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 happy about the renegades and heretics changes.

Malefic lords got a huge price increase up from 30 to 80 points so smite spam is gone.

Cultists are down to 4 points each.

2 commanders and 30 cultists is a cheap battalion. More cultists is cheap obsec. Commanders and enforcers are cheap characters that can be used to summon deamons.

A brigade is also dirt cheap at 3 commanders, 6 cultists, 3 spawn, 3 enforcers/marauders/disciples, and 3 mortar HWS=570 points.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:


If I really, really want a twenty man squad, for the price of 1cp, I will get back on a 5+ out of the 10 or so I start with, I can make them a 20 man squad. [With better BS, WS, Ld and special/heavy weapons options and no order penalities. - For the same price.]

Cp's that btw are easier with infantry. Conscripts are 2x minimum as expensive cs requirement fijler

 schadenfreude wrote:

Malefic lords got a huge price increase up from 30 to 80 points so smite spam is gone.

Seems way too much to me.

Unless they can now cast an extra spell, they're worse than Neurothropes in virtually every way, yet cost 10pts more.

 vipoid wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:

Malefic lords got a huge price increase up from 30 to 80 points so smite spam is gone.

Seems way too much to me.

Unless they can now cast an extra spell, they're worse than Neurothropes in virtually every way, yet cost 10pts more.

Compared to a neurothrope he has:

-1 invul
+1 speed
+1 Power known
-1 Power cast
-1 wound
No Shadow in the warp
No buff to Zoans
No Spirit Leech
Gets smashy when perils.

I'd say that indeed 80 is too much, his correct cost is 65. Maybe that with further FAQs he will slowly migrate back to this value.

Note: I think that neuros are undercosted, they should cost 90. 70 for 2 powers is too low. With this consideration, a Malefic lord is fine at 70-75.

So, i'm just glad i didn't go out and buy the stuff from Forgeworld i was planning on using in my army list...

My 6 man Shadow Spectre unit is now 60 points more expensive, and the second list based around a Scorpion is now waaaay out I didn't expect the Sonic Lance Lynx to now be 60 points more expensive... It was already expensive before, but now at 395 points........

Still, i guess it gives me the chance to drop in 10 Swooping Hawks now instead

I didn't catch the character change before the vids went down.

Can anyone clarify what it was and also if there were any detachment changes or smite changes?

One thing i don't get though...

Is the Earthshaker Battery point increase.

115 points now makes it 7 points more expensive than a normal Basilisk?!?!?!?! Sure, it's potentially easier to hide but...??

Kdash wrote:
One thing i don't get though...

Is the Earthshaker Battery point increase.

115 points now makes it 7 points more expensive than a normal Basilisk?!?!?!?! Sure, it's potentially easier to hide but...??

You want a real headscratcher?

Tarantula Sentry Guns have now doubled in points.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
I didn't catch the character change before the vids went down.

Can anyone clarify what it was and also if there were any detachment changes or smite changes?

Character change is -

If under 10 wounds, they can only be shot at if they are BOTH the closest model AND visible. It ends the debate of whether or not you can target them if another unit is closer but not in LoS of the firer.

Another important thing to note - is that if you're firing a weapon that does not need LoS, you technically can't shoot at a character now even if it IS the closest model, if you can't draw LoS to it.

As for smite changes - not seen anything about it anywhere, so i guess it was just a false rumour... There had to be at least one in there i guess!

Spoletta wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:

Malefic lords got a huge price increase up from 30 to 80 points so smite spam is gone.

Seems way too much to me.

Unless they can now cast an extra spell, they're worse than Neurothropes in virtually every way, yet cost 10pts more.

Compared to a neurothrope he has:

-1 invul
+1 speed
+1 Power known
-1 Power cast
-1 wound
No Shadow in the warp
No buff to Zoans
No Spirit Leech
Gets smashy when perils.

I'd say that indeed 80 is too much, his correct cost is 65. Maybe that with further FAQs he will slowly migrate back to this value.

Note: I think that neuros are undercosted, they should cost 90. 70 for 2 powers is too low. With this consideration, a Malefic lord is fine at 70-75.

I'm inclined to agree about Neurothropes, but 70-75pts seems ridiculously high for Malefic Lords, unless they get to cast a second power.

 vipoid wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:

Malefic lords got a huge price increase up from 30 to 80 points so smite spam is gone.

