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.

 Kanluwen wrote:

fe40k wrote:
Guardsman are 5ppm models, full stop.

Prove it. I can prove they're not. Neophyte Hybrids are the same statline as a Guardsman but with LD7/8(Guardsmen are 6/7 when their Sergeant is alive). Neophytes are 5ppm.

Punisher Heavy40 tanks are not ok either - in fact, there's a fair number of other Guard things that are also a bit over the top.

Punishers are S5 AP0 D1 with a 24" range.

It's a fricking Boltgun with Heavy 20 that, if staying below a certain Movement Value, gets to fire its turret weapon twice. If a Punisher is OP then christ, what you must think of Tactical Marine spam!

Is Guard the only faction that has overperforming/underpriced units? No. They're also not the only faction going to get nerfed.

Until we see Dark Reapers or Guilliman or Assault Cannon Razorbacks or Mortarion or Magnus get MEANINGFUL nerfs? Yeah. We kinda are.
Guilliman went up 25 points...14.4% of his initial points cost.
A Primaris Psyker went from 28 to 38ppm.

Just because XYZ is nerfed multiple times in a row does NOT mean it's not warrented - sometimes it really is.

By that same vein, sometimes XYZ is nerfed multiple times in a row because someone thinks it's the problem--but it isn't.

Seriously, try to look at this game through a non-imperial/non-biased lens; some things ARE overperforming, or underpriced - faction is irrelevant with these facts. It's not the end of the world if your army gets nerfed - it feels like it sucks, but if it's better for the game's health; so be it. I'd rather have them attempt to make a balanced game than cater to everyone's emotional whims.

Then I expect Dark Reapers to get nerfed into the fething GROUND. They should get nerfed so fething hard they come out of the other side of the planet. They should get nerfed so hard they never show back up in a list until 10th edition.

I mean, if we want to talk about things that are "overperforming and underpriced"...that's where you fething start to look.

No Orders, No Stratagems, No Regimental Tactics, fewer weapon options and practically no sinergies and they still cost 1 point more...rotfl

 Kanluwen wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
5 ppm is really about right for them. They'll still be really good. Cheap 5+ wounds are great. I;m also awaiting a much needed nerf to scion command squads.

5ppm and 4ppm for Guardsmen and Conscripts would be right...if Commissars hadn't gotten absolutely shanked months ago and remained absolute garbage.
5ppm and 4ppm for Guardsmen and Conscripts would be right...if they had a feature similar to Camo Cloaks where they got to add 2 points to their saves while in Cover or if they had a Cult Ambush styled rule.


As it stands, 5ppm and 4ppm is absolute garbage and anyone who feels it's "appropriate" needs to stop commenting on Guard related threads.

Sounds and looks like somebody got real mad cause he went out and bough the 300 man guard blob, get real man. This guy is just pointing out his opinion. Dont attack people like i jokingly did you.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Prove it. I can prove they're not. Neophyte Hybrids are the same statline as a Guardsman but with LD7/8(Guardsmen are 6/7 when their Sergeant is alive). Neophytes are 5ppm.

They don't have a codex yet. Bad comparison.

Punishers are S5 AP0 D1 with a 24" range.

It's a fricking Boltgun with Heavy 20 that, if staying below a certain Movement Value, gets to fire its turret weapon twice. If a Punisher is OP then christ, what you must think of Tactical Marine spam!

Slow down there.

LRBT with PGC is 150. 40 S5 shots, 20 hits, 13 wounds vs MEQ.

150 points is 12 marines at best. Even if they were in double tap range...they come in way less...24 shots, 16 hits, 8 wounds

Both those units have the same number of wounds. One has T8 though.

One interesting point to me about guardsmen is how they're being used. In IG armies themselves, nobody is really taking more than the minimum necessary to fill out a detachment most of the time, and rarely ever maxing them out, and generally people arent tripping over themselves to find ways to fit in more. Basically, they're not being spammed for their own sake, they're basically taken because they have to be taken and just happen to be good in the process. Nobody is fielding armies of 200 guardsmen.

