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.

The problem is when these GW folks listen to screaming masses and adjust points based on that alone. ESPECIALLY when there are STILL things which require actual FAQs. Guard have had many units nerfed into uselessness and we still require rules clarifications. That's my problem with all this. GW has clearly overstretched their capabilities and not done their due diligence with rules writing or playtesting. I'm still disgruntled that I need all these FAQs and points changes written in my codex.

 Colonel Cross wrote:
The problem is when these GW folks listen to screaming masses and adjust points based on that alone. ESPECIALLY when there are STILL things which require actual FAQs. Guard have had many units nerfed into uselessness and we still require rules clarifications. That's my problem with all this. GW has clearly overstretched their capabilities and not done their due diligence with rules writing or playtesting. I'm still disgruntled that I need all these FAQs and points changes written in my codex.

Which units have been nerfed to uselessness?

Conscripts are tougher to justify when compared to Guardsman at the moment; but a 30man squad size still useful in its own ways (especially when you can still make them Morale immune/50% orders) - if Guardsman ever go up to 5ppm, perhaps Conscripts will stay at 4ppm.

Commissars are hard to find a place for, sure; but something DID need to be done about cheapo, morale immune, massive squads receiving perfect orders everytime.

Anything else?

You seen anyone use a heavy mortar? Lol. They were bad before their price increase.

Ordana wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Eldar need nerfs. Not AM.

This topic is about changes to Guard. No one here has denied that Eldar needs tweaks aswell. Nor does tweaking Guard imply that Eldar will not be tweaked aswell.

Thank you for your insight?

Kanluwen wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Dark reapers need a nerf. IG needs a few tweaks still.

Nah.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ordana wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Eldar need nerfs. Not AM.

This topic is about changes to Guard. No one here has denied that Eldar needs tweaks aswell. Nor does tweaking Guard imply that Eldar will not be tweaked aswell.

Actually, yeah. It does. Because at this point Guard have seen more changes than the past three iterations of the Eldar book has.

Christ, Conscripts and Commissars have seen more changes than most of the Eldar books have.

What he said.

fe40k wrote:

Commissars are hard to find a place for, sure; but something DID need to be done about cheapo, morale immune, massive squads receiving perfect orders everytime.

Anything else?

So is Synapse getting nerfed? The Iyanden trait?

 Colonel Cross wrote:
You seen anyone use a heavy mortar? Lol. They were bad before their price increase.

You're using a Forgeworld model as an example? That's just bad faith, practically no one has the model. I could complain all day about my CODEX.

 Byte wrote:

Ordana wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Eldar need nerfs. Not AM.

This topic is about changes to Guard. No one here has denied that Eldar needs tweaks aswell. Nor does tweaking Guard imply that Eldar will not be tweaked aswell.

Thank you for your insight?

Kanluwen wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Dark reapers need a nerf. IG needs a few tweaks still.

Nah.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ordana wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Eldar need nerfs. Not AM.

This topic is about changes to Guard. No one here has denied that Eldar needs tweaks aswell. Nor does tweaking Guard imply that Eldar will not be tweaked aswell.

Actually, yeah. It does. Because at this point Guard have seen more changes than the past three iterations of the Eldar book has.

Christ, Conscripts and Commissars have seen more changes than most of the Eldar books have.

What he said.

IG book is a bit more than a month older and we just had the first major tournament where reapers were shining. Also index IG was notably decent with infantry.

Daedalus81 wrote:

IG book is a bit more than a month older and we just had the first major tournament where reapers were shining. Also index IG was notably decent with infantry.

Oh please. We didn't even get a month before the Commissar nerf, and Conscripts saw a significant change from Index to Codex.

Codex: Astra Militarum went up for preorder on September 30th, 2017.
The FAQ happened on October 22nd, 2017.

Huh, I thought this thread was dead, did an actual reliable rumor pop up yet or are we still arguing over nothing?

fe40k wrote:

 Colonel Cross wrote:
The problem is when these GW folks listen to screaming masses and adjust points based on that alone. ESPECIALLY when there are STILL things which require actual FAQs. Guard have had many units nerfed into uselessness and we still require rules clarifications. That's my problem with all this. GW has clearly overstretched their capabilities and not done their due diligence with rules writing or playtesting. I'm still disgruntled that I need all these FAQs and points changes written in my codex.

Which units have been nerfed to uselessness?