Seems way too much to me.

Unless they can now cast an extra spell, they're worse than Neurothropes in virtually every way, yet cost 10pts more.

Compared to a neurothrope he has:

-1 invul
+1 speed
+1 Power known
-1 Power cast
-1 wound
No Shadow in the warp
No buff to Zoans
No Spirit Leech
Gets smashy when perils.

I'd say that indeed 80 is too much, his correct cost is 65. Maybe that with further FAQs he will slowly migrate back to this value.

Note: I think that neuros are undercosted, they should cost 90. 70 for 2 powers is too low. With this consideration, a Malefic lord is fine at 70-75.

I'm inclined to agree about Neurothropes, but 70-75pts seems ridiculously high for Malefic Lords, unless they get to cast a second power.

80 is too high, yes, but there has been no update to the datasheets themselves, so they are stuck with only 1 cast until an FAQ changes it.

Although good arguments, I hope they stay the same.
It really sucks to don´t have even one HQ which costs not at least 100 points.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Kdash wrote:
One thing i don't get though...

Is the Earthshaker Battery point increase.

115 points now makes it 7 points more expensive than a normal Basilisk?!?!?!?! Sure, it's potentially easier to hide but...??

You want a real headscratcher?

Tarantula Sentry Guns have now doubled in points.

That's not a head scratcher at all. 10 points for 5 T5 4+ wounds is pretty absurd when Eldar pays 30 and Orks pay 15 for 6 T5 5+. And they still need crew after that.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Kdash wrote:
One thing i don't get though...

Is the Earthshaker Battery point increase.

115 points now makes it 7 points more expensive than a normal Basilisk?!?!?!?! Sure, it's potentially easier to hide but...??

You want a real headscratcher?

Tarantula Sentry Guns have now doubled in points.

That's not a head scratcher at all. 10 points for 5 T5 4+ wounds is pretty absurd when Eldar pays 30 and Orks pay 15 for 6 T5 5+. And they still need crew after that.

10 points(not including the twin Heavy Bolter or twin Lascannons) for 5 T5 4+ Wounds that cannot fight back in Close Combat and have preferential engagement targets...
It was 24 points for the twin Heavy Bolter(prefers engaging Infantry targets) variant that was BS 4+ or 50 points for the twin Lascannon(prefers engaging non-Infantry keyworded targets) variant.
It's now 34 points for the twin Heavy Bolter variant and 60 for the lascannon variant.

Remind me again why they needed to double in price?

Kdash wrote:One thing i don't get though...

Is the Earthshaker Battery point increase.

115 points now makes it 7 points more expensive than a normal Basilisk?!?!?!?! Sure, it's potentially easier to hide but...??

Kanluwen wrote:

Kdash wrote:
One thing i don't get though...

Is the Earthshaker Battery point increase.

115 points now makes it 7 points more expensive than a normal Basilisk?!?!?!?! Sure, it's potentially easier to hide but...??

You want a real headscratcher?

Tarantula Sentry Guns have now doubled in points.

I'm not an IG player, and I don't even know their exact stats, but I know both of them frequently came up all over the IG tactics threads.

GW probably just wants both units out of the competitive meta, so people would start using codex options instead.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Kdash wrote:
One thing i don't get though...

Is the Earthshaker Battery point increase.

115 points now makes it 7 points more expensive than a normal Basilisk?!?!?!?! Sure, it's potentially easier to hide but...??

You want a real headscratcher?

Tarantula Sentry Guns have now doubled in points.

That's not a head scratcher at all. 10 points for 5 T5 4+ wounds is pretty absurd when Eldar pays 30 and Orks pay 15 for 6 T5 5+. And they still need crew after that.

10 points(not including the twin Heavy Bolter or twin Lascannons) for 5 T5 4+ Wounds that cannot fight back in Close Combat and have preferential engagement targets...
It was 24 points for the twin Heavy Bolter(prefers engaging Infantry targets) variant that was BS 4+ or 50 points for the twin Lascannon(prefers engaging non-Infantry keyworded targets) variant.
It's now 34 points for the twin Heavy Bolter variant and 60 for the lascannon variant.

Remind me again why they needed to double in price?

Because when the relativly simple gun costs more than the body, and the body is pretty darn though for the pricetag, its a sign things may be out of control.