In this regard, them moving to 5ppm isn't going to change much for most people either way. It's not going to ruin guard armies, and its not going to suddenly make other stuff viable, and its not really going to make them any worse screeners. Most armies arent built around enough guardsmen that they cant just jigger some options and swap a couple weapons and emerge mostly at the same point they were before, the archetypal Brigade usually may go up 60pts at 1850/2k? Within the context of IG armies, I don't think this will have the effect most people either dread or hope for. Mostly, if true, it's likely a reflexive response to a much bemoaned by ultimately minor issue.

The problem appears to be with the Soup lists, where the razor thin margin is much more important to inclusion and people are taking them specifically to cover (largely otherwise intended) capability gaps. This has been an issue with multiple units now for almost six goddamn years and three editions now because armies are still largely designed as self contained forces with inherent weaknesses and strengths, but then the army construction rules allows you to basically toss those out the window.

By the same token, if this change really is coming down, it will make the 4th major nerf to basic IG troops in about 8 months, more major changes of that sort than any army has had in 40k's history ever in such a timespan (or hell even the span of an edition), especially to such core elements. First the Codex changes to Conscripts from the Index (reduced squad size and 50% chance of orders failing), then the Commissar changes, then the Conscript price increase, and now an Infantry Squad price increase. For a game where this army has gone literally 6 years without any updates before (and others over a decade), an army that has traditonally been rather mediocre or outright awful through most of the game's history (especially the units in question here), and where latest event results dont bear out IG being particularly head of the pack, it's not hard to see where players would get frustrated, especially when there are other units in much more immediate dire need of attention in both directions (Id nerf the shadowsword before Infantry Squads, Reapers before either, and redo the entire GK costing lineup before any of those). Basically, having this many changes to such core units this quickly makes it appear that GW is basically just swatting randomly at stuff, without taking time to consider ramifications (especially notable when they made conscripts 4ppm next to 4ppm Infantry Squads and dint make then 5ppm change then) and the fast pace of disruption is irritating in the extreme. Yearly or twice a year changes would be one thing, but having them drib and drab out in a seemingly haphazard manner ever couple months is abysmal execution, which, sadly, is tradition with GW.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
ITT:

"Hordes are too good because my army can't deal with it."

"My army has dark reapers."

Yeah my army can't kill hordes too if I just bring lascannons.

Nah, Eldar have no problem agaisn't hordes, believe me. You won't see any Eldar Player complaining about Hordes

 Galas wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
ITT:

"Hordes are too good because my army can't deal with it."

"My army has dark reapers."

Yeah my army can't kill hordes too if I just bring lascannons.

Nah, Eldar have no problem agaisn't hordes, believe me. You won't see any Eldar Player complaining about Hordes

Except the one literally in this thread complaining about hordes.

So is there a source for this?

KurtAngle2 wrote:

No Orders, No Stratagems, No Regimental Tactics, fewer weapon options and practically no sinergies and they still cost 1 point more...rotfl

A Neophyte Hybrids Squad can take:
2 models with options from the Special Weapons List(Grenade Launcher, Flamers, and Webbers)
2 models with options from the Heavy Mining Weapons (Heavy Stubbers, Mining Lasers, and Seismic Cannons)
OR
2 models can form a Heavy Weapons Team (Heavy Bolter, Lascannon, Mortar, Missile Launcher, and Autocannon)

Guard Squads can take
1 model with options from Special Weapons List(Grenade Launchers, Sniper Rifles, Flamers, Plasma Guns, or Meltaguns) and 2 models can form a Heavy Weapons Team(same options as above)
Same number of weapon options actually...although Neophyte Hybrids do also come standard with Pistols as well as Autoguns(that can be swapped for Lasguns or Shotguns).
They also get Cult Icons, allowing for rerolling Hit Rolls of 1s during the Fight Phase and "Unquestioning Loyalty" makes it so that any Genestealer Cult Infantry model can protect a Genestealer Cult character from losing a Wound on a 4+...and their 'Sergeant' equivalent is sitting at Space Marine levels of Leadership rather than Guard levels.
You also have 'Cult Ambush' allowing for you to deploy the unit in ambush instead of on the battlefield.