Conscripts are tougher to justify when compared to Guardsman at the moment; but a 30man squad size still useful in its own ways (especially when you can still make them Morale immune/50% orders) - if Guardsman ever go up to 5ppm, perhaps Conscripts will stay at 4ppm.

Commissars are hard to find a place for, sure; but something DID need to be done about cheapo, morale immune, massive squads receiving perfect orders everytime.

Anything else?

They still have a use, but I'd probably lump Veterans into the list of things nerfed. Pre-codex they were kind of hard to justify bringing vs Scions or infantry, but with the increased prices on their weaponry, it just becomes easier to pass on them.

Colonel Cross wrote:You seen anyone use a heavy mortar? Lol. They were bad before their price increase.

Just like I complain when people were talking of Elysians and such as proof that Guard is op, I think bringing up non-codex units is proof that Guard is overnerfed is a bad idea.

 Kanluwen wrote:

fe40k wrote:

Commissars are hard to find a place for, sure; but something DID need to be done about cheapo, morale immune, massive squads receiving perfect orders everytime.

Anything else?

So is Synapse getting nerfed? The Iyanden trait?

Synapse can be shot down; along with Gaunts are only 6+SV and no orders - plus, all the gaunts are super short range. Also, Tyranids can't parking lot/gunline like IG can.

Iyanden trait is on 8PPM Eldar, not 4ppm Guardsman with equal if not more firepower; it's not a good comparison.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

IG book is a bit more than a month older and we just had the first major tournament where reapers were shining. Also index IG was notably decent with infantry.

Oh please. We didn't even get a month before the Commissar nerf, and Conscripts saw a significant change from Index to Codex.

Codex: Astra Militarum went up for preorder on September 30th, 2017.
The FAQ happened on October 22nd, 2017.

Agreed, pretty weak point of view. Reapers have been broken from go. If you need to follow LVO to know that, you don't play enough 40k. Sometimes saying nothing is just better...

 Kanluwen wrote:

fe40k wrote:

Commissars are hard to find a place for, sure; but something DID need to be done about cheapo, morale immune, massive squads receiving perfect orders everytime.

Anything else?

So is Synapse getting nerfed? The Iyanden trait?

Those armies don't exactly have access to good cheap ranged units. Guardians are 4 ppm more expensive than conscripts with better WS/BS, but a much shorter weapon range (12"). Termagaunts are also 4ppm, but once again, with a worse weapon range (12") and slightly better BS, while getting a worse armor save (6+). Against equal points of either of those guardsmen will outshoot them easily.

At 3PPM, conscripts were hands down the best troops. At 4ppm they're still ok, just overshadowed by guardsmen who are also 4ppm. Guardsmen could be 5ppm and still be very solid troops.

fe40k wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

fe40k wrote:

Commissars are hard to find a place for, sure; but something DID need to be done about cheapo, morale immune, massive squads receiving perfect orders everytime.

Anything else?

So is Synapse getting nerfed? The Iyanden trait?

Synapse can be shot down; along with Gaunts are only 6+SV and no orders - plus, all the gaunts are super short range. Also, Tyranids can't parking lot/gunline like IG can.

Officers can be shot down too. Commissars could be shot down. They just don't have the Wounds of the 'supersynapse' critters; but let's not forget that there are actual units in the Tyranid book that have Synapse on them.

Add to it that you have the Sporocyst which boost up Synapse range or Synapse being on things that are able to pack heavy weapons and it becomes understandable why some of the bigger beasts can be singled out.

Iyanden trait is on 8PPM Eldar, not 4ppm Guardsman with equal if not more firepower; it's not a good comparison.

Same ability; perfect example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wolfblade wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

fe40k wrote:

Commissars are hard to find a place for, sure; but something DID need to be done about cheapo, morale immune, massive squads receiving perfect orders everytime.

Anything else?

So is Synapse getting nerfed? The Iyanden trait?

Those armies don't exactly have access to good cheap ranged units. Guardians are 4 ppm more expensive than conscripts with better WS/BS, but a much shorter weapon range (12"). Termagaunts are also 4ppm, but once again, with a worse weapon range (12") and slightly better BS, while getting a worse armor save (6+). Against equal points of either of those guardsmen will outshoot them easily.

Termagants have access to things like the "Always counts as being in cover" trait, making the "worse armor save" thing a nonstarter for an argument. Guardians having a "much shorter weapon range" is offset by the fact that they are Assault rather than Rapid Fire; meaning static numbers of shots.