Yes, limited targeting and no melee skills/movement-but it was godamn 24 points for a twin heavy bolter that is FAR too hard to kill at range for a 24 points model.

Saying they "doubled in price" is rather dishonest in this case, consdiering they doubled the BODY price, but the gun price was the main chunk of it and it stayed the same (and in the lascannon case, still is.)

At 34/60 points, its still a good pick.

Anyone see the Leviathan Dreadnought in there anywhere? I am not finding it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

10 points(not including the twin Heavy Bolter or twin Lascannons) for 5 T5 4+ Wounds that cannot fight back in Close Combat and have preferential engagement targets...
It was 24 points for the twin Heavy Bolter(prefers engaging Infantry targets) variant that was BS 4+ or 50 points for the twin Lascannon(prefers engaging non-Infantry keyworded targets) variant.
It's now 34 points for the twin Heavy Bolter variant and 60 for the lascannon variant.

Remind me again why they needed to double in price?

None of the Eldar or Ork options come with the weapon. Eveyone pays for that part. That's irrelevant.

I need you to ponder a spearhead with 18 tarrantulas. That's 108 HB shots for under 500 points with HQ on 90 T5 wounds. I challenge you to find a more point efficient option than that.

And then make them Cadian or Vostroyan for even more fun.

 quickfuze wrote:
Anyone see the Leviathan Dreadnought in there anywhere? I am not finding it.

+15 points for Grav flux, taking a second close combat weapon only adds +10 instead of costing full price.

 BoomWolf wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Kdash wrote:
One thing i don't get though...

Is the Earthshaker Battery point increase.

115 points now makes it 7 points more expensive than a normal Basilisk?!?!?!?! Sure, it's potentially easier to hide but...??

You want a real headscratcher?

Tarantula Sentry Guns have now doubled in points.

That's not a head scratcher at all. 10 points for 5 T5 4+ wounds is pretty absurd when Eldar pays 30 and Orks pay 15 for 6 T5 5+. And they still need crew after that.

10 points(not including the twin Heavy Bolter or twin Lascannons) for 5 T5 4+ Wounds that cannot fight back in Close Combat and have preferential engagement targets...
It was 24 points for the twin Heavy Bolter(prefers engaging Infantry targets) variant that was BS 4+ or 50 points for the twin Lascannon(prefers engaging non-Infantry keyworded targets) variant.
It's now 34 points for the twin Heavy Bolter variant and 60 for the lascannon variant.

Remind me again why they needed to double in price?

Because when the relativly simple gun costs more than the body, and the body is pretty darn though for the pricetag, its a sign things may be out of control.

Yes, limited targeting and no melee skills/movement-but it was godamn 24 points for a twin heavy bolter that is FAR too hard to kill at range for a 24 points model.

Saying they "doubled in price" is rather dishonest in this case, consdiering they doubled the BODY price, but the gun price was the main chunk of it and it stayed the same (and in the lascannon case, still is.)

At 34/60 points, its still a good pick.

24 to 34 isn't double. Base cost went from 2.5 points per T5 wound to 5 points per T5 wound so it's still inexpensive wounds.

No attacks in CC is a fair trade for still being able to shoot while in CC.

Conscripts at 4 could be good if normal infantry was made 5 ppm.
They are still the best units in the game for 5 or less points.

It sucks if you play FW, but the part about the GW units isn't bad.

 Galas wrote:
Conscripts at 4 could be good if normal infantry was made 5 ppm.
They are still the best units in the game for 5 or less points.

It sucks if you play FW, but the part about the GW units isn't bad.

Unless you play Grey Knights. I'm sorry, Codex: Dreadknight.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

10 points(not including the twin Heavy Bolter or twin Lascannons) for 5 T5 4+ Wounds that cannot fight back in Close Combat and have preferential engagement targets...
It was 24 points for the twin Heavy Bolter(prefers engaging Infantry targets) variant that was BS 4+ or 50 points for the twin Lascannon(prefers engaging non-Infantry keyworded targets) variant.
It's now 34 points for the twin Heavy Bolter variant and 60 for the lascannon variant.

Remind me again why they needed to double in price?

None of the Eldar or Ork options come with the weapon. Eveyone pays for that part. That's irrelevant.

Actually that very much is relevant.

