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.
who wants to bet on the release? My bet is Friday because most (but not all) FAQ releases since December were on Friday. Monday is also possible if they want to avoid disrupting tournaments this weekend.
axisofentropy wrote: who wants to bet on the release? My bet is Friday because most (but not all) FAQ releases since December were on Friday. Monday is also possible if they want to avoid disrupting tournaments this weekend.
Someone said before their GT, which is in May, but usually when we get leaks like this it's not far behind. OTOH they could be leaking on purpose to test the waters.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/12 22:59:49
axisofentropy wrote: who wants to bet on the release? My bet is Friday because most (but not all) FAQ releases since December were on Friday. Monday is also possible if they want to avoid disrupting tournaments this weekend.
Sorry, but last year FAQs were released on Sundays and this year they've been released on Tuesdays.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
alextroy wrote: Mostly is a funny word. It does not mean exclusively, just more of this and less of that.
Mostly can mean 95% and you know it.
2 points here.
1st flayed ones blow and you know it, and nobody is taking more then 60 of them in matched play ever
2nd if your wanting to re enact something from the fluff to this degree then your already better off playing a none matched play game.
Your reaching real hard for that branch mate.
Flayed Ones aren't terrible for the price, so no you might not take 60 ordinarily unless you're facing mostly swarming opponents. However, I should have the option to do so in a tournament setting if I felt like it.
Why? Why should anyone be entitled to play ANY army they want in a Tournament?
Why are people believing 4chan all of a sudden? They have an even worse track record than bols. The Grey Knights stuff was probably just made up to get a rise out of players and it looks like it worked.
Maybe GK players are so willing to believe this because they are so used to getting dumped on by GW. Seriously though, GK need a massive boost, or massive point drop, or both simply to be mid tier
I’m not believing this but if it comes true I’m gonna be really upset.
There is no such thing as a plea of innocence in my court. A plea of innocence is guilty of wasting my time. Guilty. - Lord Inquisitor Fyodor Karamazov
In an Imperium of a million worlds, what is the death of one world in the cause of purity?~Inquisition credo
He who allows the alien to live, shares its crime of existence. ~Inquisitor Apollyon
So, DE will be the only ones to potentially struggle with limits if they want more than 2 detachments and can’t take 3 patrols, due to them only getting access to 3 Archons and Drazhar. Technically all 3 have access to 3 transports (Tantalus can transport but is classed as a heavy) in addition to having deep strike options. Wytches only have the Tantalus and Ravager for heavy, so, they aren’t likely to run multiple spearheads.
If you are looking to build a “fluffly” multi-sourced army of a Kabal, Cult and Coven detachment each, you will have no problem what so ever finding enough unique units to run 3 different detachments – you won’t have the space in a 2k point list to really add in what you want, but, it is very very possible to do.
If you want to run just 2 detachments, then you’re getting the same amount of CP (very likely) as you would if you ran 3 patrol detachments… So, no real benefit from running 3 patrols. You also still have enough individual units to not be bothered by the 3 unit limit.
Taking Kabals as an example – 1 battalion, 1 spearhead and 1 vanguard as an example – you’d easily make it waaaaaaaaaaaaaay past 2000 points before you even start to get close to maxing out on each of the units.
You need to remember, that if this rule comes in, it will likely ONLY affect tournaments. Playing at home/at a club etc you can happily just ignore the ruling and run 3 patrol detachments. This is something that really needs to be highlighted more. You also have to realise, that if said rule does come in for matched play, it will probably scale by points. Max of 3 at 2k points, max of 4 at 3k points etc, so you won’t be limited there either.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Dark Eldar need to be the exception to the rule. Simple as that, because their Codex has been designed with lots of Patrol Detachments in mind.
I myself remain sceptical as to how effective tournament based limits actually are. And that's because reading a great many comments on line, it seems that to date they've not prevented Really Hard Lists, so much as simply changed what constitutes Really Hard Lists.
dingdingdingding.
Blanket restrictions that are applied to everybody and are intended to hurt Really Strong Thing generally hurt Really Weak Thing much more.
If you take the approach "Ok, seems like everybody's spamming Custodes Shield Captains and Tau Commanders and Tyranid Hive Tyrants! If we make it so every HQ is 0-1 per detachment in matched, that problem is 100% SOLVED!" Suddenly every Tau list is going to be bringing detachments with 1 super strong commander and 1 other less optimal choice, every Nid army is doing the same with hive tyrants, etc. And every faction with only one HQ choice is suddenly disallowed from ever taking a Battalion detachment.
Which is why the limit seems to be a max of 3, rather than 1?
