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.
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.
That is a pretty small group of highly biased players. It's also a very unique demographic - people who can afford to travel to play tournaments on a regular basis. These people have a highly vested interest in their stupid tournament net-listed armies remaining unchanged.
I don't know maybe am more strange then I think I really are. But does something like "clan" loyality exist in w40k? You know those people for which, and am not saying am one of them, just play other army or game isn't a fix for their army problems? I could imagine if someone played BAs and the two good things about their codex was the cpts and scouts, and someone took the cpts away and gave nothing in return, they may have a problem with adjusting. Or is it totally not the thing and the norm is that each year or new faq/errata your exepcted to go and buy a new army, just like in AoS, and if you are lucky some models maybe will transfer from the old list to the new list.
also pardon me about the tournament question. Was the BA+castellan+Ig list considered bad for tournaments, because it was too efficient and had no real counters that could also win games vs other armies? Because if yes why not just leave the changes to the tournament folk? Their orgenisers can just say a combinations of X units won't be allowed at the event, or that the stratagem can't be used. The changes wouldn't require, the nerfing of armies that do not play at the top tables of big tournaments on the other side of the ocean.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/28 16:03:59
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.
bananathug wrote: 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?
Bananathug coming through with truth and clarity yet again.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Danny slag wrote: And that shows the asinine bias of your argument because you wouldn't say the same thing about shooting a unit. But doesn't shooting them dead also stop them from doing anything? Oh but that's different because that's what the armies you play do. Your entire argument still sums up in "units I don't use shouldn't be able to do anything to units I use."
You're dense.
I play an all mono-faction all Primaris Imperial Fists army. I can't gunline the way you claim if I wanted to and have to rely on controlling the board center to win games. But nice projection of how my army is the cancer of the game despite not being in the top 10 this entire edition.
The current meta is already a result of the builds we've mentioned being nerfed and the game is better for it. Your bias for melee only armies is basically insane if only for the fact that the game shouldn't allow one player to lock the other player completely out of every phase save for assualt on turn 1. Even if you want to argue that shooting is strong it doesn't prevent you from doing other things in the game and they even gave you a means on increasing the durability of your army against shooting on turn 1 (and making transports better since they'll weather shooting on turn 1 better).
Says they don't play gunline then proceeds to say they play a gunline army.
Again you seem to think that shooting a unit dead is "fair" but killing it in melee isn't, somehow. Go ahead and tell me how my units you've shot off the board "still get to do something."
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/28 16:02:12
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.
Thousand Sons were working as a Smite spam army, not a major assault army.
Tzaangor bombs had a little success, so I guess if you wanted to smash 1/10 of the top lists; mission accomplished.
Tzaangor bomb was a powerful supplement to the smite spam army that was toned down by denying alpha strikes out of deep strike meaning that you can't throw most of your army into reserves to smash into the enemy lines the same way you used to.
You're ignoring that this change was done for good reason and using the fact that the reasons being mentioned aren't strong anymore as proof that the change wasn't needed despite the reason those builds aren't broken anymore being a result of said change.
I'm not ignoring it, I'm disputing it. This change was too heavy-handed in the wrong direction. Tzaangoer bombs were part of one, maybe two lists at NOVA. They just weren't a prevalent, serious issue. And there was good reason for that: they were annoying, but they weren't game breaking (I say this as a person who only fights AGAINST them since I won't play as Chaos).
The Smite Spam army will still be fine because it's primary assault element was Warp Time'd Mortarion, who is completely unaffected by this change.
I have no idea why you decided to say "Top 30" except maybe because it helps you.
No, because there're limits to grasping numbers of the cuff.
To just address the Top 0.01% of possible army lists combinations, addressing something in the ball-park of the top one or two million ITC lists played this year would probably be a better approach.
Audustum wrote: Uh, no, not at all. Let's review the lists, shall we?
I have no idea why you decided to say "Top 30" except maybe because it helps you. Most places generally settle on top 10 and occasionally top 15. In order to include as many lists as possible, here's the top 16 (cause I found na extra):
1. Knights/CP Farm
2. Knights/CP Farm
3. Ynnari
4. Knights/CP Farm
5. Morty+Magnus Party
6. Knights/CP Farm
7. Custodes Mass Jetbikes
8. Dark Eldar
9. Blood Angels
10. Harlequinns
11. Knight/CP Farm
12. Custodes (Infantry of all things)
13. Knights/CP Farm
14. Tau
15. Adeptus Astartes
16. Daemons
So looking at this, the top lists aside from Knight/CP Farm are almost certainly Eldar of some sort or another. There were only two Chaos lists at all that could even TAKE Tzaangoer bombs. Cultist Spam, even with Abaddon, has like no presence at all. Honestly, your idea of the current meta just seems wildly off base or based on early 2018 as opposed to late 2018.
The good news is changes to fly should shake up those builds a bit since most of those armies rely on jumping over units to charge important units.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/28 16:14:49
Quasistellar wrote: I do like that they're addressing the particularly strong strategems and upping their price, along with limiting CP regen.
Since they haven't done anything else to limit "soup", though, I think it's pretty clear that it's here to stay, and they're just going to try to balance around it.
