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.

Martel732 wrote:
IG are still hilariously overpowered. I think you're fine. 15 10-man squads is even better in some ways. They basically autowin vs any power armor based list.

IG is fine now, high up on the competitive ladder for sure, but not overpowered. The definition of OP is now reserved for more serious stuff.

Infantry based IG lists are much weaker than the old conscript ones, they don't work so well as screens, require a lot of points invested if you want to use orders, less overwatch...
IG excel in long range firepower, but suffer a lot from hit penalties and have a mostly land based force, so once enemy models start infiltrating their lines they lose power really fast.

Regarding the problems with the "Cheap hordes", it's not a problem. It's a correct game design if you have synergy between line troops that die in the front and the specialist units that do the heavy work. That's how an army works! The problem is that some factions cannot do this, especially SM of any flavor. If the tactical marines were a bit more soakyer (is that a word?) for their points, 80% of this edition's problems would be solved.

It is far from fine. Manticores should NOT be cheaper than predators or hammerheads. IG still needs a bucket of nerfs.

Poor nyds. Let them alone a little while. They dont see OP. Have they had good placements in tournaments?

Really the only nerf they still need is 10-15% price hike on some stuff and everyoen alse to have their codex.

The way the codex works seems fine right now, it's just a lot of stuff is undercosted.

Also on topic: there is no universally good way of avoiding cheese, only a scalpel army by army approach.

 Galas wrote:
Poor nyds. Let them alone a little while. They dont see OP. Have they had good placements in tournaments?

Nids are winning everything around me except vs IG. If not IG or Nids, players are't winning. New people especially are getting really upset. Just yesterday a new guy asked if six mortar teams, manticore, and double basilisk was common because he died in three turns.

LoW are like Flyers, they drastically affect the meta. I prefer Apocalypse being a different game.

But no, they are not cheese. Neither are hordes.

Martel732 wrote:
If you don't have a perfect record vs power armor, you a poor IG player. Period. IG are literally elite-proof.

Or maybe I don't play all Conscripts with Manticores...?

IG is also the only gunline that gets better the more terrain there is on the table. Nuts.

Whaaat, the kings of artillery faction is kings of artillery?

Say it ain't so!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
It is far from fine. Manticores should NOT be cheaper than predators or hammerheads. IG still needs a bucket of nerfs.

So you want Predators and Hammerheads to only be able to fire a limited amount of shots over the course of the game? Not just based upon their shooting phase being active mind.

Fine with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Earth127 wrote:
Really the only nerf they still need is 10-15% price hike on some stuff and everyoen alse to have their codex.

The way the codex works seems fine right now, it's just a lot of stuff is undercosted.

Also on topic: there is no universally good way of avoiding cheese, only a scalpel army by army approach.

The biggest issue with Guard right now is that the stuff which is undercosted is either available on only one platform(hence the undercosting--it's supposed to be specific to one or maybe units) or has a better available option from FW for a similar price(artillery batteries) that don't have the same downsides of the codex version.

Add in that people still don't seem to 'get' how Orders work when they complain about them and it just is pathetic complaining about Guard at the moment.

Arson Fire wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
can we take a moment to clarify why the OP thinks grots are a balance issue?

T2, 3 points, no save? Those grots?

I'm similarly bewildered by their mention of Ripper Swarms.

I didn't, but dakka people can be really dense and especially WAAC players.

I simply said all fodder type units that shouldn't be able to be taken as core troops. This includes those units.

This isn't hard to wrap your head around, if a unit is an auxiliary style unit, it would fall under this designation.

Why shouldn't they be scoring troops?

Go into any armies tactics thread, any of them. Every single one is about 0% actual tactics, and just "spam x unit." Where x is whatever the cheapest unit in the codex or an allied codex is.
Scroll through any of them and you'll occasionally see someone trying to discus something tactics, immediately followed by "all units are trash, they're worthless, if you take anything but spamming unit X you're army is garbage."
cheap fodder units have something you can't adjust with points cost, board control, which is why if you honestly go look at tactics you'll see exactly what I just described and why adjusting army comp so we have some actual armies on tables instead of ridiculousness spam lists would be good for adding some actual competition to the game.

When most people say "competitive" what they actually mean is the least amount of competition possible. They want the game to boil down to showing each other their lists and declaring a victor. I prefer games that are won based on how you play with your army men on the table.

Okay but that doesn't really mean "fodder" shouldn't score. That means you rebalance points. The whole "X troops per non troop unit" idea is just bad.

Martel732 wrote:
Lords of War are definitely not cheese in 8th as they are downed readily by lascannons, don't take up much real estate and generally are VERY expensive. Ironically, the IG seems to have the best LoW as well.