At 3PPM, conscripts were hands down the best troops. At 4ppm they're still ok, just overshadowed by guardsmen who are also 4ppm. Guardsmen could be 5ppm and still be very solid troops.

I would do a "fixed that for you", but we're not supposed to. So real quick rundown...

At 3ppm, Conscripts were "hands down the best troops" for people taking allied detachments of Guard from the Index for their soup lists and for people who were playing against individuals who refused to adapt to the new game mechanics. Because of the fact that Conscripts were 3ppm and came equipped with all Lasguns, you would see people take big blobs of Conscripts, an Officer, and Commissars--allowing for the Conscripts to get FRFSRF. It was a relatively small outlay of points for something that, for whatever dumb reason, people legitimately saw as scary (remember that early 8th there were people seriously crying about Guard infantry being able to kill Land Raiders or Knights with their lasguns for whatever stupid reason) and would focus down on.

The Codex hits, Conscripts get hit with the "Can only accept Orders on a roll of 4" change--which nobody really complained about that, thinking it was a good fix to one issue(people whining that "Conscripts have too much damage output!" ) as it made them more of the meatshield unit they're meant to be.
A month later, Conscripts get bumped to 4 points and Commissars get gutted; nobody seriously takes either again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kurhanik wrote:

Colonel Cross wrote:You seen anyone use a heavy mortar? Lol. They were bad before their price increase.

Just like I complain when people were talking of Elysians and such as proof that Guard is op, I think bringing up non-codex units is proof that Guard is overnerfed is a bad idea.

Honestly, I don't think it an unreasonable thing to bring up now that Chapter Approved has points for both codex & forge world--and given that the FW units are just an iTunes purchase away.

Even at 5 ppm, IG can spend 25% of their list and basically autowin against every assault heavy list. I'm not looking for an "autowin" button. I'm not the one who removed every anti-horde weapon in the game, and then increased the AP on both the manticore and basilisk. Indirect fire needs a penalty or those tanks still need major boosts in cost.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

IG book is a bit more than a month older and we just had the first major tournament where reapers were shining. Also index IG was notably decent with infantry.

Oh please. We didn't even get a month before the Commissar nerf, and Conscripts saw a significant change from Index to Codex.

Codex: Astra Militarum went up for preorder on September 30th, 2017.
The FAQ happened on October 22nd, 2017.

You missed the point that they were good in the index. They had a lot of time to marinate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Byte wrote:

Agreed, pretty weak point of view. Reapers have been broken from go. If you need to follow LVO to know that, you don't play enough 40k. Sometimes saying nothing is just better...

No one was pumping Dark Reapers during the index like they do now or if they were they weren't topping the charts. The traits made all the difference. But if you feel like pulling up the older tournament results you're free to do so.

Martel732 wrote:
Even at 5 ppm, IG can spend 25% of their list and basically autowin against every assault heavy list. I'm not looking for an "autowin" button. I'm not the one who removed every anti-horde weapon in the game, and then increased the AP on both the manticore and basilisk. Indirect fire needs a penalty or those tanks still need major boosts in cost.

Do you think IG would be balanced if Manticores and Basilisks were removed from the codex without any other changes?

I'm just curious, because if that's the case, then perhaps upping IG infantry by 1ppm is like trying to shoot the sheep because the cow is sick.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Officers can be shot down too. Commissars could be shot down. They just don't have the Wounds of the 'supersynapse' critters; but let's not forget that there are actual units in the Tyranid book that have Synapse on them.

Commissars are characters, there are so few good snipers in the game (Tyranids don't have any as an example) so not many armies can shot down a Commissar. Commissars were simply to cheap for what they provided. Although I agree that GW was overzealous with the nerf and made them useless.

Termagants have access to things like the "Always counts as being in cover" trait, making the "worse armor save" thing a nonstarter for an argument.

Which has several limitations that make it far inferior to a natural 5+ armor save. It would be a nonstarter argument if the trait was a flat +1 to the save, but that would have been an insane trait that would have made the other Fleets irrelevant. In addition, IG has its own traits, so does Tyranids. So most of the time the Termagants are not going to be in cover, and Guardsmen will have another boosts. And that still ignoring that the Guardsmen have a better standard weapon, and the option to duplicate their firepower for basically free.