But yeah. You totally don't get anything special for that 1ppm.

 Grimgold wrote:
So is there a source for this?

Is "some guy who guessed well in the past" not reliable enough for you?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

I'm not actually upset that GW is trying to balance the game. I'm a bit upset that they're crowdsourcing the balance to the community, though. I know some ace Warhammer 40k players, and as you can tell by the recent LVO the ace players have moved beyond Guard as other codexes have come out, and the Guard that did show up did splendidly but not dominatingly. This tells me that there's been another meta shift since CA2017 and the recent codexes, and we should wait for it to shake out before making any rash decisions.

We've been seeing for years that the competetive scene is better at finding the broken parts of the game than the studio is (RAW vs RAI being a large part of it). Using them as a metric on what needs fixing is valid, and even if the meta has moved towards Eldar, I'm pretty sure that if we see an Eldar nerf but don't see the less balanced parts of Guard brought into line we'll just return to the pre-Eldar codex meta. So yeah, they BOTH need to see some nerfs (and some buffs on other stuff in the book to balance the "never take" vs "always take" lists).

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Instead, however, people that haven't adapted (for whatever reason, I get that some people simply can't) to the new edition and new books are allowed to dictate policy so long as they scream loud enough. It's easier to nerf guardsmen by 25% (by upping their cost) than it is to discover the unique and interesting ways that the tourney players (who no doubt had to kick some Astra Militarum ass to win LVO) have figured out to cope with the problem.

As I've said, if we only nerf the current hotness but leave the previous meta leader alone we'll just step back to whatever was best prior to the current best. So when nerfs are handed out, everything that was on the "auto-include if you want to dominate" lists between one major update and the next should all be addressed. Otherwise all the meta does is step back to the previous broken thing and we don't fix anything properly.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

I'm not actually upset that GW is trying to balance the game. I'm a bit upset that they're crowdsourcing the balance to the community, though.

You're making an assumption here, which allows you to easily wash your hands of any possible problems simply because you disagree with the change.

 Kanluwen wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

No Orders, No Stratagems, No Regimental Tactics, fewer weapon options and practically no sinergies and they still cost 1 point more...rotfl

A Neophyte Hybrids Squad can take:
2 models with options from the Special Weapons List(Grenade Launcher, Flamers, and Webbers)
2 models with options from the Heavy Mining Weapons (Heavy Stubbers, Mining Lasers, and Seismic Cannons)
OR
2 models can form a Heavy Weapons Team (Heavy Bolter, Lascannon, Mortar, Missile Launcher, and Autocannon)

Guard Squads can take
1 model with options from Special Weapons List(Grenade Launchers, Sniper Rifles, Flamers, Plasma Guns, or Meltaguns) and 2 models can form a Heavy Weapons Team(same options as above)
Same number of weapon options actually...although Neophyte Hybrids do also come standard with Pistols as well as Autoguns(that can be swapped for Lasguns or Shotguns).
They also get Cult Icons, allowing for rerolling Hit Rolls of 1s during the Fight Phase and "Unquestioning Loyalty" makes it so that any Genestealer Cult Infantry model can protect a Genestealer Cult character from losing a Wound on a 4+...and their 'Sergeant' equivalent is sitting at Space Marine levels of Leadership rather than Guard levels.
You also have 'Cult Ambush' allowing for you to deploy the unit in ambush instead of on the battlefield.

But yeah. You totally don't get anything special for that 1ppm.

Special weapons are useless, I see no Plasma/Melta there.

Aside from the Mining Laser (Lascannon with half the range and D3 damage) all other Mining Weapons are terrible for their points cost.

The HWT is the same as guard but it costs MORE than 2 guards forming a HWT.

The Cult Icon costs 10 points and is useless on shooting models.

Unquestioning Loyalty, unless a Character is fighting in CQC, does not provide anything meaningful with the current character targeting system.