I need you to ponder a spearhead with 18 tarrantulas. That's 108 HB shots for under 500 points with HQ on 90 T5 wounds. I challenge you to find a more point efficient option than that.

And then make them Cadian or Vostroyan for even more fun.

That's 108 HB shots for under 500 points with an HQ on 90 T5 wounds that literally cannot move once they have been deployed. It's also worth mentioning that Tarantulas can be negated by parking infantry in front of vehicles or vehicles in front of infantry to mitigate the effectiveness of specific weapon loadouts.

You can also, y'know, maneuver around them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galas wrote:
Conscripts at 4 could be good if normal infantry was made 5 ppm.
They are still the best units in the game for 5 or less points.

Once again:

Infantry Squads did not need any changes at all.
Conscripts could literally have been mitigated and retained at 3 ppm by requiring an Infantry or Veteran Squad to be present for each Conscript Squad. That would have changed them from 60 points for 20 Conscripts to 100 points for a mandatory squad of babysitters.

I don't like the "You need one squad of X if you want to field Y"
Whats if someone just wants a army of conscripts but don't want normal infantry or veterans?

I believe Conscripts were fine at 3ppm with the Commisar nerf (That I think should be changed to kill one dude and reduce morale loses by 1d6 and reduce his cost to 25p), orders on a 4+ and the 30-max unit.

Personally, I don't see a problem with this. The FW critizism is legitimate, of course, they have made most of it too expensive without any kind of balance intention. Is sad how obviois it is.
But most of the GW (Yeah, GK are screw over. but I believe the problems with GK is much more deept than just point costs, they need a complete redesign as a faction) changes aren't as bad as people is making them appear. I'll give this 2-3 weeks before people cool off and the new meta starts to settle.
To be honest the only other game where I see such outrage with any balance changes is WoW. I suppose it makes sense, the more work you need to put in what you are playing (Leveling and equiping a character during months, building and painting an army) and the more difficult it is to switch to another one, the more outrage generates from the playerbase any kind of change.

 Galas wrote:
I don't like the "You need one squad of X if you want to field Y"
Whats if someone just wants a army of conscripts but don't want normal infantry or veterans?

I believe Conscripts were fine at 3ppm with the Commisar nerf (That I think should be changed to kill one dude and reduce morale loses by 1d6 and reduce his cost to 25p), orders on a 4+ and the 30-max unit.

Then tough crap?

Conscripts were a problematic unit, just like Command Squads were.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Actually that very much is relevant.

No, because generally everyone pays the same for a weapon based on BS.

That's 108 HB shots for under 500 points with an HQ on 90 T5 wounds that literally cannot move once they have been deployed. It's also worth mentioning that Tarantulas can be negated by parking infantry in front of vehicles or vehicles in front of infantry to mitigate the effectiveness of specific weapon loadouts.

You can also, y'know, maneuver around them.

Your suggested unit shenanigans do nothing. If it can see infantry it can shoot it or vice versa for tanks. If it can't then it shoots whatever is closest and they can nearly kill a predator - while a quas las pred can't kill one on average and you get 2.5 of those for those about 500. Not to mention the other 1500 points in the army.

The point is to produce as much lead for the cheapest cost. Not to maneuver.

Seriously, the only change for Drukhari is to the Court of the Archon and Razorwing Flocks, so it's OK for us to still have 30pt bikes that do considerably less than a kitted out Windrider or Cloud Dancer which are both cheaper? There are quite a few units that needed points changes but it's only the useless Court that gets it.

 Imateria wrote:
Seriously, the only change for Drukhari is to the Court of the Archon and Razorwing Flocks, so it's OK for us to still have 30pt bikes that do considerably less than a kitted out Windrider or Cloud Dancer which are both cheaper? There are quite a few units that needed points changes but it's only the useless Court that gets it.

I'm hoping that fewer changes suggests our codex is closer. There are a fair few units that are overcosted, and it's even worse with the weapon options. However if they're working on Drukari right now they might not want to rock the boat just yet *crosses many fingers*

Going by the 'fewer changes means a closer codex' logic, that means pretty much every Xenos army is right around the corner.

 Fafnir wrote:
Going by the 'fewer changes means a closer codex' logic, that means pretty much every Xenos army is right around the corner.

All the Imperial armies that are prioritary have been released (Barring SW), so yeah, it makes sense for 2018 to be about Xenos Codexs.