The issue isn't maxing units with DE it's that you have an hq tax that really hurts DE, and no other army has to worry as much about taking the units that aren't great. You also have the issue of transports. Only being able to take 3 of each transport will really hurt DE. I play a little DE, (I used to run Ynnari. Not Ynnari/craftsworld reaper spam but straight Ynnari) so I have some of all of the Aeldari sitting around. Looking through this codex I can say making 3 patrols with lots of transports would definitely be preferable for me. The armies that really get hurt by this 1-3 non troops are;
1. Harlequins, but they cold still manage if it wasn't for only 3 transports. 2. Inquisition, I don't see how they could survive with this change. Especially when you factor in the no souping that's been rumored. 3. Sisters of Battle, I've seen very few sisters armies that used 3 or less dominions, seraphims, and especially immolators. 4. Sisters of Silence, I was already wondering how they'd do these but this kills them even more.
It also hurts my Grey Knights but I'll live. If the no souping comes into play it'll hurt my GK, inquisition, sisters, army I've wanted to run but I guess that's just a personal problem
That’s the thing though. The HQ tax is either set at 3 HQs or 4 HQs – so, you’re essentially paying up to 89 points (if your taking Drazhar, 120) for +1CP. Sure, it’s a little bit of a tax, but, it isn’t completely without benefit.
I agree on the transports being a bit of a pain, but at a cost of 480 points for 3 Raiders and 3 Venoms it can be worked around in competitive play.
Harlequinns, I mentioned before, currently clock in at just under 2k points in a list with this kind of restriction and when taking NO upgrades. Sure, it means you have 3 Death Jests, 3 Shadowseers and 1 Solitare footslogging, but they also have the webway stratagem, meaning you can max out a squad of troops and then use the 3rd transport for the characters. Their codex is also coming soon, so things might change.
Inquision and Sisters of Silence I’m not counting as an army right now. You only ever see these as part of soup armies right now, and in soup armies they won’t be affected by the restrictions anyway as you’re not usually spamming their units.
SoB have 3 transport options. As for the fact that you don’t usually see an army of them that isn’t spamming certain units, isn’t an excuse to no restrict said spam. Besides, if they need more Dominions, they can still run 30 of them.
Does it affect Grey Knights that much? You can still spam Interceptors, due to 3, 10-man squads and being able to combat squad them. Can still take 3 Grand Master Dreadknights etc.
To be honest, all the discussions I’ve seen on here in relation to this potential restriction, makes me a little concerned for the state of the game overall. Because tournaments are won usually by spam, people seem to think that half the units in the codices don’t exist. People are too scared to try things and hang onto pre-conceived conceptions. I’ve had the benefit of being out of the hobby for a few years, so I can come back and evaluate a lot of things without bias or “this is bad even though I’ve never tried it” opinions. I genuinely think this kind of restriction would be good for players, events and the game overall – once we get past the initial complaints and get down to playing the game.
Why on gods green earth would you EVER run 30 dominions in 3 squads? Only 4 of them can get guns. The rest are just overpriced battle sisters. You're paying 50pts per squad to make them WORSE. That's like buying a hellblaster squad and then paying 75pts to replace their plasma weapons with bolters. This is one of the single least informed things I've EVER heard on dakka. Also SoB have Rhinos(which are worthless), and Repressors(which are 250$ on ebay). So they have 1 transport choice.
By that sentence alone I can tell with 10000000% certainty that you simply DO NOT KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE GAME for your opinion to have any significant weight.
People aren't afraid to 'try new things', people are just generally capable of math. It doesn't take a world war two vet with a degree from MIT to look at a rhino in an army where rhinos cost 7 more points than everyone elses, who also don't have any units that benefit from being transported by it, and go 'huh, that's not very good.'
And this is all compounded by the fact that this doesn't do anything to actually balance the game, all it does is make codexes like Eldar, Nids, Guard, and Chaos who either have multiple strong options or have competitive armies that revolve around troops EVEN MORE POWERFUL relative to everyone else.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/13 02:01:26
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
So, DE will be the only ones to potentially struggle with limits if they want more than 2 detachments and can’t take 3 patrols, due to them only getting access to 3 Archons and Drazhar. Technically all 3 have access to 3 transports (Tantalus can transport but is classed as a heavy) in addition to having deep strike options. Wytches only have the Tantalus and Ravager for heavy, so, they aren’t likely to run multiple spearheads.
If you are looking to build a “fluffly” multi-sourced army of a Kabal, Cult and Coven detachment each, you will have no problem what so ever finding enough unique units to run 3 different detachments – you won’t have the space in a 2k point list to really add in what you want, but, it is very very possible to do.
If you want to run just 2 detachments, then you’re getting the same amount of CP (very likely) as you would if you ran 3 patrol detachments… So, no real benefit from running 3 patrols. You also still have enough individual units to not be bothered by the 3 unit limit.
Taking Kabals as an example – 1 battalion, 1 spearhead and 1 vanguard as an example – you’d easily make it waaaaaaaaaaaaaay past 2000 points before you even start to get close to maxing out on each of the units.