Cult Ambush is random and you still pay for it even if you're using a Vehicle (not even stating the need for 50% of your army to be deployed immediately)

+1 Leadership is not worth 1 point over a guardsman (and don't let me get started on the lack of automorale pass that the Cult lacks expect for 6" bubble near the Patriarch...)

 Vaktathi wrote:
One interesting point to me about guardsmen is how they're being used. In IG armies themselves, nobody is really taking more than the minimum necessary to fill out a detachment most of the time, and rarely ever maxing them out, and generally people arent tripping over themselves to find ways to fit in more. Basically, they're not being spammed for their own sake, they're basically taken because they have to be taken and just happen to be good in the process. Nobody is fielding armies of 200 guardsmen.

In this regard, them moving to 5ppm isn't going to change much for most people either way. It's not going to ruin guard armies, and its not going to suddenly make other stuff viable, and its not really going to make them any worse screeners. Most armies arent built around enough guardsmen that they cant just jigger some options and swap a couple weapons and emerge mostly at the same point they were before, the archetypal Brigade usually may go up 60pts at 1850/2k? Within the context of IG armies, I don't think this will have the effect most people either dread or hope for. Mostly, if true, it's likely a reflexive response to a much bemoaned by ultimately minor issue.

The problem appears to be with the Soup lists, where the razor thin margin is much more important to inclusion and people are taking them specifically to cover (largely otherwise intended) capability gaps. This has been an issue with multiple units now for almost six goddamn years and three editions now because armies are still largely designed as self contained forces with inherent weaknesses and strengths, but then the army construction rules allows you to basically toss those out the window.

By the same token, if this change really is coming down, it will make the 4th major nerf to basic IG troops in about 8 months, more major changes of that sort than any army has had in 40k's history ever in such a timespan (or hell even the span of an edition), especially to such core elements. First the Codex changes to Conscripts from the Index (reduced squad size and 50% chance of orders failing), then the Commissar changes, then the Conscript price increase, and now an Infantry Squad price increase. For a game where this army has gone literally 6 years without any updates before (and others over a decade), an army that has traditonally been rather mediocre or outright awful through most of the game's history (especially the units in question here), and where latest event results dont bear out IG being particularly head of the pack, it's not hard to see where players would get frustrated, especially when there are other units in much more immediate dire need of attention in both directions (Id nerf the shadowsword before Infantry Squads, Reapers before either, and redo the entire GK costing lineup before any of those). Basically, having this many changes to such core units this quickly makes it appear that GW is basically just swatting randomly at stuff, without taking time to consider ramifications (especially notable when they made conscripts 4ppm next to 4ppm Infantry Squads and dint make then 5ppm change then) and the fast pace of disruption is irritating in the extreme. Yearly or twice a year changes would be one thing, but having them drib and drab out in a seemingly haphazard manner ever couple months is abysmal execution, which, sadly, is tradition with GW.

I think Commisars should be un-nerfed but not to his previous state. A normal commisar should be 24-26 points and kill a dude to reduce morale loses by 1d6 (And he can affect more than one unit). Make Lord Commisars do the same but with 2d6 and Yarrick with 3d6.

And, now this is in general, one shouldn't use Tactical Marines as a measure of balance. The Tactical Marine or generic space marine statline is unbalanceable. Its horrible from a design standpoint. Its over, finito. Space Marines are dead. Its the statline of a generalist that can't do anything good.

Thats why the only units with the Space Marine statline that are competitive have a ton of special rules on top. But you can't do that for basic infantry. If you wan't to nerf Imperial Guard, ok, thats fine. And I agree, because compared with Hormagaunts, Termagaunts, Fire Warrios ,Necron Warriors, Kabalite Warriors, etc... they are much better for a inferior cost. But don't compare them with Tactical Marines. Because TAC Marines are a failure from a design standpoint. In the other hand, the Primaris statline and weapons solve all of those problems, and thats a statline that you can give a fair cost in the context of the game, and with enough design space.

