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.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Karol wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Like they needed a buff?

I wish they did buff my army, what is wrong with wanting that. And it is imperium.

Point was that Knights were the one faction that didn't need that buff to still be effective after being shot at for a turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Darsath wrote:

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.

Agreed. It's a positive step, it just may well not be enough to change the meta. But we can't know for sure until there are some big tournaments using these rules.

Confirmed GW and competitive players are not playing the same game.

The loyal 32 just became more important. Cheap CP is even more valuable with only limited means of regening it (although the warlord trait and relic have been nerfed). The ability of units to screen from flying charges makes chaff even more important and punishes armies that can't throw chaff out.

Nothing done about 3++ castillians. New targeting/shooting rules make rotate ion shields even more powerful. Eldar psychic powers still OP as all outdoors. DE, ugh.

The real problem of soup (gaming detachments for strat access/use) doesn't seem to be understood by GW yet. Patting themselves on the back for battle brothers which "solved" a problem that no one was having (Celestine plus assassins was the only exploit I saw) shows the disconnect they have with their own game.

The no deepstrike protections are clearly a crutch for non-competitive players. Anyone who has the tactical acumen of an 8 year old is able to screen out deepstrikers. Forcing units to stay off the table until turn 2 just increases the value of resilient long range shoot (hmmm, no problematic units have those traits...) and fast/double moving units (nope, not meta defining units at all).

Oh, the fortifications can hold objectives is such a terrible rule. Stinks of marketing "we need to sell more fortifications for this edition" I can't think of any other reason a building should be able to hold an objective...

Terrain still sucks. True LOS is so bad (the tip of my spear shoots the corner of your command flag pole). The character targeting rules are still dumb (that unit of scouts hidden in that building mean you can't shoot my shield captain on top of the building.

Underwhelming at best. I was hoping the terrain interactions would be looked at. Deepstriking would be limited to outside of 9" of enemies deployment zone. LOS required for psychic powers. Character targeting looked at. Relics modified. Something done about the loyal 32. Vect once per turn. No heretic astartes for cultists. Something done about the double shoot/move/attack strats. Word of pheonix/SfD changes.

I'm not sure how I feel about the 2cp to give your guys cover turn 1. Having to clump all of my infantry into oddly shaped/leveled terrain was a quality of life issue I'm glad they fixed. But just being able to deploy wherever seems like it removes one of the last strategic elements of deployment further dumbing down an already dumb game.

Basically the things that are making the game as unbalanced as it is on a competitive level and next to nothing (raising the cost of some strats and going from 2 cp per turn to 1 cp per turn regen will have an effect turn 3 or later but by that time the broken stuff has already done it's job).

Doesn't leave me optimistic for CA but I'm still holding out hope. Maybe they had to stay away from all of those changes since CA is already at the printers and I'll be pleasantly surprised but in the mean time anyone want to buy a slightly used BA or SM codex?

 Dave1215 wrote:
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.

Well the GT level tournie players are loving it. We need a buff for mono-faction armies though.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

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.

I play the other type of knights. Does not chage the fact I am against making stuff bad, for sake of making stuff bad. An errata or FAQ should be making bad stuff good or worth taking. With nerfs like this two things are achived. Either the nerf is not enough, and the army or unit keeps being used anyway. As the example of eldar nerfs this edition or IG this FAQ are showing. Or the thing is killed, and the players wonder what they are suppose to do with the models now. It aint like GW is taking returns on stuff that no longer works or anything like that.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Danny slag wrote:

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.

They're all you see at the top tables (if you subtract, like, 7 of NOVA's top 10). That's QUITE the qualifying statement at the end. This was very much an unnecessary nerf to melee armies.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
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.

You missed the change to Fly and how that affects the smashcaptain build. You can't jump over screening units to charge knights anymore (as an example) but rather need something to pull the screening unit out of position first THEN charge the knight.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Like they needed a buff?

Never said they needed a buff. Just seems that it might hurt IK players since they cannot ever use this strategem to give IKs a chance to get out onto the battlefield.

SG

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
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.

Smash captain was also nerfed with fly nerf. No more need to roll 3" to charge after ds and screen stops from charging target

I like how needing to roll a 9 on 2d6 when deepstriking is "guaranteed charge." Less than 50% chance is far from guaranteed.