You need to remember, that if this rule comes in, it will likely ONLY affect tournaments. Playing at home/at a club etc you can happily just ignore the ruling and run 3 patrol detachments. This is something that really needs to be highlighted more. You also have to realise, that if said rule does come in for matched play, it will probably scale by points. Max of 3 at 2k points, max of 4 at 3k points etc, so you won’t be limited there either.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Dark Eldar need to be the exception to the rule. Simple as that, because their Codex has been designed with lots of Patrol Detachments in mind.
I myself remain sceptical as to how effective tournament based limits actually are. And that's because reading a great many comments on line, it seems that to date they've not prevented Really Hard Lists, so much as simply changed what constitutes Really Hard Lists.
dingdingdingding.
Blanket restrictions that are applied to everybody and are intended to hurt Really Strong Thing generally hurt Really Weak Thing much more.
If you take the approach "Ok, seems like everybody's spamming Custodes Shield Captains and Tau Commanders and Tyranid Hive Tyrants! If we make it so every HQ is 0-1 per detachment in matched, that problem is 100% SOLVED!" Suddenly every Tau list is going to be bringing detachments with 1 super strong commander and 1 other less optimal choice, every Nid army is doing the same with hive tyrants, etc. And every faction with only one HQ choice is suddenly disallowed from ever taking a Battalion detachment.
Which is why the limit seems to be a max of 3, rather than 1?
The issue isn't maxing units with DE it's that you have an hq tax that really hurts DE, and no other army has to worry as much about taking the units that aren't great. You also have the issue of transports. Only being able to take 3 of each transport will really hurt DE. I play a little DE, (I used to run Ynnari. Not Ynnari/craftsworld reaper spam but straight Ynnari) so I have some of all of the Aeldari sitting around. Looking through this codex I can say making 3 patrols with lots of transports would definitely be preferable for me. The armies that really get hurt by this 1-3 non troops are;
1. Harlequins, but they cold still manage if it wasn't for only 3 transports.
2. Inquisition, I don't see how they could survive with this change. Especially when you factor in the no souping that's been rumored.
3. Sisters of Battle, I've seen very few sisters armies that used 3 or less dominions, seraphims, and especially immolators.
4. Sisters of Silence, I was already wondering how they'd do these but this kills them even more.
It also hurts my Grey Knights but I'll live. If the no souping comes into play it'll hurt my GK, inquisition, sisters, army I've wanted to run but I guess that's just a personal problem
That’s the thing though. The HQ tax is either set at 3 HQs or 4 HQs – so, you’re essentially paying up to 89 points (if your taking Drazhar, 120) for +1CP. Sure, it’s a little bit of a tax, but, it isn’t completely without benefit.
I agree on the transports being a bit of a pain, but at a cost of 480 points for 3 Raiders and 3 Venoms it can be worked around in competitive play.
Harlequinns, I mentioned before, currently clock in at just under 2k points in a list with this kind of restriction and when taking NO upgrades. Sure, it means you have 3 Death Jests, 3 Shadowseers and 1 Solitare footslogging, but they also have the webway stratagem, meaning you can max out a squad of troops and then use the 3rd transport for the characters. Their codex is also coming soon, so things might change.
Inquision and Sisters of Silence I’m not counting as an army right now. You only ever see these as part of soup armies right now, and in soup armies they won’t be affected by the restrictions anyway as you’re not usually spamming their units.
SoB have 3 transport options. As for the fact that you don’t usually see an army of them that isn’t spamming certain units, isn’t an excuse to no restrict said spam. Besides, if they need more Dominions, they can still run 30 of them.
Does it affect Grey Knights that much? You can still spam Interceptors, due to 3, 10-man squads and being able to combat squad them. Can still take 3 Grand Master Dreadknights etc.
To be honest, all the discussions I’ve seen on here in relation to this potential restriction, makes me a little concerned for the state of the game overall. Because tournaments are won usually by spam, people seem to think that half the units in the codices don’t exist. People are too scared to try things and hang onto pre-conceived conceptions. I’ve had the benefit of being out of the hobby for a few years, so I can come back and evaluate a lot of things without bias or “this is bad even though I’ve never tried it” opinions. I genuinely think this kind of restriction would be good for players, events and the game overall – once we get past the initial complaints and get down to playing the game.
Why on gods green earth would you EVER run 30 dominions in 3 squads? Only 4 of them can get guns. The rest are just overpriced battle sisters. You're paying 50pts per squad to make them WORSE. That's like buying a hellblaster squad and then paying 75pts to replace their plasma weapons with bolters. This is one of the single least informed things I've EVER heard on dakka. Also SoB have Rhinos(which are worthless), and Repressors(which are 250$ on ebay). So they have 1 transport choice.
By that sentence alone I can tell with 10000000% certainty that you simply DO NOT KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE GAME for your opinion to have any significant weight.
People aren't afraid to 'try new things', people are just generally capable of math. It doesn't take a world war two vet with a degree from MIT to look at a rhino in an army where rhinos cost 7 more points than everyone elses, who also don't have any units that benefit from being transported by it, and go 'huh, that's not very good.'
