't need to go together, I think the best is to make the deep-strike rule an add-on, for more fine tuning balance.

But if you fiddle with scions too much, they just turn back into veterans with carapace armor.

Command squads are the worst offender of the plasma scion setup to me. They let you skip out on the tax of the normal troopers. I can't believe GW just left them as they are, which is essentially suicide drop teams of special weapons, for a measly 128 points. If you could only bring 4 plasma in a ten man squad, I think there'd be fewer complaints. I play with friends, so that's how I run them now.

I personally think that all of the special deployment abilities are just criminally undercosted, and way too easy to get. It seems like everyone and his dog has some way of deploying at 9" now.

 argonak wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 daedalus wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Are Scions still that bad after the Plasma price increase?

In my mind? Yeah. I can't imagine at least without at least 10 of them. I normally use at least 20. Hell, I have 40 made up, and frankly, sometimes I wish I had points for more.

Thing is, and I keep saying this, but there's absolutely NOTHING you can do to them that I can think of that would result in them not being as good as they are, but still make people want to take them even semi-competitively.

Probably lowering the amount of Plasma they can take, making the deep-strike hability a add-on you pay for (Because a Scion with a plasmagun in a Taurox shouldn't worth the same as a deep-striking plasma Scion), etc...
Those two things don't need to go together, I think the best is to make the deep-strike rule an add-on, for more fine tuning balance.

But if you fiddle with scions too much, they just turn back into veterans with carapace armor.

Command squads are the worst offender of the plasma scion setup to me. They let you skip out on the tax of the normal troopers. I can't believe GW just left them as they are, which is essentially suicide drop teams of special weapons, for a measly 128 points. If you could only bring 4 plasma in a ten man squad, I think there'd be fewer complaints. I play with friends, so that's how I run them now.

I personally think that all of the special deployment abilities are just criminally undercosted, and way too easy to get. It seems like everyone and his dog has some way of deploying at 9" now.

I agree about the free access to deepstrike.

And about the first point, I have actually said in other threads how veterans and Stormtroopers should be mixed with a flexible unit that you can customize with both Stormtroopers and Veterans options.

This has to be the shittiest proposals to fix commissars since the new FAQ.

 NenkotaMoon wrote:
This has to be the shittiest proposals to fix commissars since the new FAQ.

Ageeed. Especially in light of the new eldar and nid codexes.

What I prefer for Summary Execution is:

Remove "Aura of Discipline." When a unit fails Battleshock, the Commissar may execute one model in that unit to *add* the Commissar's Leadership to the unit's Leadership for that test.

The big difference being this change makes Commissars good but not *supergood* (you can still blow through a unit if you inflict enough casualties), and "Base + Commissar" leadership means you blam through more Conscripts than regular troops.