Reapers weren't broken untill the codex.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

IG book is a bit more than a month older and we just had the first major tournament where reapers were shining. Also index IG was notably decent with infantry.

Oh please. We didn't even get a month before the Commissar nerf, and Conscripts saw a significant change from Index to Codex.

Codex: Astra Militarum went up for preorder on September 30th, 2017.
The FAQ happened on October 22nd, 2017.

You missed the point that they were good in the index. They had a lot of time to marinate.

The FAQ Link wrote:Secondly, and significantly, we’ve adjusted Commissars in line with feedback from the community, playtesters and observations from competitive gaming events around the world. Commissars still provide some much-needed insulation from Morale tests, but now, Summary Execution provides a re-roll at the cost of one unfortunate Guardsman rather than totally protecting you against any and all morale.

They decided that the Conscripts would receive an "okay" fix by going from Index to Codex initially with just the "Requires a D6 roll of 4+ to receive Orders". Then on the "observations" of what was it, one event? Maybe?
They nerfed Commissars to hell and back again.

Now, if you want to try to claim that "Dark Reapers weren't good in the Index so we need more data!!11!!"--that's on you. It's a baldfaced lie, but that's on you.

 Byte wrote:

Agreed, pretty weak point of view. Reapers have been broken from go. If you need to follow LVO to know that, you don't play enough 40k. Sometimes saying nothing is just better...

No one was pumping Dark Reapers during the index like they do now. The traits made all the difference.

Uh, yeah. Yeah they were. Once we saw the first "-1 to hit" traits, Dark Reapers started showing up pretty heavily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Officers can be shot down too. Commissars could be shot down. They just don't have the Wounds of the 'supersynapse' critters; but let's not forget that there are actual units in the Tyranid book that have Synapse on them.

Commissars are characters, there are so few good snipers in the game (Tyranids don't have any as an example) so not many armies can shot down a Commissar. Commissars were simply to cheap for what they provided. Although I agree that GW was overzealous with the nerf and made them useless.

Tyranid Primes are Characters. They're expensive compared to Officers, certainly, however they do come with more than just Orders as a benefit for the points cost.

Termagants have access to things like the "Always counts as being in cover" trait, making the "worse armor save" thing a nonstarter for an argument.

Which has several limitations that make it far inferior to a natural 5+ armor save. It would be a nonstarter argument if the trait was a flat +1 to the save, but that would have been an insane trait that would have made the other Fleets irrelevant. In addition, IG has its own traits, so does Tyranids. So most of the time the Termagants are not going to be in cover, and Guardsmen will have another boosts. And that still ignoring that the Guardsmen have a better standard weapon, and the option to duplicate their firepower for basically free.

The only time you don't get the trait is:
A) If you're something with keyword "Fly"
B) You've Advanced
C) You've Charged

And for B&C, you only lose it until your next Movement Phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Even at 5 ppm, IG can spend 25% of their list and basically autowin against every assault heavy list. I'm not looking for an "autowin" button. I'm not the one who removed every anti-horde weapon in the game, and then increased the AP on both the manticore and basilisk. Indirect fire needs a penalty or those tanks still need major boosts in cost.

"Increased the AP"?

You know that Earthshakers were AP3 before, right?
And that Manticores' Storm Eagle Rockets were AP4?

Earthshakers are AP-3 now(gasp! that lines up with AP3 perfectly!)
Storm Eagle Rockets are AP-2 now(gasp! again that lines up with AP4 perfectly!)

Okay Kanluwen, I am generally on your side (though I know you'd rather not have me, I think!), but let's stop being ridiculous.

Every AP3 weapon became AP-2 (Battlecannons, Krak Missiles... the only one I can think of that didn't was the Power Sword.

Every AP4 weapon (Autocannons, Heavy Bolters, etc) became -1.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Okay Kanluwen, I am generally on your side (though I know you'd rather not have me, I think!), but let's stop being ridiculous.

Every AP3 weapon became AP-2 (Battlecannons, Krak Missiles... the only one I can think of that didn't was the Power Sword.

Every AP4 weapon (Autocannons, Heavy Bolters, etc) became -1.

Let's stop being ridiculous...and then you try to paint it as an "everything got changed!" while ignoring that those two items that Martel was whining about literally didn't change?