And this is all compounded by the fact that this doesn't do anything to actually balance the game, all it does is make codexes like Eldar, Nids, Guard, and Chaos who either have multiple strong options or have competitive armies that revolve around troops EVEN MORE POWERFUL relative to everyone else.
That’s the point I’m making though. You CAN run 30 Dominons in 3 squads – just because it’s not -currently- “optimal” or “good” because they only get 4 weapons, doesn’t mean it is a reason to invalidate this potential change. A 10 man team in a Rhino with 4 Melta costs 243 points, which is 15 points more expensive than a 5 man team in a Repressor. Overall, the difference between 6 squads of 5 with Melta and 3 squads of 10 with melta is a massive 639 points. Sure, you drop 12 melta shots, but, I guess spending 459 of the 639 gained points on 12 Retributor multi-meltas is also a “bad idea”. You could also argue, that, because melta dominon squads are spammed so much, they are one of the “outlying OP” units in that codex and due a nerf to bring them into line. You could also argue that they are fine, and the rest is just bad, so the rest is due a buff instead. Either way, things will get changed to bring more units into the “viable” line. A lot of people are focusing on things in isolation, where instead, you need to go in with the mindset of “well, if this is changing, what else is changing alongside it?”
They cost 1 point more than a regular sister, and for that they get to scout move at the start of the game? Sure, the rest of their stats is the same, but I’d argue 10 points is a decent price to pay to move a transport halfway up no-mans-land before the game starts.
Slightly different, but some people run weapons teams, like Devestators, with extra bodies so they don’t instantly start dropping in efficiency as soon as they lose a model or 2. I’d also say, that you’re only paying 5 points more than a min troop squad for the privilege of scouting.
If this change does come in, what would you run with SoB? 3 Dominons in Repressors, 3 Seraphim squads, 3 Exorcists and Celestine? Add in 2 Cannoness’ for CP and you’re already looking at over 1700 points. Is it then wrong to then ask for some of the other units to be sprinkled into the remaining 2-300 points? Surely you’d want some troops anyway, for things like obsec and a battalion? This is just me quickly spit-balling list ideas. I guess, you could run HB Retributors instead of Exorcists if you wanted horde fire, and I’m guessing you’ll want a few Immolators as well.
We don’t know what their codex is going to bring and change. What if they get something akin to Combat Squads? You have to take into consideration that we are dealing with an Index army here, which is fast becoming a minority with the fast release of codices. GW will know the direction things are heading in, and need to make balance changes with the future in mind, and not put chains around their feet trying to match the new with the old – especially when the old is currently (and unfortunately) an un-supported line at GW. We know this is changing.
Just because a rhino is “worthless” doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist and there are absolutely zero ways to make it work. Just because an unsupported model costs $250 on ebay, again, isn’t an excuse. Every SoB player has known for a long time now, that if you want to take up the army, it will be expensive and time consuming – unless you knew someone that had an old collection of them. It’s like saying “Don’t nerf Astra Militarum because it costs me £44 for a single Death Krieg Infantry Squad and I will need 6+ of them!” Sure, it’s not the best of situations, and ideally GW would support every model for every army in the same way. At least we know that plastic sisters are coming in 2019 though.
Yes, math is a thing, along with averages and weight of dice. There is no getting around that – but math is still a guideline and you can always find counters for things. People always get hung up on the isolated 1 turn trade between 2 units. What would have happened to Nick Nanavanti at Adepticon if his list camp up against 3 Assault Cannon Razorbacks and 2 Stormtalons with Heavy Bolters? Sure, those 5 units alone cost 767 points with a captain tax for the RBs, but, does the fact that they will remove 37 chaff models a turn between them not count for something? Could even add in a 3rd Stormtalon to remove 90 a turn. Is the list “points efficient”, probably nowhere near. Is it tabletop efficient against that points efficient list? 100%. Just because paper says a Stormtalon sucks at efficiently killing Cultists, doesn’t mean a list with them in, is bad at killing Cultist spam.
It’s the same as – if you want to deny Dominon table rush, all you need is 2 scout units and a dozen lascannons. If you want to beat 3 Fire Raptors take a load of T’au suits with markerlights and velocity trackers.
Does it make troop based armies better? I a way, it potentially does, but, when we look at 95% of the troops based lists out there doing well at events, their non-troop “support” elements generally already fit within this potential framework. The main outliers that won’t, are the lists containing 5+ mortal heavy weapons teams, and let’s face it, a reduction in that is welcome. The question is, does this impact on another person’s ability to deal with those current lists? Potentially. However, I do believe there are options. If we see a further shift towards more troop spam, then we’ll see an increased shift towards higher rate of fire weaponry to deal with them, alongside other troops choices to contest objectives. The days where you don’t have enough time in a tournament game to kill enough of your opponent’s troops are nearing an end, due to the introduction of chess clocks.