Everyone gaks their pants if combat units have any chance at all of doing any damage.

ITT- people complaining about the DS "nerf" like they've never played another edition of 40k before and it's just going back to how it always was.

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)

Point changes are mainly addressed in CA, which is 2.5 months out.

I'm pretty happy with this FAQ. It addressed issues in a measured way and didn't try to go overboard. Hopefully we'll see the full picture in CA.

 Grimtuff wrote:
ITT- people complaining about the DS "nerf" like they've never played another edition of 40k before and it's just going back to how it always was.

I never played another edition. Neither did any of my friends.

Point changes are mainly addressed in CA, which is 2.5 months out.

Ok, but what if it ends up the same way the last CA did. GK were the worse or one of the worse factions 9 months ago, and the CA nerfed them with points costs going up.

 ServiceGames wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Like they needed a buff?

Never said they needed a buff. Just seems that it might hurt IK players since they cannot ever use this strategem to give IKs a chance to get out onto the battlefield.

SG

Giving them the buff would hurt the game more than denying them the buff hurts the army.

On a different note: GW didn't change the way Grapnel Launchers work, meaning Reivers can still pull the 2" charge stunt.

Danny slag wrote:


Why? Seriously give a reason. You dont say "shooting needs to be riskier" despite it being stronger than close combat. And combat already is riskier. So all close combat armies need to be fethed into uselessness because of one unit, blood angel captains?

The changes to the BA captain have nothing to do with melee armies in general.

In any case buy some Rhinos and give them 2+ armor saves.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Danny slag wrote:


Why? Seriously give a reason. You dont say "shooting needs to be riskier" despite it being stronger than close combat. And combat already is riskier. So all close combat armies need to be fethed into uselessness because of one unit, blood angel captains?

The changes to the BA captain have nothing to do with melee armies in general.

In any case buy some Rhinos and give them 2+ armor saves.

I have two rhinos, termintors can't ride in rhinos.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

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.

What about the risky units like khorne berserkers? Most of my army is consistent of melee stuff. I've had to add more and more shooting through the existence of 8th when going to events. It's getting harder and harder to find victory against 95% gunline metas. I've played games where none of my Berserkers made it to melee because they were shot to Oblivion before they could get anything done.

The nerf to tzeentch demons was pretty lame... i get the LoC was pretty strong. But it cost 2cp a turn to make him good lol

Danny slag wrote:
I like how needing to roll a 9 on 2d6 when deepstriking is "guaranteed charge." Less than 50% chance is far from guaranteed.

Everyone gaks their pants if combat units have any chance at all of doing any damage.

Units doing ds charges don't do 2d6 charges. As a bare minimum they have multiple units and rerol' for 50-50(that's why multiple units) or boost distance. 2d6 9" charge is for noobs

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Danny slag wrote:


Why? Seriously give a reason. You dont say "shooting needs to be riskier" despite it being stronger than close combat. And combat already is riskier. So all close combat armies need to be fethed into uselessness because of one unit, blood angel captains?

The changes to the BA captain have nothing to do with melee armies in general.

In any case buy some Rhinos and give them 2+ armor saves.

You seem to be confused. Everyone took smash captains with jump packs to deep strike in. so GW nerfed deep stroking. Which yes effects every melee army.

Oh sure let me put my GSC in rhinos....oh wait.

But man you can get your GSC those gazylion points huge trucks that can't be hidden out of LoS and ride in those. Just don't let your opponent read your codex what they can transport and you should be ok.


But on a more positive side of things. With vect working the way it does now, how does one fit it in to an Inari soup list? You have to take the flesh dudes detachment, or is it just impossible to do, with in the points limitations given of course?

Karol wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Danny slag wrote:


Why? Seriously give a reason. You dont say "shooting needs to be riskier" despite it being stronger than close combat. And combat already is riskier. So all close combat armies need to be fethed into uselessness because of one unit, blood angel captains?

The changes to the BA captain have nothing to do with melee armies in general.

In any case buy some Rhinos and give them 2+ armor saves.

I have two rhinos, termintors can't ride in rhinos.

Terminators have a 1+ save in cover. So does a Land Raider. BOTH are AWESOME with this.

That said, why are your Terminators on the board turn 1 and not deep striking?

tneva82 wrote:

Danny slag wrote:
I like how needing to roll a 9 on 2d6 when deepstriking is "guaranteed charge." Less than 50% chance is far from guaranteed.