 Vaktathi wrote:

In this regard, them moving to 5ppm isn't going to change much for most people either way. It's not going to ruin guard armies, and its not going to suddenly make other stuff viable, and its not really going to make them any worse screeners. Most armies arent built around enough guardsmen that they cant just jigger some options and swap a couple weapons and emerge mostly at the same point they were before, the archetypal Brigade usually may go up 60pts at 1850/2k? Within the context of IG armies, I don't think this will have the effect most people either dread or hope for. Mostly, if true, it's likely a reflexive response to a much bemoaned by ultimately minor issue.

In lists where people are packing in as much "good stuff" as they can 30 to 60 points means that a whole other unit needs to be forced out, heavy weapons dropped, CP lost, etc. It does little to hurt pure IG like you say, but the soup lists are going to have a harder time having their cake and eating it, too.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

I'm not actually upset that GW is trying to balance the game. I'm a bit upset that they're crowdsourcing the balance to the community, though. I know some ace Warhammer 40k players, and as you can tell by the recent LVO the ace players have moved beyond Guard as other codexes have come out, and the Guard that did show up did splendidly but not dominatingly. This tells me that there's been another meta shift since CA2017 and the recent codexes, and we should wait for it to shake out before making any rash decisions.

We've been seeing for years that the competetive scene is better at finding the broken parts of the game than the studio is (RAW vs RAI being a large part of it). Using them as a metric on what needs fixing is valid, and even if the meta has moved towards Eldar, I'm pretty sure that if we see an Eldar nerf but don't see the less balanced parts of Guard brought into line we'll just return to the pre-Eldar codex meta. So yeah, they BOTH need to see some nerfs (and some buffs on other stuff in the book to balance the "never take" vs "always take" lists).

The problem is they're not using the competitive players. I don't know any competitive player who called for further nerfing to Imperial Guard after Chapter Approved 2017 hit the highlights. I know a bunch of people here on Dakkadakka did, who have probably never competed at NOVA or LVO or the tournament circuit in their lives. And a few people on Facebook made some memes. After CA2017, though, the competitive blogs mostly moved on to other things, job done. There was no major tournament after CA2017 (that I know of) that really tested the guard nerfs from it, except LVO. The Guard got nerfs in CA2017, and LVO would've been the test to see if those nerfs made them more balanced. I actually think they did, with the top mono-guard player coming in something like 21st. That's a good showing, but not a dominating one. Nerfs were handed out in CA2017, and were not tested. Now that IG have been to their first major tournament since CA2017 and got 21st, I'd say they're probably adequate but still a bit good, which is not the situation to start upping the costs of their most basic troops choice, lol.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Instead, however, people that haven't adapted (for whatever reason, I get that some people simply can't) to the new edition and new books are allowed to dictate policy so long as they scream loud enough. It's easier to nerf guardsmen by 25% (by upping their cost) than it is to discover the unique and interesting ways that the tourney players (who no doubt had to kick some Astra Militarum ass to win LVO) have figured out to cope with the problem.

As I've said, if we only nerf the current hotness but leave the previous meta leader alone we'll just step back to whatever was best prior to the current best. So when nerfs are handed out, everything that was on the "auto-include if you want to dominate" lists between one major update and the next should all be addressed. Otherwise all the meta does is step back to the previous broken thing and we don't fix anything properly.

But Guard did see nerfs since they were the previous meta leader in CA2017, and the meta hasn't had time to shake out since then I don't think to reveal the new leader. Maybe it still would have been guard, maybe it would have been nids? Who knows! Better nerf guard again, because waiting for more information after the first round of nerfs is too hard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

I'm not actually upset that GW is trying to balance the game. I'm a bit upset that they're crowdsourcing the balance to the community, though.

You're making an assumption here, which allows you to easily wash your hands of any possible problems simply because you disagree with the change.

What assumption am I making? Would you argue that GW is not balancing things based on community input?

Special Characters are breaking things in Soup, not specific factions. There are multiple rage filled threads over that topic.