I do feel like I have a different mindset and approach to the game than a lot of people here, and I accept that there are concerns to overcome and resolve, but, I just don’t accept that those concerns are currently as big as people say they are, especially when you consider that all we know is this 1 rumour and nothing else at all about this FAQ release.
Other rumours have also appeared about Grey Knights overnight be the looks of it. It states they are expecting to get some points and unit special rule changes, but to what full extent/whether they are true is unknown.
Kdash wrote: [q
That’s the point I’m making though. You CAN run 30 Dominons in 3 squads – just because it’s not -currently- “optimal” or “good” because they only get 4 weapons, doesn’t mean it is a reason to invalidate this potential change. A 10 man team in a Rhino with 4 Melta costs 243 points, which is 15 points more expensive than a 5 man team in a Repressor. Overall, the difference between 6 squads of 5 with Melta and 3 squads of 10 with melta is a massive 639 points. Sure, you drop 12 melta shots, but, I guess spending 459 of the 639 gained points on 12 Retributor multi-meltas is also a “bad idea”. You could also argue, that, because melta dominon squads are spammed so much, they are one of the “outlying OP” units in that codex and due a nerf to bring them into line. You could also argue that they are fine, and the rest is just bad, so the rest is due a buff instead. Either way, things will get changed to bring more units into the “viable” line. A lot of people are focusing on things in isolation, where instead, you need to go in with the mindset of “well, if this is changing, what else is changing alongside it?”
What it does mean is that pretty much universally it's the weaker armies that gets killed while tough armies simply take up almost as good alternatives.
Thus game balance goes to hell.
For sake of game pray the rumour is wrong. This will KILL balance.
Blanket limitations=help broken armies and hurt weaker armies. This has been SHOWN by real tournaments over and over again. No reason to think it's magically different just by being from GW.
I'm fairly sure we won't see the Spring FAQ until early-mid May. I reckon GW would have alluded to 'a release in a few weeks' if it were going to be released in April.
Kdash wrote: [q
That’s the point I’m making though. You CAN run 30 Dominons in 3 squads – just because it’s not -currently- “optimal” or “good” because they only get 4 weapons, doesn’t mean it is a reason to invalidate this potential change. A 10 man team in a Rhino with 4 Melta costs 243 points, which is 15 points more expensive than a 5 man team in a Repressor. Overall, the difference between 6 squads of 5 with Melta and 3 squads of 10 with melta is a massive 639 points. Sure, you drop 12 melta shots, but, I guess spending 459 of the 639 gained points on 12 Retributor multi-meltas is also a “bad idea”. You could also argue, that, because melta dominon squads are spammed so much, they are one of the “outlying OP” units in that codex and due a nerf to bring them into line. You could also argue that they are fine, and the rest is just bad, so the rest is due a buff instead. Either way, things will get changed to bring more units into the “viable” line. A lot of people are focusing on things in isolation, where instead, you need to go in with the mindset of “well, if this is changing, what else is changing alongside it?”
What it does mean is that pretty much universally it's the weaker armies that gets killed while tough armies simply take up almost as good alternatives.
Thus game balance goes to hell.
For sake of game pray the rumour is wrong. This will KILL balance.
Blanket limitations=help broken armies and hurt weaker armies. This has been SHOWN by real tournaments over and over again. No reason to think it's magically different just by being from GW.
But what if there are a load of other balance changes within this FAQ to address the potential issues this rumour would cause? If such a thing is also included, then we have nothing to worry about.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CaptainBetts wrote: I'm fairly sure we won't see the Spring FAQ until early-mid May. I reckon GW would have alluded to 'a release in a few weeks' if it were going to be released in April.
I'm hoping to hear more from the LGT guys soon about it, with their list deadline approaching.
With both the GT finals and the LGT in May, i can honestly see it potentially ending up in June instead of May, if it isn't released this month, as they will probably "find more things they didn't expect" coming out of those 2 big events.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/13 10:22:41
CaptainBetts wrote: I'm fairly sure we won't see the Spring FAQ until early-mid May. I reckon GW would have alluded to 'a release in a few weeks' if it were going to be released in April.
I'm hoping to hear more from the LGT guys soon about it, with their list deadline approaching.
With both the GT finals and the LGT in May, I can honestly see it potentially ending up in June instead of May, if it isn't released this month, as they will probably "find more things they didn't expect" coming out of those 2 big events.
I can seriously imagine the 'we found some more things at GT and the LGT we didn't expect!' quote happening.
Of course, with tournaments happening again and again, they'll have to release the FAQ at some point.
