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.
Sikplex wrote: I think a lot of people were expecting quite a few shifts in point changes...
Quite disappointed to see several armies receive nothing at all.
(Mainly Grey Knights... seeing the position they are in ATM)
Points changes are in Chapter Approved. They don't do points adjustments in errata.
If they were expecting points changes, they were just setting themselves up for disappointment.
If they don't why there was on spring? They could have, have done but this opted not to. And whatever are in ca are already decided for better or worse.
And getting your entire army shot off the board before it has any chance to do any damage isn't fun either. But that half of the equation doesn't seem to ever come up. Because as I said they're ok discouraging combat armies.
I haven't seen many shooty armies do well recently, with the exception of the Castellan, which is (still) just broken.
Genestealers, Ynnari, Prophets of Flesh, Daemons, Bash-Brothers, Tzaangors, etc.. are pretty much all you see at top tables, if you subtract the IG/BA/Castellan lists.
Melee has an edge at moment and shooting (e.g. Tau, Necrons, Marines without Guilliman) definitely needs a boost. Just the reality of the game atm.
False. Tzaanagors are seen because they're cheap filler for a smite army, not because of close combat prowess. The only one that was at the top tables was imperial soup with smash captains, in every WAAC list. So they should fix the blood Angel's stratagems, not nerf all combat into uselessness because of blood angels. You seem to be forgetting that charging from deep strike has less than a 50% chance of working, can be negated completely by screens, and you can only do it with part of your army. It's already very risky and a huge gamble. I guess they want it to be high risk zero reward instead.
Danny slag wrote: RIP close combat armies.
They keep pushing 40k towards being two static gun lines that deploy in the back edge and lob shots at each other.
Close combat is riskier because you have to roll charge, more dangerous because your opponent gets to attack back, and with fallback leaves you vulnerable, so I dont know why GW seems to think it should be nerfed into oblivion and is "unfair" of a close combat unit is ever able to reach a gunline.
That's the point. Close combat needs to be riskier.
The problem is risk-free close combat like Smash Captains or Bloodletter bombs. It's both boring and absolutely brainless to play, play against and bad for the game.
Melee needs a boost overall probably. But I agree the solution to that is not to allow someone to lock the opponent's gunline in melee on turn 1! So I see this change as positive.
Getting 60 Berserkers shoved into melee turn 1 is not ever fun to play against
And getting your entire army shot off the board before it has any chance to do any damage isn't fun either. But that half of the equation doesn't seem to ever come up. Because as I said they're ok discouraging combat armies.
They addressed the problem of going second against a gunline too: you have a stratagem that makes all of the units in your deployment zone (sans Titantic) gain the benefits of cover. As a Primaris player I'm happy to finally get something useful for my army other than the Chapter Master upgrade.
Doenst do squat for armies with middling saves
Most vehicles have decent saves which makes transports more important (2+ save on a Rhino, 1+ save on a Land Raider for a couple of examples) and if you're not sticking them in a transport you should have deployed them out of line of sight anyways. You know, stuff that we've been doing for several editions now to force gunlines to either forgo shooting due to lacking valid targets, or forcing them to move in order to see things to shoot.
As a dark eldar and ork player it really doesnt do much. Orks will still get blown off the board(I know thats more an army issue) but Dark Eldar Vehicles(san taloi) used to be safe if you screaming jets them now if they get shot at by any halfway decent weapon they'll still be relying on their invul
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/09/28 14:46:04
False. Tzaanagors are seen because they're cheap filler for a smite army, not because of close combat prowess. The only one that was at the top tables was imperial soup with smash captains, in every WAAC list. So they should fix the blood Angel's stratagems, not nerf all combat into uselessness because of blood angels. You seem to be forgetting that charging from deep strike has less than a 50% chance of working, can be negated completely by screens, and you can only do it with part of your army. It's already very risky and a huge gamble. I guess they want it to be high risk zero reward instead.
No. Tzaangors aren't even close to being the cheapest filler. They are there to teleport up with the Dark Matter Crystal, charge one screen-unit, wrap another. Than you pile in Mortarion or something into the same wrapped screen unit. Everything's locked in combat and the shooty army auto-loses.
Danny slag wrote: RIP close combat armies.
They keep pushing 40k towards being two static gun lines that deploy in the back edge and lob shots at each other.
Close combat is riskier because you have to roll charge, more dangerous because your opponent gets to attack back, and with fallback leaves you vulnerable, so I dont know why GW seems to think it should be nerfed into oblivion and is "unfair" of a close combat unit is ever able to reach a gunline.
That's the point. Close combat needs to be riskier.
The problem is risk-free close combat like Smash Captains or Bloodletter bombs. It's both boring and absolutely brainless to play, play against and bad for the game.
