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.

Dandelion wrote:

 mrwhoop wrote:
Irbis mentions captains and thats the Tau commander equavalent. Leads 100 guys and should be limited. I also dont want to see 3 jp thunder hammer capts in a list (looking at you BA)

Read it again:

A) In case you haven't noticed, SM had same restriction from the start, except worse, because it was per army, not detachment,

That is a reference to the chapter master stratagem. He's brought it up a couple times.

But yes, Tau commanders are equivalent to marine captains as far as the armies are structured. If Tau commanders warrant limiting due to fluff then so do marine captains, farseers, warbosses or any other primary HQ.

The problem would of course be massively limiting army building because GW couldn't be bothered to balance a single HQ. So if GW wants to have super OP broken but limited units then fine, but at least give me normal, not broken, stuff.

Space Marines aren't proof that restrictions are acceptable either. The army that is notorious for getting a constant stream of new models is not going to care since they are swimming in options. Even if it was limited to keyword, you still have LIbrarians, Chaplains, Captains, Chapter Masters including named Chapter Masters which currently aren't limited by the Chapter Master Strategem, Lieutenants,Techmarines, and the random vehicle HQs. Most if not all of their named Chapters have at least one named character. Many of which are chapter masters that you can mix with normal captains unlike Farsight or Shadowsun who lead entire armies, but are still the same keyword as a normal Commander.This is before you take into account that they are Imperial and can invite any other imperial army to join them at the cost of chapter tactics and strategems.

I don't mind a generic HQ limit so long as the codex is built with that in mind. Space marines can take the hit because they have lots of options, but Tau don't have as many. So give Tau sub-commanders. Give them a generic tank commander. Give them something other than "just take more fireblades". (not that I don't like fireblades, but having options helps change things up)

It's irrelevant how a HQ choice is structured in the fluff.. Until a SM captain can carry 4 melta weapons it is in no way comparable to a Tau Commander or flying hive tyrant

GT finalists for GWs grand tournament got an e-mail yesterday saying that the beta rules for smite and targeting characters will be in effect for the final.

If that's any indicator of what will be in this FAQ or when it will be released I don't know.

I'd prefer to know because I don't want my list invalidated a week before the final.

 Kirasu wrote:
It's irrelevant how a HQ choice is structured in the fluff.. Until a SM captain can carry 4 melta weapons it is in no way comparable to a Tau Commander or flying hive tyrant

with 18" range and Assault no less. That is better than an entire squad of Devastators toting multi-meltas.

Name ONE SM character on level with that.

The limits aren't over the top. If they made a subcommander, it would suffer the same exact problem, just with one fewer wound and maybe a different special rule.

Or just fix commanders so that they aren't too good for points. Too hard for gw alas.

Just give us Sub-commanders in stealth suits with +3BS and I can die happy with my Shadowsun full stealth suits list.

tneva82 wrote:
Or just fix commanders so that they aren't too good for points. Too hard for gw alas.

By doing what? Giving them a gigantic points increase? A quad Fusion Blaster Coldstar costs 174 pts. That is only four points more than Pedro Kantor for an effective range of 58" Melta x4.

Like I said, there is literally no other HQ unit in the game that can mimic the output of a Commander other than a Flying Hive Tyrant.

It sucks for the people that were running five or six of them, but it is a little hard to have sympathy for them. Spam armies deserve to get the hammer dropped on them. And anyone that is running one that doesn't see that happening is delusional. And painting something doesn't really change that.

The writing has been on the wall from day one that GW is going to be treating this edition as a living ruleset and nerfing what they perceive as broken. Maybe it's warranted (my opinion) or not, but expect as a rule that if something g is being taken too much or is very strong GW is probably eyeing it for tweaks.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Or just fix commanders so that they aren't too good for points. Too hard for gw alas.

By doing what? Giving them a gigantic points increase? A quad Fusion Blaster Coldstar costs 174 pts. That is only four points more than Pedro Kantor for an effective range of 58" Melta x4.