Not "every AP3 weapon became AP-2". They used the new edition as a way to tweak AP values. A lot of stuff that was AP5 became AP0 with the new edition, where it doesn't do any modifiers(which means it won't be as effective versus monsters or vehicles or other things with relatively high armor saves). Some stuff that was AP5 before still has a -1 modifier(Arc weapons for AdMech...which are intended to be used against vehicles).

It's important for you to know that not "every" AP<insert value here> weapon became the same as its counterpart values would be now...but the weapons that did see changes usually also saw an increase in Damage values.
Autocannons lost a point of AP but gained a point of damage.
Krak Missiles lost a point of AP but gained D6 damage values.

If one sat down and looked at these things, you'd be able to spot it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

They decided that the Conscripts would receive an "okay" fix by going from Index to Codex initially with just the "Requires a D6 roll of 4+ to receive Orders". Then on the "observations" of what was it, one event? Maybe?
They nerfed Commissars to hell and back again.

Swing and a miss again. Conscripts and commissars were strong from day 1. That would be JUNE if we

Now, if you want to try to claim that "Dark Reapers weren't good in the Index so we need more data!!11!!"--that's on you. It's a baldfaced lie, but that's on you.

I never said they weren't good. I said the traits made all the difference.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

They decided that the Conscripts would receive an "okay" fix by going from Index to Codex initially with just the "Requires a D6 roll of 4+ to receive Orders". Then on the "observations" of what was it, one event? Maybe?
They nerfed Commissars to hell and back again.

Swing and a miss again. Conscripts and commissars were strong from day 1. That would be JUNE if we

If we...what?

Conscripts were a joke unit until people started playing against soup lists while failing to understand that it wasn't just the "morale immunity"(which, again, nobody is whining about for other armies that have it).

It was the fact that people were still expecting to run up on a unit that they used to just ignore its armor save and trade shots with them like it was no big deal. At the time of the Index, you had units of 50 Conscripts that would be boosted up by Officers with FRFSRF to dump out 100 shots at over rapid fire range and then you'd have Commissars sitting in the back to keep it down to 1 model/turn being lost.

Cut to Conscripts having their unit size reduced to 20 min 30 max and can only take Orders on 4+s...people still whined thinking that they took Orders with no issue and that they'd still be fighting 50 man blobs.

Now, if you want to try to claim that "Dark Reapers weren't good in the Index so we need more data!!11!!"--that's on you. It's a baldfaced lie, but that's on you.

I never said they weren't good. I said the traits made all the difference.

Oh, and what difference was that?

That now they could get a -1 to be hit while still retaining their perk?

Yeah, the "traits" didn't make any real difference in a unit that camps in the backfield and just ignores every negative to Hit modifier.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Okay Kanluwen, I am generally on your side (though I know you'd rather not have me, I think!), but let's stop being ridiculous.

Every AP3 weapon became AP-2 (Battlecannons, Krak Missiles... the only one I can think of that didn't was the Power Sword.

Every AP4 weapon (Autocannons, Heavy Bolters, etc) became -1.

Let's stop being ridiculous...and then you try to paint it as an "everything got changed!" while ignoring that those two items that Martel was whining about literally didn't change?

Not "every AP3 weapon became AP-2". They used the new edition as a way to tweak AP values. A lot of stuff that was AP5 became AP0 with the new edition, where it doesn't do any modifiers(which means it won't be as effective versus monsters or vehicles or other things with relatively high armor saves). Some stuff that was AP5 before still has a -1 modifier(Arc weapons for AdMech...which are intended to be used against vehicles).

It's important for you to know that not "every" AP<insert value here> weapon became the same as its counterpart values would be now...but the weapons that did see changes usually also saw an increase in Damage values.
Autocannons lost a point of AP but gained a point of damage.
Krak Missiles lost a point of AP but gained D6 damage values.

If one sat down and looked at these things, you'd be able to spot it.

And manticores and basilisks gained d3 damage? Which they didn't have before?

I've sit down and looked at it, and I've noticed that there is consistency between the AP values in 7th vs. now. Hell, the Predator autocannon got buffed to high heaven and is still only AP-1, though with 3 damage. Then the Reaper autocannon got -1 AP (from AP4 also) and is only 1 damage.

Damage varies wildly, and there's no consistency, I can see. Which makes sense, since it's an all new stat. Every former AP4 weapon is now AP-1 except the Sky Eagle Missile, and every former AP3 weapon is now AP-2, except the Power Sword and the Earthshaker Cannon.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Oh, and what difference was that?