Are you talking in a vacuum or in the context of a list? The Shadowsword is probably better than Magnus or Mortarion on their own, but Magnus and Mortarion together make up a much better list than any two baneblade equivalents.

Okay maybe not rick and morty.

Martel732 wrote:
It is far from fine. Manticores should NOT be cheaper than predators or hammerheads. IG still needs a bucket of nerfs.

Comparing something to hammerheads isn't fair sport, come on.

As for predators, a quad las pred inflicts 66% more damage on targets from T6 to T8 3+. Care to explain me why it should cost LESS than a manticore? Right now it costs 34% more, and i'd say that it is the right place.

Because the pred has to sometimes move and can't ignore LoS.

Manticores are better than almost any tank in any army anywhere. They play like 180 pt models.

Martel732 wrote:
Because the pred has to sometimes move and can't ignore LoS.

Manticores are better than almost any tank in any army anywhere. They play like 180 pt models.

And what happens when the Manticores run out of rockets?

Danny slag wrote:
Go into any armies tactics thread, any of them. Every single one is about 0% actual tactics, and just "spam x unit." Where x is whatever the cheapest unit in the codex or an allied codex is.
Scroll through any of them and you'll occasionally see someone trying to discus something tactics, immediately followed by "all units are trash, they're worthless, if you take anything but spamming unit X you're army is garbage."
cheap fodder units have something you can't adjust with points cost, board control, which is why if you honestly go look at tactics you'll see exactly what I just described and why adjusting army comp so we have some actual armies on tables instead of ridiculousness spam lists would be good for adding some actual competition to the game.

When most people say "competitive" what they actually mean is the least amount of competition possible. They want the game to boil down to showing each other their lists and declaring a victor. I prefer games that are won based on how you play with your army men on the table.

So how does restricting access to grots and rippers achieve this?

In both cases the army has a better spammable board control unit which you aren't restricting.

It doesn't. Making models pay for existing and taking up real estate does.

Martel732 wrote:
Because the pred has to sometimes move and can't ignore LoS.

Manticores are better than almost any tank in any army anywhere. They play like 180 pt models.

Better for what? I surely hope that you don't think that they are good at anti tank, because you wouldn't like the math on that.

Even against MEQ you are taking out 2 per turn, good luck making your points back in 4 shooting phases like that.

They blow up my tanks real good. So there's that. They kill my marines real good too.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Whaaat, the kings of artillery faction is kings of artillery?

Say it ain't so!

The biggest issue with Guard right now is that the stuff which is undercosted is either available on only one platform(hence the undercosting--it's supposed to be specific to one or maybe units) or has a better available option from FW for a similar price(artillery batteries) that don't have the same downsides of the codex version.

Add in that people still don't seem to 'get' how Orders work when they complain about them and it just is pathetic complaining about Guard at the moment.

The reason for people complaining about Guard Kanluwen, you might be amazed to learn, is because they went from a low tier army to the highest tier army this edition. They are currently too strong, many of their units and mechanics are undercosted. Don't believe me? Look at tournament results. Look at what people are bringing to tournaments. Look at how well they are consistently performing. Something tells me that Guard players didn't suddenly become genius tacticians over night, rather their army has a distinct and clear advantage over others.

We understand exactly how Orders work, the problem is that they're far too cheap and the units that make best use of them have been costed too low.

5 or even 6 PPM Infantry is the correct price, when you answered me earlier, you gave no reasons as to why it was too expensive (without a random buff that you believe must be included). They have the same statline as units that are more expensive. Conscripts are probably too good for what they do at 4 PPM. At 3 PPM they were a joke. Grots are 3 PPM (M5", WS5+, BS4+, S2, T2, 6+ save, LD4), compare them to Conscripts and tell me how they are possibly worth the same amount of points?

Kings of artillery should still pay appropriate costs for their units.

I’m of the opinion that limits of X per troop choice isn’t the right answer, at least from a fluff perspective. IG easily field entire regiments of conscript equivalents that, whether by design or accident, see combat, so in a particular battle you could see 90% conscripts easily. Also the tabletop really only represents an almost insignificant amount of combat; when conscripts are used I wouldn’t be surprised if they were fielded in the thousands to drown out the opponent, so your proposed fix prevents them from being used as intended in the fluff. Also it would prevent Gretchin Revolutionary Commitee armies from being fielded without a large number of Orks, which instantly turns me off from this proposal.

Honestly I think it’s a core rules issue/meta favoring massed and cheap bodies, and if I had my way I’d change something there rather than make “cheap bodies” a liability to get.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Whaaat, the kings of artillery faction is kings of artillery?

Say it ain't so!

The biggest issue with Guard right now is that the stuff which is undercosted is either available on only one platform(hence the undercosting--it's supposed to be specific to one or maybe units) or has a better available option from FW for a similar price(artillery batteries) that don't have the same downsides of the codex version.