Melee needs a boost overall probably. But I agree the solution to that is not to allow someone to lock the opponent's gunline in melee on turn 1! So I see this change as positive.
Getting 60 Berserkers shoved into melee turn 1 is not ever fun to play against
And getting your entire army shot off the board before it has any chance to do any damage isn't fun either. But that half of the equation doesn't seem to ever come up. Because as I said they're ok discouraging combat armies.
They addressed the problem of going second against a gunline too: you have a stratagem that makes all of the units in your deployment zone (sans Titantic) gain the benefits of cover. As a Primaris player I'm happy to finally get something useful for my army other than the Chapter Master upgrade.
So they have a stratagem that's great for MEQ static gunline evo go second. Doesn't fix the imbalance of erring the gak out of combat armies. That 6+ cover save sure will save a whopping 3 of my melee models to maybe reach charge range turn 3...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/28 14:46:47
Yeah remember when deep stirke was nerfed the first time for armies that didn't have warp time to push their dudes turn one?
Or how for armies without Guillman razorbacks got a points hike. It is the same thing again. Instead of fixing the broken thing, GW just kills the whole build.
I seriously wonder why they didn't do something like remove infiltration from scouts, or something like that too.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
False. Tzaanagors are seen because they're cheap filler for a smite army, not because of close combat prowess. The only one that was at the top tables was imperial soup with smash captains, in every WAAC list. So they should fix the blood Angel's stratagems, not nerf all combat into uselessness because of blood angels. You seem to be forgetting that charging from deep strike has less than a 50% chance of working, can be negated completely by screens, and you can only do it with part of your army. It's already very risky and a huge gamble. I guess they want it to be high risk zero reward instead.
No. Tzaangors aren't even close to being the cheapest filler. They are there to teleport up with the Dark Matter Crystal, charge one screen-unit, wrap another. Than you pile in Mortarion or something into the same wrapped screen unit. Everything's locked in combat and the shooty army auto-loses.
So let's make combat armies auto lose because you play a gunline, sounds great.
Danny slag wrote: RIP close combat armies.
They keep pushing 40k towards being two static gun lines that deploy in the back edge and lob shots at each other.
Close combat is riskier because you have to roll charge, more dangerous because your opponent gets to attack back, and with fallback leaves you vulnerable, so I dont know why GW seems to think it should be nerfed into oblivion and is "unfair" of a close combat unit is ever able to reach a gunline.
That's the point. Close combat needs to be riskier.
The problem is risk-free close combat like Smash Captains or Bloodletter bombs. It's both boring and absolutely brainless to play, play against and bad for the game.
Melee needs a boost overall probably. But I agree the solution to that is not to allow someone to lock the opponent's gunline in melee on turn 1! So I see this change as positive.
Getting 60 Berserkers shoved into melee turn 1 is not ever fun to play against
And getting your entire army shot off the board before it has any chance to do any damage isn't fun either. But that half of the equation doesn't seem to ever come up. Because as I said they're ok discouraging combat armies.
They addressed the problem of going second against a gunline too: you have a stratagem that makes all of the units in your deployment zone (sans Titantic) gain the benefits of cover. As a Primaris player I'm happy to finally get something useful for my army other than the Chapter Master upgrade.
So they have a stratagem that's great for MEQ static gunline evo go second. Doesn't fix the imbalance of erring the gak out of combat armies. That 6+ cover save sure will save a whopping 3 of my melee models to maybe reach charge range turn 3...
6+ cover save..?
Is your army 7+ save normally? Are you running nothing but Poxwalkers?
ClockworkZion wrote: They addressed the problem of going second against a gunline too: you have a stratagem that makes all of the units in your deployment zone (sans Titantic) gain the benefits of cover. As a Primaris player I'm happy to finally get something useful for my army other than the Chapter Master upgrade.
I will admit that I'm mostly a hobbyist rather than a player, so please correct me if I'm wrong. But, doesn't this completely screw over Imperial Knights players?
SG
IK's are in a good enough spot to be fine. Probably going to hit their Invul anyway.
Process wrote: So has anything really changed? guard batteries still a thing, even if its just to get as many cp as possible to start with.
This doesn't change anything does it?
ohh apart from stopping the raven guard domination we're seeing............?
Well, I think it's too soon to say.
The CP change will make a difference to how much you can spam the strats on Knights. Rotate Ion Shields is 3cp on a Castellan alone. Without significant CP regen you're going to run out fast.
So let's make combat armies auto lose because you play a gunline, sounds great.
I don't play a gunline. Lol. Because most are terrible right now.
Go play some Tau or something and come back, telling me how you did auto-winning against all those Genestealers, Daemons, etc.. out there
Agreed. Pure gunline does poorly, and honestly I'm generally ok with that, just as I am ok with pure combat doing poorly. Both are gimmick lists in my opinion (outside of Tau and Daemons respectively, who do need help).