Everyone gaks their pants if combat units have any chance at all of doing any damage.

Units doing ds charges don't do 2d6 charges. As a bare minimum they have multiple units and rerol' for 50-50(that's why multiple units) or boost distance. 2d6 9" charge is for noobs

You mean like how shooty armies have things like reroll auras to boost their odds? How novel! But that's different right because it likely benefits the type of army you play.

You still have to make a roll to see if you even get in, and if you dont your entire unit is wasted. Huge risk, no real reward over just shooting instead.

Your entire argument seems to be "sometimes combat units can do damage and that's unacceptable." Stupid argument is stupid.

I think a lot of people are preemptively grabbing the pitchforks when it remains to be seen what Chapter Approved will bring with regards to points costs. Stuff that still appears to be broken might be recosted appropriately.

Danny slag wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Danny slag wrote:


Why? Seriously give a reason. You dont say "shooting needs to be riskier" despite it being stronger than close combat. And combat already is riskier. So all close combat armies need to be fethed into uselessness because of one unit, blood angel captains?

The changes to the BA captain have nothing to do with melee armies in general.

In any case buy some Rhinos and give them 2+ armor saves.

You seem to be confused. Everyone took smash captains with jump packs to deep strike in. so GW nerfed deep stroking. Which yes effects every melee army.

Oh sure let me put my GSC in rhinos....oh wait.

No, deep striking was nerfed due to alpha striking melee builds that locked armies in their deployment zones and basically kept people from playing the game. Fly was nerfed because of the BA Captain, Shining Spears and Custodian Jetbikes.

I had no expectations for this FAQ but I was pleasantly surprised with the CP nerfs. What I'm not surprised with is GK being left in the dust. We'll see what CA does to help, but I don't expect anything significant.

 Kelligula wrote:
I had no expectations for this FAQ but I was pleasantly surprised with the CP nerfs. What I'm not surprised with is GK being left in the dust. We'll see what CA does to help, but I don't expect anything significant.

I think GK need a Codex redo to be honest. You can only do so much in a FAQ.

 ClockworkZion wrote:


You seem to be confused. Everyone took smash captains with jump packs to deep strike in. so GW nerfed deep stroking. Which yes effects every melee army.

Oh sure let me put my GSC in rhinos....oh wait.

No, deep striking was nerfed due to alpha striking melee builds that locked armies in their deployment zones and basically kept people from playing the game. Fly was nerfed because of the BA Captain, Shining Spears and Custodian Jetbikes.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
That said, why are your Terminators on the board turn 1 and not deep striking?

While good advice, this does make their damage per points lower overall
You pay X points for a unit for 5 turns of play, sometimes 6-7 turns, but lets keep it simple and just say 5.
If your unit isn't doing anything for a full turn it's efficiency potential is now Xppm - 20%.
Having to wait a full turn to use a unit, especially an already expensive one, is a downside of itself.

-

It's a good FAQ.

It addressed some of the most problematic issues.

Personally, I would've loved faction-specific CP, but it'll work like this.

It's not a rebalancing, so I hope CA brings some love to Grey Knights, Necrons, etc.. (and hopefully tones down Cultists, still think they shouldn't have the Hereticus Astartes Keyword), but for what the FAQ does address, I like it a lot.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Danny slag wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Danny slag wrote:


Why? Seriously give a reason. You dont say "shooting needs to be riskier" despite it being stronger than close combat. And combat already is riskier. So all close combat armies need to be fethed into uselessness because of one unit, blood angel captains?

The changes to the BA captain have nothing to do with melee armies in general.

In any case buy some Rhinos and give them 2+ armor saves.

You seem to be confused. Everyone took smash captains with jump packs to deep strike in. so GW nerfed deep stroking. Which yes effects every melee army.

Oh sure let me put my GSC in rhinos....oh wait.

No, deep striking was nerfed due to alpha striking melee builds that locked armies in their deployment zones and basically kept people from playing the game. Fly was nerfed because of the BA Captain, Shining Spears and Custodian Jetbikes.

Like what? Point to an alpha striking deep strike melee army that did any good other than blood Angel's. The ones everyone mentions, genestealers and berserkers dont deep strike and instead run up the board.