You know why Commanders are "too good for points", right?

Because Crisis Suits are overcosted and not worth fielding...

Like I said, there is literally no other HQ unit in the game that can mimic the output of a Commander other than a Flying Hive Tyrant.

You're using one specific example in that of the "quad Fusion Blaster Coldstar"--and you're comparing it to Pedro fricking Kantor. That's like me comparing a Knight Armiger to a Shadowsword.

It sucks for the people that were running five or six of them, but it is a little hard to have sympathy for them. Spam armies deserve to get the hammer dropped on them. And anyone that is running one that doesn't see that happening is delusional. And painting something doesn't really change that.

Nobody's asking to be able to "run 5 or 6 of them" on the Tau side of things. People had asked for:
a) Crisis Suits to be worth taking so that they don't need to "run 5 or 6 of them".
b) Subcommanders to be added so that all-suit armies can be possible and reasonably fielded.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dandelion wrote:I don't mind a generic HQ limit so long as the codex is built with that in mind. Space marines can take the hit because they have lots of options, but Tau don't have as many. So give Tau sub-commanders. Give them a generic tank commander. Give them something other than "just take more fireblades". (not that I don't like fireblades, but having options helps change things up)

I'd argue that both Marines and Tau could benefit from having "a generic scout commander" as well. Something in the vein of Darkstrider for Tau and Cyrus from DoW for Marines.
I'd also argue for Skitarii to get an HQ of their own.

Kirasu wrote:It's irrelevant how a HQ choice is structured in the fluff.. Until a SM captain can carry 4 melta weapons it is in no way comparable to a Tau Commander or flying hive tyrant

Okay, so a Captain can't carry "4 melta weapons".

Many Tau players would have argued that putting 4 Fusions on a suit would do nothing but encourage the suicide drop tactics and lo and behold...

 Kanluwen wrote:

You know why Commanders are "too good for points", right?

Because Crisis Suits are overcosted and not worth fielding...

Disagree, but in any case there is little you could do to bring suits up to the level of commanders without making them broken, too. You can make suits a little better, but they'll never be better than a commander and so people will still pick the commander.

It used to be that the Scout dude for Ultramarines was a generic Scout leader (even though he wasn't in the HQ slot yet), but that codex still said to feel free to make him suit your chosen Chapter. For all its faults that codex was pretty well organized and meaningful, even if terrible on the tabletop at the end of its run.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Or just fix commanders so that they aren't too good for points. Too hard for gw alas.

By doing what? Giving them a gigantic points increase? A quad Fusion Blaster Coldstar costs 174 pts. That is only four points more than Pedro Kantor for an effective range of 58" Melta x4.

You know why Commanders are "too good for points", right?

Because Crisis Suits are overcosted and not worth fielding...

Like I said, there is literally no other HQ unit in the game that can mimic the output of a Commander other than a Flying Hive Tyrant.

You're using one specific example in that of the "quad Fusion Blaster Coldstar"--and you're comparing it to Pedro fricking Kantor. That's like me comparing a Knight Armiger to a Shadowsword.

It sucks for the people that were running five or six of them, but it is a little hard to have sympathy for them. Spam armies deserve to get the hammer dropped on them. And anyone that is running one that doesn't see that happening is delusional. And painting something doesn't really change that.

Nobody's asking to be able to "run 5 or 6 of them" on the Tau side of things. People had asked for:
a) Crisis Suits to be worth taking so that they don't need to "run 5 or 6 of them".
b) Subcommanders to be added so that all-suit armies can be possible and reasonably fielded.