Generally though the game should be balanced around a mixed force being the default, in my opinion.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/28 14:52:53
Process wrote: So has anything really changed? guard batteries still a thing, even if its just to get as many cp as possible to start with.
This doesn't change anything does it?
ohh apart from stopping the raven guard domination we're seeing............?
They nerfed the BA captins and the jetbikes custodes. Now if either are also invalid to play with, is a question better players then me have to anwser. I do think the BA player without the regeneration abilities maybe not good enough, but it is gut feeling. May as well be wrong and he could still be ok to be used in some sort of builds.
Generally though the game should be balanced around a mixed force being the default, in my opinion.
You know what is a mixed melee and shoting army? GK are, and how good are they doing? The game is won by armies that are not doing shoting and melee, they are won by armies with super shoting, and some super melee units to counter or tie up stuff. Something like a good mid range army doesn't exist in w4k right now,
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/28 14:55:06
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
ClockworkZion wrote: They addressed the problem of going second against a gunline too: you have a stratagem that makes all of the units in your deployment zone (sans Titantic) gain the benefits of cover. As a Primaris player I'm happy to finally get something useful for my army other than the Chapter Master upgrade.
I will admit that I'm mostly a hobbyist rather than a player, so please correct me if I'm wrong. But, doesn't this completely screw over Imperial Knights players?
I wish they did buff my army, what is wrong with wanting that. And it is imperium.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
ClockworkZion wrote: They addressed the problem of going second against a gunline too: you have a stratagem that makes all of the units in your deployment zone (sans Titantic) gain the benefits of cover. As a Primaris player I'm happy to finally get something useful for my army other than the Chapter Master upgrade.
I will admit that I'm mostly a hobbyist rather than a player, so please correct me if I'm wrong. But, doesn't this completely screw over Imperial Knights players?
While Knights won't benefit from the rule, they need it less to start with. Knights are a low-count army so will usually get the +1 to the first turn roll. Secondly, everything in the army can move 10" or more and still fire heavy weapons without a penalty. GW sell enough tall terrain pieces to either block LOS to Knight-sized models or at least give them a normal cover save.
I think Knights will be fine.
I stand between the darkness and the light. Between the candle and the star.
Danny slag wrote: RIP close combat armies.
They keep pushing 40k towards being two static gun lines that deploy in the back edge and lob shots at each other.
Close combat is riskier because you have to roll charge, more dangerous because your opponent gets to attack back, and with fallback leaves you vulnerable, so I dont know why GW seems to think it should be nerfed into oblivion and is "unfair" of a close combat unit is ever able to reach a gunline.
That's the point. Close combat needs to be riskier.
The problem is risk-free close combat like Smash Captains or Bloodletter bombs. It's both boring and absolutely brainless to play, play against and bad for the game.
Melee needs a boost overall probably. But I agree the solution to that is not to allow someone to lock the opponent's gunline in melee on turn 1! So I see this change as positive.
Getting 60 Berserkers shoved into melee turn 1 is not ever fun to play against
And getting your entire army shot off the board before it has any chance to do any damage isn't fun either. But that half of the equation doesn't seem to ever come up. Because as I said they're ok discouraging combat armies.
They addressed the problem of going second against a gunline too: you have a stratagem that makes all of the units in your deployment zone (sans Titantic) gain the benefits of cover. As a Primaris player I'm happy to finally get something useful for my army other than the Chapter Master upgrade.
So they have a stratagem that's great for MEQ static gunline evo go second. Doesn't fix the imbalance of erring the gak out of combat armies. That 6+ cover save sure will save a whopping 3 of my melee models to maybe reach charge range turn 3...
MEQ doesn't do gunline all that well, plus if you play the mission (which MEQhas to do in order to have a chance of winning) you need to be mobile to grab objectives in most games. So no, it's not great for static MEQ gunlines because no one plays those (or at least plays those an expects to win games).
Danny slag wrote: RIP close combat armies.
They keep pushing 40k towards being two static gun lines that deploy in the back edge and lob shots at each other.
Close combat is riskier because you have to roll charge, more dangerous because your opponent gets to attack back, and with fallback leaves you vulnerable, so I dont know why GW seems to think it should be nerfed into oblivion and is "unfair" of a close combat unit is ever able to reach a gunline.
That's the point. Close combat needs to be riskier.
The problem is risk-free close combat like Smash Captains or Bloodletter bombs. It's both boring and absolutely brainless to play, play against and bad for the game.
Melee needs a boost overall probably. But I agree the solution to that is not to allow someone to lock the opponent's gunline in melee on turn 1! So I see this change as positive.