IG going to 5ppm is ok I guess, I always thought it was odd that orders just "go off" now, in the past it was some kind of stat roll/check.

There are some really nasty combos for lasguns in this edition. Vostroyans with FRSR can throw down 36 shots at 18 inches with 9 infantry. It costs nothing to do so, no CP, no check, it just "goes".

Commissars aren't really busted, they just are not automatic like before, you really shouldn't put them next to a large squad anyway. They are a good Plasma Pistol or Power Weapon carrying support model, personally I like my warlord to be a lord commissar with the master of command ability, much less likely to fail that test with Ld 9 bubble and the reroll. (And is more survibable and punchy then the Company Command unit.)

The problem is they're not using the competitive players. I don't know any competitive player who called for further nerfing to Imperial Guard after Chapter Approved 2017 hit the highlights. I know a bunch of people here on Dakkadakka did, who have probably never competed at NOVA or LVO or the tournament circuit in their lives. And a few people on Facebook made some memes. After CA2017, though, the competitive blogs mostly moved on to other things, job done. There was no major tournament after CA2017 (that I know of) that really tested the guard nerfs from it, except LVO. The Guard got nerfs in CA2017, and LVO would've been the test to see if those nerfs made them more balanced. I actually think they did, with the top mono-guard player coming in something like 21st. That's a good showing, but not a dominating one. Nerfs were handed out in CA2017, and were not tested. Now that IG have been to their first major tournament since CA2017 and got 21st, I'd say they're probably adequate but still a bit good, which is not the situation to start upping the costs of their most basic troops choice, lol.

This entire post is full of faulty assumptions and conjecture. GW did test these things, GW did get feedback from tournies, GW did think about this. Just because YOU did not get this information directly from them does not mean those things did not happen. Additionally, there are more tournies in the world than the ITC circuit in the USA. From a stats/balance perspective, LVO is a fantastic gauge of the performance of a rule set imo.

So, until this becomes a reality, there's no reason to panic.

Imperial Soup, Chaos Soup, and Eldar are simply too strong relative to the field.

There's nothing wrong with toning these factions down slightly so that the rest of us can compete.

Your 5 squads of guardsmen now cost 250 points rather than 200. Not exactly a major change. Bring 1 less squad and you're points neutral.

 Marmatag wrote:
So, until this becomes a reality, there's no reason to panic.

Imperial Soup, Chaos Soup, and Eldar are simply too strong relative to the field.

There's nothing wrong with toning these factions down slightly so that the rest of us can compete.

Adding 25% to the basic cost of an entire faction's troops choice isn't a slight nerf, lol.

Space Marine players would riot if Tactical Marines went up to 16 points.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
So, until this becomes a reality, there's no reason to panic.

Imperial Soup, Chaos Soup, and Eldar are simply too strong relative to the field.

There's nothing wrong with toning these factions down slightly so that the rest of us can compete.

Adding 25% to the basic cost of an entire faction's troops choice isn't a slight nerf, lol.

Space Marine players would riot if Tactical Marines went up to 16 points.

It isn't a nerf if the unit is underpriced from the beginning

It's a nerf. A justifiable one.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
So, until this becomes a reality, there's no reason to panic.

Imperial Soup, Chaos Soup, and Eldar are simply too strong relative to the field.

There's nothing wrong with toning these factions down slightly so that the rest of us can compete.

Adding 25% to the basic cost of an entire faction's troops choice isn't a slight nerf, lol.

Space Marine players would riot if Tactical Marines went up to 16 points.

Honestly it's slight and has been pointed out (but you ignored) that for a pure-Guard player it basically will change next to nothing in the list (just change some load outs around and you're likely to see no changes to pure Guard armies) but it's going to push Guard soups down.

Marines seeing a points increase takes a mediocre army and makes it bad. Guard seeing a points increase takes a great army and at WORST makes it good instead.

 Kanluwen wrote:

fe40k wrote:
Guardsman are 5ppm models, full stop.

Prove it. I can prove they're not. Neophyte Hybrids are the same statline as a Guardsman but with LD7/8(Guardsmen are 6/7 when their Sergeant is alive). Neophytes are 5ppm.