Pedro Kantor costs 170 pts. A Quad Fusion Coldstar costs 174 pts. If you want to complain about units like Crisis Suits costing too many points (comparing like points-values), it is perfectly reasonable to compare two units with a similar points value from different armies. Don't even get me started on Commander Dante costing 50 pts more than a Fusionstar. Or are you arguing that Dante's one 6" Melta shot and decent melee (like he will actually get there...) is somehow on par with a Fusionstar? And cry me a river on the cost of things like Crisis Suits look high. Look at Terminators. But you don't see Terminator Captains having the ability to drop Orbital Bombardments once per turn every turn. Just because one unit is subpar for the points does not mean another unit should be broken as hell to make up for it.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

You know why Commanders are "too good for points", right?

Because Crisis Suits are overcosted and not worth fielding...

Disagree, but in any case there is little you could do to bring suits up to the level of commanders without making them broken, too. You can make suits a little better, but they'll never be better than a commander and so people will still pick the commander.

When you could do 1 Suit per slot instead of minimum of 3 Suits per slot, people did field more Suits.
Crisis Suits are 42ppm(min unit size makes that 126pts before wargear or drones--fielding them as Bodyguards makes them 45ppm instead)
Commander in XV8 is 72, XV85 is 76, and XV86 Coldstar is 90(again prices before wargear or drones).
Burst Cannons and Missile Pods add an extra 32ppm to everything(8pts/Burst Cannon 24pts/Missile Pod)--making the Crisis Suits 222pts for just the initial 3 with Burst Cannon and Missile Pods.
Commanders respectively are 104, 108, 122pts with the same setup.

So yeah, there's a lot that can be done to "make Suits a little better"--starting with dropping them to 35ppm or including the Burst Cannons and Missile Pods in their base point costs(Additionally, Fusion Blasters have to replace the initial items from a RAW standpoint, so the initial items still have to be paid for plus the Fusion Blasters at 21pts per FB).

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:It used to be that the Scout dude for Ultramarines was a generic Scout leader (even though he wasn't in the HQ slot yet), but that codex still said to feel free to make him suit your chosen Chapter. For all its faults that codex was pretty well organized and meaningful, even if terrible on the tabletop at the end of its run.

To be fair it said that with regards to all characters at the time.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Pedro Kantor costs 170 pts. A Quad Fusion Coldstar costs 174 pts.

206pts actually, since you still pay for the Burst Cannon and Missile Pod if going by RAW(in order to replace, it needs to be present at the start).

If you want to complain about units like Crisis Suits costing too many points (comparing like points-values), it is perfectly reasonable to compare two units with a similar points value from different armies. Don't even get me started on Commander Dante costing 50 pts more than a Fusionstar. Or are you arguing that Dante's one 6" Melta shot and decent melee (like he will actually get there...) is somehow on par with a Fusionstar? And cry me a river on the cost of things like Crisis Suits look high. Look at Terminators. But you don't see Terminator Captains having the ability to drop Orbital Bombardments once per turn every turn. Just because one unit is subpar for the points does not mean another unit should be broken as hell to make up for it.

a) Tau's equivalent of Orbital Bombardment is once per battle, same as yours. I'm guessing that wasn't actually your point but just to head it off at the pass in case someone else tries to make that point...
b) Nowhere did I say that the points costs for Pedro or Dante were okay. Same with Terminators. What I have said is that Crisis Suits are overpriced and there's not much of a reason to take them when you can instead take things like Fusionstars. Chill out a bit.

You're operating from the flawed assumption that because I advocated for X army I wouldn't advocate for Y to see similar treatment.
If you actually have paid attention for awhile now I've been suggesting potential Terminator buffs in the form of giving them(and Power Armored Marines in general) a FNP vs anything that is low Strength and no AP.

The way to make Crisis Suits usable vs Commanders is to separate the point costs of their weapons for +4BS models and +2BS models.

 Galas wrote:
The way to make Crisis Suits usable vs Commanders is to separate the point costs of their weapons for +4BS models and +2BS models.