Getting 60 Berserkers shoved into melee turn 1 is not ever fun to play against
And getting your entire army shot off the board before it has any chance to do any damage isn't fun either. But that half of the equation doesn't seem to ever come up. Because as I said they're ok discouraging combat armies.
They addressed the problem of going second against a gunline too: you have a stratagem that makes all of the units in your deployment zone (sans Titantic) gain the benefits of cover. As a Primaris player I'm happy to finally get something useful for my army other than the Chapter Master upgrade.
So they have a stratagem that's great for MEQ static gunline evo go second. Doesn't fix the imbalance of erring the gak out of combat armies. That 6+ cover save sure will save a whopping 3 of my melee models to maybe reach charge range turn 3...
6+ cover save..?
Is your army 7+ save normally? Are you running nothing but Poxwalkers?
GSC which are 11 points (minimum) for a paper thin model. Most guns in the game have some AP, with the exception of stunt marine boaters. So this stratagem will mean almost nothing. Just like it means nothing for orks, though at least they arent paying out the ass per model.
GW keeps using duct tape to fix what is inherently broken which is the turn structure. And they keep breaking entire armies to fix cheese that's only a very specific model combined with a specific strategem.
Well they did make it so you can hold objectives with buildings which is a hilarious way to make fortifications better (and makes me want to run the largest one I can just so hordes can't even get within 3" of said objective).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Process wrote: So has anything really changed? guard batteries still a thing, even if its just to get as many cp as possible to start with.
This doesn't change anything does it?
ohh apart from stopping the raven guard domination we're seeing............?
Considering how fast some army builds burn through CP it means we're looking at 1-2 turns of heavy CP usage instead of 4-5 turns.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/28 15:00:54
Process wrote: So has anything really changed? guard batteries still a thing, even if its just to get as many cp as possible to start with.
This doesn't change anything does it?
ohh apart from stopping the raven guard domination we're seeing............?
Yeah this is how I see it. I don't see any move away from the current reliance on allied Guard to gain CPs for Imperium Soup. You're not going to see IK without it, just as you didn't before.
I've seen so many innovative rule changes suggested here and other places among players that the new FAQ makes me very frustrated. At every turn GW seems to have taken the laziest, nerfiest solution possible. And to say Battle Brothers is working and everyone loves it makes me wretch.
I have to say that many of these changes made me happy as a Craftworld/Drukhari player primarily. Also makes me excited to pull out my Dark Angels again.
Process wrote: So has anything really changed? guard batteries still a thing, even if its just to get as many cp as possible to start with.
This doesn't change anything does it?
ohh apart from stopping the raven guard domination we're seeing............?
Yeah this is how I see it. I don't see any move away from the current reliance on allied Guard to gain CPs for Imperium Soup. You're not going to see IK without it, just as you didn't before.
It means the Knight players will either need to spend less CP per turn for late game CP usage, or run out before turn 3 meaning they'll go down faster once they run out since they won't get as much CP back every turn.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/28 15:07:33
Overall, I like it. The CP farm nerf is good, and warranted, but in truth I feel like CPs should be faction specific. Because like others have pointed out, you're still going to have cheap IG brigades to fuel knight stratagems, it's just going to less effective because they don't get so many free CPs.
If knight stratagems HAD to use CPs from knight detachments, that would be a lot more fair and permament fix, imo.
Also, the smash captain nerf didn't seem all that substantial. Increased the stratagem cost by 1. Meh. But that's not my biggest issue atm anyways.
I also think the RG/AL nerf was warranted. Granted, they were incredibly reliant on those armies getting first turn, but a guaranteed berzerker charge turn 1 or deep striking-but-not-moving agressors were broken as hell. My question is whether or not the new stratagem counts as a move for things like agressors.
And granted, there's still plenty of stuff that has ridiculous turn 1 moves (40" genestealer charges, 30" knight charges, etc). But the less of that nonsense, the better.
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment." Words to live by.
ClockworkZion wrote: They addressed the problem of going second against a gunline too: you have a stratagem that makes all of the units in your deployment zone (sans Titantic) gain the benefits of cover. As a Primaris player I'm happy to finally get something useful for my army other than the Chapter Master upgrade.
I will admit that I'm mostly a hobbyist rather than a player, so please correct me if I'm wrong. But, doesn't this completely screw over Imperial Knights players?
While Knights won't benefit from the rule, they need it less to start with. Knights are a low-count army so will usually get the +1 to the first turn roll. Secondly, everything in the army can move 10" or more and still fire heavy weapons without a penalty. GW sell enough tall terrain pieces to either block LOS to Knight-sized models or at least give them a normal cover save.
I think Knights will be fine.
Generally correct but gw terrain pieces are full of windows so los is never blocked and as you can't just be behind terrain to get cover no cover save. But then again not that they need it
1500 