Heck, they could release it now, before the GT and the LGT, and then see how their 'attempts at balance' worked out.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/13 10:29:42
Kdash wrote: [q
That’s the point I’m making though. You CAN run 30 Dominons in 3 squads – just because it’s not -currently- “optimal” or “good” because they only get 4 weapons, doesn’t mean it is a reason to invalidate this potential change. A 10 man team in a Rhino with 4 Melta costs 243 points, which is 15 points more expensive than a 5 man team in a Repressor. Overall, the difference between 6 squads of 5 with Melta and 3 squads of 10 with melta is a massive 639 points. Sure, you drop 12 melta shots, but, I guess spending 459 of the 639 gained points on 12 Retributor multi-meltas is also a “bad idea”. You could also argue, that, because melta dominon squads are spammed so much, they are one of the “outlying OP” units in that codex and due a nerf to bring them into line. You could also argue that they are fine, and the rest is just bad, so the rest is due a buff instead. Either way, things will get changed to bring more units into the “viable” line. A lot of people are focusing on things in isolation, where instead, you need to go in with the mindset of “well, if this is changing, what else is changing alongside it?”
What it does mean is that pretty much universally it's the weaker armies that gets killed while tough armies simply take up almost as good alternatives.
Thus game balance goes to hell.
For sake of game pray the rumour is wrong. This will KILL balance.
Blanket limitations=help broken armies and hurt weaker armies. This has been SHOWN by real tournaments over and over again. No reason to think it's magically different just by being from GW.
But what if there are a load of other balance changes within this FAQ to address the potential issues this rumour would cause? If such a thing is also included, then we have nothing to worry about.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CaptainBetts wrote: I'm fairly sure we won't see the Spring FAQ until early-mid May. I reckon GW would have alluded to 'a release in a few weeks' if it were going to be released in April.
I'm hoping to hear more from the LGT guys soon about it, with their list deadline approaching.
With both the GT finals and the LGT in May, i can honestly see it potentially ending up in June instead of May, if it isn't released this month, as they will probably "find more things they didn't expect" coming out of those 2 big events.
Kdash wrote: [q
That’s the point I’m making though. You CAN run 30 Dominons in 3 squads – just because it’s not -currently- “optimal” or “good” because they only get 4 weapons, doesn’t mean it is a reason to invalidate this potential change. A 10 man team in a Rhino with 4 Melta costs 243 points, which is 15 points more expensive than a 5 man team in a Repressor. Overall, the difference between 6 squads of 5 with Melta and 3 squads of 10 with melta is a massive 639 points. Sure, you drop 12 melta shots, but, I guess spending 459 of the 639 gained points on 12 Retributor multi-meltas is also a “bad idea”. You could also argue, that, because melta dominon squads are spammed so much, they are one of the “outlying OP” units in that codex and due a nerf to bring them into line. You could also argue that they are fine, and the rest is just bad, so the rest is due a buff instead. Either way, things will get changed to bring more units into the “viable” line. A lot of people are focusing on things in isolation, where instead, you need to go in with the mindset of “well, if this is changing, what else is changing alongside it?”
What it does mean is that pretty much universally it's the weaker armies that gets killed while tough armies simply take up almost as good alternatives.
Thus game balance goes to hell.
For sake of game pray the rumour is wrong. This will KILL balance.
Blanket limitations=help broken armies and hurt weaker armies. This has been SHOWN by real tournaments over and over again. No reason to think it's magically different just by being from GW.
But what if there are a load of other balance changes within this FAQ to address the potential issues this rumour would cause? If such a thing is also included, then we have nothing to worry about.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CaptainBetts wrote: I'm fairly sure we won't see the Spring FAQ until early-mid May. I reckon GW would have alluded to 'a release in a few weeks' if it were going to be released in April.
I'm hoping to hear more from the LGT guys soon about it, with their list deadline approaching.
With both the GT finals and the LGT in May, i can honestly see it potentially ending up in June instead of May, if it isn't released this month, as they will probably "find more things they didn't expect" coming out of those 2 big events.
And by that logic, it'll never be released.
Well, there is always the September one! But i agree. It'll need to drop eventually, but the longer we go without the FAQ, and with 2 100 person+ events happening within a week of each other, i can see them thinking "well, we waiting for Adepticon, we prob should do the same for these as well".
Kdash wrote: [q
That’s the point I’m making though. You CAN run 30 Dominons in 3 squads – just because it’s not -currently- “optimal” or “good” because they only get 4 weapons, doesn’t mean it is a reason to invalidate this potential change. A 10 man team in a Rhino with 4 Melta costs 243 points, which is 15 points more expensive than a 5 man team in a Repressor. Overall, the difference between 6 squads of 5 with Melta and 3 squads of 10 with melta is a massive 639 points. Sure, you drop 12 melta shots, but, I guess spending 459 of the 639 gained points on 12 Retributor multi-meltas is also a “bad idea”. You could also argue, that, because melta dominon squads are spammed so much, they are one of the “outlying OP” units in that codex and due a nerf to bring them into line. You could also argue that they are fine, and the rest is just bad, so the rest is due a buff instead. Either way, things will get changed to bring more units into the “viable” line. A lot of people are focusing on things in isolation, where instead, you need to go in with the mindset of “well, if this is changing, what else is changing alongside it?”
What it does mean is that pretty much universally it's the weaker armies that gets killed while tough armies simply take up almost as good alternatives.