That now they could get a -1 to be hit while still retaining their perk?

Yeah, the "traits" didn't make any real difference in a unit that camps in the backfield and just ignores every negative to Hit modifier.

Army cohesion.

You can look at some October top 3s here:
http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2017/11/16/top-itc-tournament-lists-october-2017/

Lots of conscripts. commissars, and mortars. No dark reapers.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Okay Kanluwen, I am generally on your side (though I know you'd rather not have me, I think!), but let's stop being ridiculous.

Every AP3 weapon became AP-2 (Battlecannons, Krak Missiles... the only one I can think of that didn't was the Power Sword.

Every AP4 weapon (Autocannons, Heavy Bolters, etc) became -1.

Let's stop being ridiculous...and then you try to paint it as an "everything got changed!" while ignoring that those two items that Martel was whining about literally didn't change?

Not "every AP3 weapon became AP-2". They used the new edition as a way to tweak AP values. A lot of stuff that was AP5 became AP0 with the new edition, where it doesn't do any modifiers(which means it won't be as effective versus monsters or vehicles or other things with relatively high armor saves). Some stuff that was AP5 before still has a -1 modifier(Arc weapons for AdMech...which are intended to be used against vehicles).

It's important for you to know that not "every" AP<insert value here> weapon became the same as its counterpart values would be now...but the weapons that did see changes usually also saw an increase in Damage values.
Autocannons lost a point of AP but gained a point of damage.
Krak Missiles lost a point of AP but gained D6 damage values.

If one sat down and looked at these things, you'd be able to spot it.

And manticores and basilisks gained d3 damage? Which they didn't have before?
I've sit down and looked at it, and I've noticed that there is consistency between the AP values in 7th vs. now. Hell, the Predator autocannon got buffed to high heaven and is still only AP-1, though with 3 damage. Then the Reaper autocannon got -1 AP (from AP4 also) and is only 1 damage.

Damage varies wildly, and there's no consistency, I can see. Which makes sense, since it's an all new stat. Every former AP4 weapon is now AP-1 except the Sky Eagle Missile, and every former AP3 weapon is now AP-2, except the Power Sword and the Earthshaker Cannon.

There's a lot more method to the madness than you seem to be aware of.
-Blast templates and their sizes.
-Static or swing damage.
-Battlefield roles.

Sniper Rifles, for example, are AP0 (which, BTW, is the same as their previous AP values...) while being a flat Strength 4(which is a big nerf in effectiveness from the previous 4+ to Wound period) with 6+s granting a Mortal Wound.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Oh, and what difference was that?

That now they could get a -1 to be hit while still retaining their perk?

Yeah, the "traits" didn't make any real difference in a unit that camps in the backfield and just ignores every negative to Hit modifier.

Army cohesion.

You can look at some October top 3s here:
http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2017/11/16/top-itc-tournament-lists-october-2017/

Lots of conscripts. commissars, and mortars. No dark reapers.

I'm not going to look at that. I don't go to that dumpsterfire of a site.

In any regards, given that the topic you chose is literally "Top ITC Tournament lists"...which doesn't include every single game played ever, it's incomplete data.

Yes, lots changed, but I don't quite get your point.

Blast templates turned into number of shots (1 large blast is roughly 1d6, 2 large blasts roughly 2d6. This lines up well with the Manticore and Basilisk, who are 2 (average) and 1 large blast each).

Static or Swing damage is an artefact of 8th edition and never existed in 7th, so to bring it up in a comparison with 7th is more of a "LOOK OVER HERE" than it is a relevant argument. Tell me what stat in 7th matches the damage stat in 8th?

Battlefield roles have only been enhanced, not change. Do you really think the Manticore needs the same AP value as a Leman Russ's main gun for cheaper? I think AP-1 is perfectly appropriate and lines up with its 7th edition iteration nicely.

Manticore being -1 AP only would help a lot for sure.

 Kanluwen wrote:

I'm not going to look at that. I don't go to that dumpsterfire of a site.

In any regards, given that the topic you chose is literally "Top ITC Tournament lists"...which doesn't include every single game played ever, it's incomplete data.

Which is a ridiculous standard. OF COURSE if we looked at every single game ever we'd find Dark Reaper dominating someone in October, but YOU don't have that data and GW DOESN'T have that data.

What we BOTH have is conscripts, commissars, malefic lords, storm ravens, etc DOMINATING.

He's just trolling you at this point.