That would certainly help a lot.
Though I would still like to add a weapon restriction for the hard points, as follows:
- Enforcer: Up to 3 weapons + 1 System
- Coldstar: Up to 2 weapons +1 system
- All XV8s: Up to 2 weapons +1 system
With the limitation, I would drop regular crisis suits to around 30 pts or so.

Then introduce a sub-commander with BS 3+ with some neat aura. Allow commanders to take any suit or most suits (stealth for example)

I would also like to see the enforcer and coldstar given an elite slot entry, piloted by Shas'vre. I love my coldstar but he makes a terrible commander.

A tank commander would also be neat. As would be a pathfinder leader.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

206pts actually, since you still pay for the Burst Cannon and Missile Pod if going by RAW(in order to replace, it needs to be present at the start).

I don't think that's how that works. You pay for the suits and wargear separately. If you replace gear, you only pay for the new gear.

If you're interpretation were correct then Scions would be a flat 10 pts and not 9+1 since GW rolls mandatory costs into the cost of the unit.

Dandelion wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

206pts actually, since you still pay for the Burst Cannon and Missile Pod if going by RAW(in order to replace, it needs to be present at the start).

I don't think that's how that works. You pay for the suits and wargear separately. If you replace gear, you only pay for the new gear.

If you're interpretation were correct then Scions would be a flat 10 pts and not 9+1 since GW rolls mandatory costs into the cost of the unit.

And this is where the contention comes up.
You say that "Scions would be a flat 10 pts and not 9+1"--so then what's the point (no pun intended) of the Hotshot Lasguns or Hotshot Laspistols even having point values? They're the only ones who can take them so...why not just make them 10 pts and give them their Lasguns and be done with it?

Answer: Because they're an "Elite" unit and should be paying for their gun.

In order to "replace" a thing, you have to have it to begin with. So either you've been specifically told somewhere that you don't have to pay for the initial item on the list or it's something which desperately needs a clarification. It's a question I've gotten wildly different answers to from GW studio members.

 Kanluwen wrote:

206pts actually, since you still pay for the Burst Cannon and Missile Pod if going by RAW(in order to replace, it needs to be present at the start).

No, you're wrong. You pay only for the stuff you actually have. This is crystal clear.

 Crimson wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

206pts actually, since you still pay for the Burst Cannon and Missile Pod if going by RAW(in order to replace, it needs to be present at the start).

No, you're wrong. You pay only for the stuff you actually have. This is crystal clear.

Cite a book or FAQ source please. I've been trying to find a definitive answer on this.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Cite a book or FAQ source please. I've been trying to find a definitive answer on this.

In the beginning of the points section of any codex.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

206pts actually, since you still pay for the Burst Cannon and Missile Pod if going by RAW(in order to replace, it needs to be present at the start).

No, you're wrong. You pay only for the stuff you actually have. This is crystal clear.

Cite a book or FAQ source please. I've been trying to find a definitive answer on this.

From 'Points Values' on page 206 of Codex Space Marines (emphasis added):

If you are playing a matched play game, or a game that uses a points limit, you can use the following lists to determine the total points cost of your army. Simply add together the points costs of all your models and the wargear they are equipped with to determine your army’s total points value.

Each codex has the same wording. If your model is not equipped with a Burst Cannon because you traded it for something else, then you do not pay for it.

 Crimson wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Cite a book or FAQ source please. I've been trying to find a definitive answer on this.

In the beginning of the points section of any codex.

Simply add together the points costs of all your models and the wargear they are equipped with to determine your army's total points value

That doesn't say whether or not you pay for something that a unit is said to be equipped with at the start and then gets replaced.


Not saying "You're wrong!" mind you, just that this is a thing that keeps coming up locally for me and has everything to do with the fact that the RAW lawyers try to force people to play their way.

 Kanluwen wrote:

That doesn't say whether or not you pay for something that a unit is said to be equipped with at the start and then gets replaced.

Why would you pay? They're no longer equipped with it. This rule is perfectly clear, you're just confused.