Thus game balance goes to hell.
For sake of game pray the rumour is wrong. This will KILL balance.
Blanket limitations=help broken armies and hurt weaker armies. This has been SHOWN by real tournaments over and over again. No reason to think it's magically different just by being from GW.
But what if there are a load of other balance changes within this FAQ to address the potential issues this rumour would cause? If such a thing is also included, then we have nothing to worry about.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CaptainBetts wrote: I'm fairly sure we won't see the Spring FAQ until early-mid May. I reckon GW would have alluded to 'a release in a few weeks' if it were going to be released in April.
I'm hoping to hear more from the LGT guys soon about it, with their list deadline approaching.
With both the GT finals and the LGT in May, i can honestly see it potentially ending up in June instead of May, if it isn't released this month, as they will probably "find more things they didn't expect" coming out of those 2 big events.
And by that logic, it'll never be released.
Well, there is always the September one! But i agree. It'll need to drop eventually, but the longer we go without the FAQ, and with 2 100 person+ events happening within a week of each other, i can see them thinking "well, we waiting for Adepticon, we prob should do the same for these as well".
Looks like it's a Summer FAQ!
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/04/13 10:59:29
Kdash wrote: [q
That’s the point I’m making though. You CAN run 30 Dominons in 3 squads – just because it’s not -currently- “optimal” or “good” because they only get 4 weapons, doesn’t mean it is a reason to invalidate this potential change. A 10 man team in a Rhino with 4 Melta costs 243 points, which is 15 points more expensive than a 5 man team in a Repressor. Overall, the difference between 6 squads of 5 with Melta and 3 squads of 10 with melta is a massive 639 points. Sure, you drop 12 melta shots, but, I guess spending 459 of the 639 gained points on 12 Retributor multi-meltas is also a “bad idea”. You could also argue, that, because melta dominon squads are spammed so much, they are one of the “outlying OP” units in that codex and due a nerf to bring them into line. You could also argue that they are fine, and the rest is just bad, so the rest is due a buff instead. Either way, things will get changed to bring more units into the “viable” line. A lot of people are focusing on things in isolation, where instead, you need to go in with the mindset of “well, if this is changing, what else is changing alongside it?”
What it does mean is that pretty much universally it's the weaker armies that gets killed while tough armies simply take up almost as good alternatives.
Thus game balance goes to hell.
For sake of game pray the rumour is wrong. This will KILL balance.
Blanket limitations=help broken armies and hurt weaker armies. This has been SHOWN by real tournaments over and over again. No reason to think it's magically different just by being from GW.
But what if there are a load of other balance changes within this FAQ to address the potential issues this rumour would cause? If such a thing is also included, then we have nothing to worry about.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CaptainBetts wrote: I'm fairly sure we won't see the Spring FAQ until early-mid May. I reckon GW would have alluded to 'a release in a few weeks' if it were going to be released in April.
I'm hoping to hear more from the LGT guys soon about it, with their list deadline approaching.
With both the GT finals and the LGT in May, i can honestly see it potentially ending up in June instead of May, if it isn't released this month, as they will probably "find more things they didn't expect" coming out of those 2 big events.
And by that logic, it'll never be released.
Well, there is always the September one! But i agree. It'll need to drop eventually, but the longer we go without the FAQ, and with 2 100 person+ events happening within a week of each other, i can see them thinking "well, we waiting for Adepticon, we prob should do the same for these as well".
Looks like it's a Summer FAQ!
I can see the rage inducing salty reactions already, of the people that will only see that picture and go into meltdown
synthaside wrote: I really hope its on the way, I really need to submit my list, for LGT.
@Bett's maybe they will take our rumoured upcoming heat wave as summer right ;-)
Same - i emailed Zach earlier asking if people submit lists before the FAQ, what is the ruling on then submitting an updated list after the FAQ should it alter the points/make the list illegal. Will post the reply when i get one.
So, DE will be the only ones to potentially struggle with limits if they want more than 2 detachments and can’t take 3 patrols, due to them only getting access to 3 Archons and Drazhar. Technically all 3 have access to 3 transports (Tantalus can transport but is classed as a heavy) in addition to having deep strike options. Wytches only have the Tantalus and Ravager for heavy, so, they aren’t likely to run multiple spearheads.
If you are looking to build a “fluffly” multi-sourced army of a Kabal, Cult and Coven detachment each, you will have no problem what so ever finding enough unique units to run 3 different detachments – you won’t have the space in a 2k point list to really add in what you want, but, it is very very possible to do.
If you want to run just 2 detachments, then you’re getting the same amount of CP (very likely) as you would if you ran 3 patrol detachments… So, no real benefit from running 3 patrols. You also still have enough individual units to not be bothered by the 3 unit limit.
Taking Kabals as an example – 1 battalion, 1 spearhead and 1 vanguard as an example – you’d easily make it waaaaaaaaaaaaaay past 2000 points before you even start to get close to maxing out on each of the units.