Grots are S2/T2/BS4+/SV6+/LD4, at 3ppm. For 1ppm, you get +1S, +1T, +1SV, +6/7LD, plus 12" Range//+1 shot on the Guardsman Lasgun; that's before access to orders or regiments. Don't underestimate how much stronger having a 5+ makes your units, especially at such a cheap PPM.

But there's something to be said about Grots in general; they're probably overpriced to begin with - I'd probably drop them to 2PPM, and shift the 10/30 point cost onto the Runtherd unit; that leaves them as a cheapo screening unit, that dies in droves (T/LD) to anything that looks it's way as well as morale kills, but allows them to have more staying power if the Ork player takes a Runtherd (at cost).

Look, 4ppm for SV5+, BS4+, Lasgun, orders/regiments; it's a fantastic value. I'll come back with more comparisons later.

Punisher Heavy40 tanks are not ok either - in fact, there's a fair number of other Guard things that are also a bit over the top.

Punishers are S5 AP0 D1 with a 24" range.

It's a fricking Boltgun with Heavy 20 that, if staying below a certain Movement Value, gets to fire its turret weapon twice. If a Punisher is OP then christ, what you must think of Tactical Marine spam!

Heavy 20/40 on a T8 chassis with BS4+, that can be improved/buffed (regiments, tank commander, orders); all for pretty cheap. It murders any infantry squad it comes across, and at no real cost, each turn. Plus, it requires the enemies precious anti-tank resources to really deal with it which diverts fire away from more important units.

What other factions get that amount of firepower, for that amount of points? This is a legitimate question - I'm curious. Maybe Tyranid Termagaunts?

Is Guard the only faction that has overperforming/underpriced units? No. They're also not the only faction going to get nerfed.

Until we see Dark Reapers or Guilliman or Assault Cannon Razorbacks or Mortarion or Magnus get MEANINGFUL nerfs? Yeah. We kinda are.
Guilliman went up 25 points...14.4% of his initial points cost.
A Primaris Psyker went from 28 to 38ppm.

I'll agree with you - Dark Reapers, Gulliman, AC Razorbacks, Mortarion/Magnus DEFINITELY need nerfs//points increases. I'm not happy with how Gulliman got away with no meaningful nerfs despite everything he brings; AC Razorbacks are too insane for their points costs (in a way thats similar to a Punisher Russ), and Dark Reapers needs a hike for how much they do; at so little a cost.

We're in agreement that more meaningful nerfs need to happen to other factions. I don't feel the Commissar nerf was unwarrented, the Psyker nerf can probably be reverted a bit (~5 points?) if the Beta Smite rules (-1 to casting roll per smite attempted in a round) get added to the game.

Just because XYZ is nerfed multiple times in a row does NOT mean it's not warrented - sometimes it really is.

By that same vein, sometimes XYZ is nerfed multiple times in a row because someone thinks it's the problem--but it isn't.

Also agreed; sometimes things are overnerfed. It's part of the balance process. Sometimes they're addressing the wrong portion of a unit or unit combination that is making something unnecessarily strong - GW has a terrible balancing record; but I can't fault them for finally trying this time around.

It's a learning process for them; they clearly haven't been practicing in the X years this game's been around.

Seriously, try to look at this game through a non-imperial/non-biased lens; some things ARE overperforming, or underpriced - faction is irrelevant with these facts. It's not the end of the world if your army gets nerfed - it feels like it sucks, but if it's better for the game's health; so be it. I'd rather have them attempt to make a balanced game than cater to everyone's emotional whims.

Then I expect Dark Reapers to get nerfed into the fething GROUND. They should get nerfed so fething hard they come out of the other side of the planet. They should get nerfed so hard they never show back up in a list until 10th edition.

I mean, if we want to talk about things that are "overperforming and underpriced"...that's where you fething start to look.

Dark Reapers don't deserved to be unusable because they're overperforming now - that's not good balance. They deserved to be balanced, and points appropriate, like any other unit in this game.