 Kanluwen wrote:

And this is where the contention comes up.
You say that "Scions would be a flat 10 pts and not 9+1"--so then what's the point (no pun intended) of the Hotshot Lasguns or Hotshot Laspistols even having point values? They're the only ones who can take them so...why not just make them 10 pts and give them their Lasguns and be done with it?

Answer: Because they're an "Elite" unit and should be paying for their gun.

In order to "replace" a thing, you have to have it to begin with. So either you've been specifically told somewhere that you don't have to pay for the initial item on the list or it's something which desperately needs a clarification. It's a question I've gotten wildly different answers to from GW studio members.

Scions essentially get a one point discount on special weapons. Also do veterans pay for their lasguns?

But like Ghaz said, you pay for the wargear they are equipped with. If you replace gear, they no longer are equipped with it. If you keep it, then you pay for it.

 Crimson wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

That doesn't say whether or not you pay for something that a unit is said to be equipped with at the start and then gets replaced.

Why would you pay? They're no longer equipped with it. This rule is perfectly clear, you're just confused.

I might be confused but I also want a damned definitive answer to shut some people up locally.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Cite a book or FAQ source please. I've been trying to find a definitive answer on this.

In the beginning of the points section of any codex.

Simply add together the points costs of all your models and the wargear they are equipped with to determine your army's total points value

That doesn't say whether or not you pay for something that a unit is said to be equipped with at the start and then gets replaced.


Not saying "You're wrong!" mind you, just that this is a thing that keeps coming up locally for me and has everything to do with the fact that the RAW lawyers try to force people to play their way.

No but it does say you pay for what your unit is equipped with, not what they had been previously equipped with.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

That doesn't say whether or not you pay for something that a unit is said to be equipped with at the start and then gets replaced.

Why would you pay? They're no longer equipped with it. This rule is perfectly clear, you're just confused.

I might be confused but I also want a damned definitive answer to shut some people up locally.

You pay for what the model is equipped with:

- The model may replace it's A for B.
- You replace A for B
- Is the model equipped with A?
- No
- You do not pay for A.

 Kanluwen wrote:

I might be confused but I also want a damned definitive answer to shut some people up locally.

At some point surely you can just appeal to universal convention. "You only pay for what the models are actually equipped with" is what literally every major tournament does and has done since 8th launched, including ones GW itself puts on. It is what every army list by someone who is not brand new to the game is doing, whether it's posted here, on Reddit, etc. It is clear that this is how it works in the actual game of Warhammer 40k that exists in the real world and isn't just one person's interpretation of a book.

 Kanluwen wrote:
And this is where the contention comes up.
You say that "Scions would be a flat 10 pts and not 9+1"--so then what's the point (no pun intended) of the Hotshot Lasguns or Hotshot Laspistols even having point values? They're the only ones who can take them so...why not just make them 10 pts and give them their Lasguns and be done with it?

Answer: Because they're an "Elite" unit and should be paying for their gun.

In order to "replace" a thing, you have to have it to begin with. So either you've been specifically told somewhere that you don't have to pay for the initial item on the list or it's something which desperately needs a clarification. It's a question I've gotten wildly different answers to from GW studio members.

Tempestors can take a bolt pistol instead of a hot-shot laspistol. A bolt pistol is costed at 1 because it is an upgrade to a basic laspistol which costs 0, The hot-shot laspistol is comparable to a bolt pistol, based on stats, so it was costed the same--so the hot-shot laspistol (and its counterpart the hot-shot lasgun) was costed at 1.

Having a weapon 'to begin with' has nothing to do with what they pay for in terms of weapons they are equipped with.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

That doesn't say whether or not you pay for something that a unit is said to be equipped with at the start and then gets replaced.

Why would you pay? They're no longer equipped with it. This rule is perfectly clear, you're just confused.

I might be confused but I also want a damned definitive answer to shut some people up locally.

Out of interest, Kan, which way are your local RAW-lords arguing?