You need to remember, that if this rule comes in, it will likely ONLY affect tournaments. Playing at home/at a club etc you can happily just ignore the ruling and run 3 patrol detachments. This is something that really needs to be highlighted more. You also have to realise, that if said rule does come in for matched play, it will probably scale by points. Max of 3 at 2k points, max of 4 at 3k points etc, so you won’t be limited there either.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Dark Eldar need to be the exception to the rule. Simple as that, because their Codex has been designed with lots of Patrol Detachments in mind.
I myself remain sceptical as to how effective tournament based limits actually are. And that's because reading a great many comments on line, it seems that to date they've not prevented Really Hard Lists, so much as simply changed what constitutes Really Hard Lists.
dingdingdingding.
Blanket restrictions that are applied to everybody and are intended to hurt Really Strong Thing generally hurt Really Weak Thing much more.
If you take the approach "Ok, seems like everybody's spamming Custodes Shield Captains and Tau Commanders and Tyranid Hive Tyrants! If we make it so every HQ is 0-1 per detachment in matched, that problem is 100% SOLVED!" Suddenly every Tau list is going to be bringing detachments with 1 super strong commander and 1 other less optimal choice, every Nid army is doing the same with hive tyrants, etc. And every faction with only one HQ choice is suddenly disallowed from ever taking a Battalion detachment.
Which is why the limit seems to be a max of 3, rather than 1?
The issue isn't maxing units with DE it's that you have an hq tax that really hurts DE, and no other army has to worry as much about taking the units that aren't great. You also have the issue of transports. Only being able to take 3 of each transport will really hurt DE. I play a little DE, (I used to run Ynnari. Not Ynnari/craftsworld reaper spam but straight Ynnari) so I have some of all of the Aeldari sitting around. Looking through this codex I can say making 3 patrols with lots of transports would definitely be preferable for me. The armies that really get hurt by this 1-3 non troops are;
1. Harlequins, but they cold still manage if it wasn't for only 3 transports.
2. Inquisition, I don't see how they could survive with this change. Especially when you factor in the no souping that's been rumored.
3. Sisters of Battle, I've seen very few sisters armies that used 3 or less dominions, seraphims, and especially immolators.
4. Sisters of Silence, I was already wondering how they'd do these but this kills them even more.
It also hurts my Grey Knights but I'll live. If the no souping comes into play it'll hurt my GK, inquisition, sisters, army I've wanted to run but I guess that's just a personal problem
That’s the thing though. The HQ tax is either set at 3 HQs or 4 HQs – so, you’re essentially paying up to 89 points (if your taking Drazhar, 120) for +1CP. Sure, it’s a little bit of a tax, but, it isn’t completely without benefit.
I agree on the transports being a bit of a pain, but at a cost of 480 points for 3 Raiders and 3 Venoms it can be worked around in competitive play.
Harlequinns, I mentioned before, currently clock in at just under 2k points in a list with this kind of restriction and when taking NO upgrades. Sure, it means you have 3 Death Jests, 3 Shadowseers and 1 Solitare footslogging, but they also have the webway stratagem, meaning you can max out a squad of troops and then use the 3rd transport for the characters. Their codex is also coming soon, so things might change.
Inquision and Sisters of Silence I’m not counting as an army right now. You only ever see these as part of soup armies right now, and in soup armies they won’t be affected by the restrictions anyway as you’re not usually spamming their units.
SoB have 3 transport options. As for the fact that you don’t usually see an army of them that isn’t spamming certain units, isn’t an excuse to no restrict said spam. Besides, if they need more Dominions, they can still run 30 of them.
Does it affect Grey Knights that much? You can still spam Interceptors, due to 3, 10-man squads and being able to combat squad them. Can still take 3 Grand Master Dreadknights etc.
To be honest, all the discussions I’ve seen on here in relation to this potential restriction, makes me a little concerned for the state of the game overall. Because tournaments are won usually by spam, people seem to think that half the units in the codices don’t exist. People are too scared to try things and hang onto pre-conceived conceptions. I’ve had the benefit of being out of the hobby for a few years, so I can come back and evaluate a lot of things without bias or “this is bad even though I’ve never tried it” opinions. I genuinely think this kind of restriction would be good for players, events and the game overall – once we get past the initial complaints and get down to playing the game.
I think the complaint is mostly that this restriction is going to do absolutely nothing to harm "the usual suspects" - Nids, Eldar, Guard, Chaos - who all have incredibly deep pools of good units and strong combinations, so you'd pretty much just swap one for the other, while the lists that it would really hurt are the occasional minor factions that you only see every once in a while, like Sisters, Harlequins, and Orks.
That's why it's such a pointless restriction. It'll just narrow the pool of viable armies.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
Necrons: 3500pts 
Genestealer Cult: 5000pts 
Grey Knights: 2500pts 
Daemons: 250pts 
Orks: 500pts 
Dark Eldar: 400pts 