Add in that people still don't seem to 'get' how Orders work when they complain about them and it just is pathetic complaining about Guard at the moment.

The reason for people complaining about Guard Kanluwen, you might be amazed to learn, is because they went from a low tier army to the highest tier army this edition. They are currently too strong, many of their units and mechanics are undercosted. Don't believe me? Look at tournament results. Look at what people are bringing to tournaments. Look at how well they are consistently performing. Something tells me that Guard players didn't suddenly become genius tacticians over night, rather their army has a distinct and clear advantage over others.

We understand exactly how Orders work, the problem is that they're far too cheap and the units that make best use of them have been costed too low.

5 or even 6 PPM Infantry is the correct price, when you answered me earlier, you gave no reasons as to why it was too expensive (without a random buff that you believe must be included). They have the same statline as units that are more expensive. Conscripts are probably too good for what they do at 4 PPM. At 3 PPM they were a joke. Grots are 3 PPM (M5", WS5+, BS4+, S2, T2, 6+ save, LD4), compare them to Conscripts and tell me how they are possibly worth the same amount of points?

Price your basic Guardsmen at 6ppm, and the question turns to "why not take Veterans or Scions" - Veterans are 6ppm and are considered pretty garbage since they pay more for weapons than your average guardsmen and need a delivery system if they want to actually take advantage of their better BS, and Scions are already considered to be really good. If you bump up the points of both of those units too, it becomes "why bother bringing guardsmen at all" when you could say jump armies and just take a Battle Sister with a better BS, better save, better gun, better morale, and krak grenades and a 6+ invulnerable save for 9ppm. Bonus points for the fact that you can take a Cannoness for 45 points with better WS, BS, wounds, attacks, leadership, armor save, and invulnerable saves than a Company Commander, and also built in give the reroll 1s order to all <order> units within 6".

Remember - Guard has Orders instead of auras, with the exception of a handful of special characters that lock you into a specific regiment. Yarrick is the only special character with an aura that does not restrict you to either Cadian or Catachan. Other than that, you are, for a naked Company Commander, paying 30 points to give out 2 orders to two different units. If you want it beyond spitting range you need to invest in vox casters (5 points each). If you want to give an order to Conscripts, you need to roll for it. If you want to give an order to Scions, you need a 40 point Tempestor (who if he or she wants to give orders to more than one unit must give up their gun and pay 5 extra points). Orders are useful, but short of spamming a few relics and hoping for good rolls, they are limited - while say an aura will just automatically work on any unit in X inches.

I can see your basic Guardsman working at 5ppm - I still think we should wait and see how the Chapter Approved nerfs settle and the next couple of codices look though. I guess with March as the next big rebalance date that means we have time to see how things look.

Cannoness is also likely undercosted.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Whaaat, the kings of artillery faction is kings of artillery?

Say it ain't so!

The biggest issue with Guard right now is that the stuff which is undercosted is either available on only one platform(hence the undercosting--it's supposed to be specific to one or maybe units) or has a better available option from FW for a similar price(artillery batteries) that don't have the same downsides of the codex version.

Add in that people still don't seem to 'get' how Orders work when they complain about them and it just is pathetic complaining about Guard at the moment.

The reason for people complaining about Guard Kanluwen, you might be amazed to learn, is because they went from a low tier army to the highest tier army this edition. They are currently too strong, many of their units and mechanics are undercosted. Don't believe me? Look at tournament results. Look at what people are bringing to tournaments. Look at how well they are consistently performing. Something tells me that Guard players didn't suddenly become genius tacticians over night, rather their army has a distinct and clear advantage over others.

Look at tournament results, look at the lists, and see that very few lists have been strictly Guard. There was the Vostroyan list that was illegal because he had a Primaris Psyker leading his Cadian Detachment which I know of for sure.

There's been a few that were Guard with Renegades & Heretics spamming Malefics--but that isn't strictly Guard either.
There's been a ton with Guard+Inquisitors+Guilliman, but guess what...that isn't strictly Guard either.

We understand exactly how Orders work, the problem is that they're far too cheap and the units that make best use of them have been costed too low.

"The units that make best use of them" are Infantry Squads, Veteran Squads, Special Weapon Squads(LOL! Like anyone uses those, right?), Heavy Weapon Squads, and Command Squads.
Because Scions, Ratlings, Ogryns, etc can't be issued Orders by anything with <Regiment>. Scions require a Tempestor to receive Orders.

5 or even 6 PPM Infantry is the correct price, when you answered me earlier, you gave no reasons as to why it was too expensive (without a random buff that you believe must be included).