Problem is, GW doesn't have a calculation they use - it's all "this feels right"; they admitted this already.

Just be wary not to let your emotions get in the way of being reasonable when talking about units; something does not deserved to be removed just because it's overpowered/underpriced.

KurtAngle2 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
So, until this becomes a reality, there's no reason to panic.

Imperial Soup, Chaos Soup, and Eldar are simply too strong relative to the field.

There's nothing wrong with toning these factions down slightly so that the rest of us can compete.

Adding 25% to the basic cost of an entire faction's troops choice isn't a slight nerf, lol.

Space Marine players would riot if Tactical Marines went up to 16 points.

It isn't a nerf if the unit is underpriced from the beginning

Martel732 wrote:It's a nerf. A justifiable one.

It's absolutely a nerf.

And whether it's justifiable remains to be seen because we need data.

But its anything but "slight".

Martel732 wrote:
It's a nerf. A justifiable one.

A "nerf" in its form, not in the substance

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
So, until this becomes a reality, there's no reason to panic.

Imperial Soup, Chaos Soup, and Eldar are simply too strong relative to the field.

There's nothing wrong with toning these factions down slightly so that the rest of us can compete.

Adding 25% to the basic cost of an entire faction's troops choice isn't a slight nerf, lol.

Space Marine players would riot if Tactical Marines went up to 16 points.

Because your regular Tactical Marine is already expensive. 5 ppm does not break the Guard.

Soup is an easy fix, but few want to acknowledge that fluff based special characters have zero place in competitive settings lol.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
So, until this becomes a reality, there's no reason to panic.

Imperial Soup, Chaos Soup, and Eldar are simply too strong relative to the field.

There's nothing wrong with toning these factions down slightly so that the rest of us can compete.

Adding 25% to the basic cost of an entire faction's troops choice isn't a slight nerf, lol.

Space Marine players would riot if Tactical Marines went up to 16 points.

Except the percentage will always be huge when the unit is costed so cheaply. Going from 4ppm to 5ppm Guardsmen is indeed a very slight nerf. It is the smallest nerf possible, actually.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
So, until this becomes a reality, there's no reason to panic.

Imperial Soup, Chaos Soup, and Eldar are simply too strong relative to the field.

There's nothing wrong with toning these factions down slightly so that the rest of us can compete.

Adding 25% to the basic cost of an entire faction's troops choice isn't a slight nerf, lol.

Space Marine players would riot if Tactical Marines went up to 16 points.

Honestly it's slight and has been pointed out (but you ignored) that for a pure-Guard player it basically will change next to nothing in the list (just change some load outs around and you're likely to see no changes to pure Guard armies) but it's going to push Guard soups down.

Marines seeing a points increase takes a mediocre army and makes it bad. Guard seeing a points increase takes a great army and at WORST makes it good instead.

I actually was the first one to point out it wouldn't affect mono-guard lists so much, so yeah, not ignoring it.

And it's really not slight. It is in a casual perspective, but for people trying to hit the top tables at tournaments, it's crippling, which is why it affects soup so much in the first place. A "slight" nerf would be making Lasguns Str 2, or something.

Guys, they nerfed Brimstones increasing their price 50%. They survived.

Making the Guardsmen Str 2 or WS 5+ would be probably the smallest nerf I can think of

 Marmatag wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
So, until this becomes a reality, there's no reason to panic.

Imperial Soup, Chaos Soup, and Eldar are simply too strong relative to the field.

There's nothing wrong with toning these factions down slightly so that the rest of us can compete.

Adding 25% to the basic cost of an entire faction's troops choice isn't a slight nerf, lol.

Space Marine players would riot if Tactical Marines went up to 16 points.

Except the percentage will always be huge when the unit is costed so cheaply. Going from 4ppm to 5ppm Guardsmen is indeed a very slight nerf. It is the smallest nerf possible, actually.

No its not.

You could easily type "4.2" in the "Points Per Model" section of the Codex and have Guardsmen cost 42 points for 10.