I literally did give a reason as to why it is too expensive. At 5 or 6 PPM, you're almost at/ at the same points value as Veterans(6ppm) or approaching the points value of Scions (9ppm).
Both of those units are BS3+ and Scions are rocking 4+ saves with a Deep Strike ability and starting at a squad size of 5 instead of 10.
Both of those units also get multiple special weapons in their squads.

You're also getting close to the points value of a Tau Fire Warrior, of which a whole squad has the same weapon across the board meaning that the unit doesn't have to worry about a 'wasted' model like Guard do with their Sergeants lacking Lasguns when it comes to FRFSRF.

They have the same statline as units that are more expensive. Conscripts are probably too good for what they do at 4 PPM. At 3 PPM they were a joke. Grots are 3 PPM (M5", WS5+, BS4+, S2, T2, 6+ save, LD4), compare them to Conscripts and tell me how they are possibly worth the same amount of points?

Conscripts were 6" 5+/5+3/3/1/1/4/5+
Same leadership, same WS, worse BS, 1 point higher T, M, S, and Save.

They also had a rule requiring you to roll for when you attempted an Order on them, needing a 4+. Even if you failed the Officer issuing the Order was counted as having issued one and the Conscripts had no benefit applied.

Gretchin, on the other hand, if taken in a unit of 20+ get to add 1 to their CC and Shooting hit rolls.

But yes. Clearly, Conscripts were "the issue".

Martel732 wrote:
Cannoness is also likely undercosted.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

You leave my Canoness alone!

Part of the core mechanics behind Guard's playstyle is *attempting* to force your opponent to deal with your chaff units while you punch them with your heavy hitters.

In my not-so-humble-opinion, long time Guard generals have been practicing a winning strategy [board control] in 8th for several editions. It's just how the army has always worked. Except that now, it's very effective, and probably wasn't obvious to playtesters that reasonably focused on the Marine side of things. I expect that PA vs PA games are pretty well balanced, all things considered.

It's the cheap board filler that makes this strategy viable. Guardsmen can't be costed *only* on their direct offence / defence capabilities, but also on the ability to prevent efficient attacks on vulnerable, high-damage output models.

Again, this game needs to be pointed based on potential, and that would be nearly impossible given the nigh-infinite combinations of units that allies allow. Infantry can protect a single Basilisk, which isn't that big of a deal. They can also be used to protect a battery of artillery, and that is a big deal. The potential of 10 infantry to protect a single Bassie is low. The potential of 30 infantry to protect 5 Artillery pieces is VERY high. In an ideal situation, infantry are very valuable as shields. So they really need to be valued as such.

Which in turn, leads to an issue with scale. If 150 points of infantry can effectively protect another 500 points of models from dying all game, those Infantry should be worth more. Board control is more valuable than their actual stats.

But that also means that if infantry are NOT being used in that way, that they are overcosted, to account for their potential. You wouldn't see any infantry EXCEPT where they are protecting other, higher value pieces. You would ENCOURAGE static gunlines. As it is, Infantry are cheap enough to march forward to engage mid-board. As they rise in value, there's less return on that use, and so will be relegated to Artillery babysitting even more. Something to keep in mind, if you dislike facing gunlines that don't move.

7th edition was a game of mobility and "indestructibility".

8th edition is a game of board control and alpha strike, Guard's current and traditional strengths. Defense is less valuable [difference between 2+ and 3+ save is less important and thus less valuable] Mobility is valuable, but is often easily mitigated by cheap bodies that prevent ideal movement. It's a different game, and one that Elite armies are at a disadvantage at... much as low mobility, low defence armies were in 7th. Which was Guard's weakness.

The fundamental winning strategy of 40k is vastly different between 7th and 8th. Guard are powerful and in need of points adjustments [I've been a proponent of a 10% increase, at least, across the board, with a minimum 1 pt increase for all non-Veteran Infantry units].

That said, I don't think that everyone has adjusted to that new mentality. Simply put, the armies that were good in 7th are not mechanically suited to the 8th environment, so players that "Gitted Gud" in 7th with underperforming armies will now be able to transfer that skill to an edition that suits it.

8th meta is blob-star.

Guard do blob-star the best.

Martel732 wrote:
Because the pred has to sometimes move and can't ignore LoS.

Manticores are better than almost any tank in any army anywhere. They play like 180 pt models.

We've been through this. They're matching the firepower of an LRBT turret against 95% of targets, but without any of the possible 3 other weapons (sponson and hull), with lower T and fewer wounds, they suffer penalties to firing if they do have to move (if something gets into the backline, not by any means impossible), and only have 4 turns of fire total over the course of a potentially 7 turn game. All it gets in return is the ability to fire without LoS. While that isn't nothing, it's highly variable depending on the opponent, board setup, terrain, deployment zones, etc. If Manticores were 180pts, you would never see one on a table.