Didn't they make official that you need to have a keyword other than Chaos, Imperium, etc.? Doesn'y that kill most soup armies, as I am pretty sure that means I can't take daemons in my TS army anymore (other than summon which sucks)
Karol wrote: Ok thanks. Maybe it is just me, but I though shoting was super powerful in 8th, and stuff like the BA captin or s spears were in lists as a bonus, a very nice one, but the heavy work still was done by stuff like reapers or castellans.
Shooting is still strong, but it's not the static gunline king it was in something like 5th. Hordes are stronger than they used to be against shooting and mobility and board control are incredibly powerful things in the current edition.
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.
Current meta is the result of them already being nerfed. They were incredibly good to the point of breaking the game which is why alpha striking was nerfed.
Uh, what nerf? They were exempt from Deep Strike rule before today.
Quasistellar wrote: I do like that they're addressing the particularly strong strategems and upping their price, along with limiting CP regen.
Since they haven't done anything else to limit "soup", though, I think it's pretty clear that it's here to stay, and they're just going to try to balance around it.
Didn't they make official that you need to have a keyword other than Chaos, Imperium, etc.? Doesn'y that kill most soup armies, as I am pretty sure that means I can't take daemons in my TS army anymore (other than summon which sucks)
Not in the same detachment.
You can have a Nurgle Daemon Battalion and a TS Battalion no problem. You just cannot have Ahriman be a HQ for your Nurgle Daemon Battalion solely on the Chaos Keyword.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/28 16:07:00
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.
I have no idea why you decided to say "Top 30" except maybe because it helps you.
No, because there're limits to grasping numbers of the cuff.
To just address the Top 0.01% of possible army lists combinations, addressing something in the ball-park of the top one or two million ITC lists played this year would probably be a better approach.
Top 10/Top 15 is pretty standard across tournament formats for a multitude of games. It's also where we have data to track consistent winners/top performers. Things below that could just as easily be player error instead of balance. You're gonna have to give some reason for your chosen cut-off line that's a bit more verifiable.
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.
Maybe 8.5 edition and a new round of codexes for everyone will move things in the right direction. In the meantime, my hobby group is burned out on the rapidly expanding trash fire that 8th is and will probably just play kill team for a few months to try and only waste a half hour at a time instead of 2.
Quasistellar wrote: I do like that they're addressing the particularly strong strategems and upping their price, along with limiting CP regen.
Since they haven't done anything else to limit "soup", though, I think it's pretty clear that it's here to stay, and they're just going to try to balance around it.
Didn't they make official that you need to have a keyword other than Chaos, Imperium, etc.? Doesn'y that kill most soup armies, as I am pretty sure that means I can't take daemons in my TS army anymore (other than summon which sucks)
Not in the same detachment.
You can have a Nurgle Daemon Battalion and a TS Battalion no problem. You just cannot have Ahriman be a HQ for your Nurgle Daemon Battalion solely on the Chaos Keyword.
Thank you. Did anyone actually do this? I mean then you lose your army trait. Wow that rule is pointless and stupid
Danny slag wrote: And that shows the asinine bias of your argument because you wouldn't say the same thing about shooting a unit. But doesn't shooting them dead also stop them from doing anything? Oh but that's different because that's what the armies you play do. Your entire argument still sums up in "units I don't use shouldn't be able to do anything to units I use."
You're dense.
I play an all mono-faction all Primaris Imperial Fists army. I can't gunline the way you claim if I wanted to and have to rely on controlling the board center to win games. But nice projection of how my army is the cancer of the game despite not being in the top 10 this entire edition.
The current meta is already a result of the builds we've mentioned being nerfed and the game is better for it. Your bias for melee only armies is basically insane if only for the fact that the game shouldn't allow one player to lock the other player completely out of every phase save for assualt on turn 1. Even if you want to argue that shooting is strong it doesn't prevent you from doing other things in the game and they even gave you a means on increasing the durability of your army against shooting on turn 1 (and making transports better since they'll weather shooting on turn 1 better).
Says they don't play gunline then proceeds to say they play a gunline army.
Again you seem to think that shooting a unit dead is "fair" but killing it in melee isn't, somehow. Go ahead and tell me how my units you've shot off the board "still get to do something."
A gunline is a mostly static army that relies on basically trying to table the opponent from their deployment zone. I'm playing a mid to short range shooting army (plus melee Reivers) that requires mobility to win games. It's not a gunline. Just because an army uses it's shooting phase doesn't make it a gunline.
Quasistellar wrote: I do like that they're addressing the particularly strong strategems and upping their price, along with limiting CP regen.
Since they haven't done anything else to limit "soup", though, I think it's pretty clear that it's here to stay, and they're just going to try to balance around it.
Didn't they make official that you need to have a keyword other than Chaos, Imperium, etc.? Doesn'y that kill most soup armies, as I am pretty sure that means I can't take daemons in my TS army anymore (other than summon which sucks)
Inside of a single detachment soup is mostly dead. Multi-detachment soup is fine.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/09/28 16:17:35
Bremon wrote: Maybe 8.5 edition and a new round of codexes for everyone will move things in the right direction. In the meantime, my hobby group is burned out on the rapidly expanding trash fire that 8th is and will probably just play kill team for a few months to try and only waste a half hour at a time instead of 2.
Same. Kill team feels so much more balanced and I think it comes down almost entirely due to a more intelligent turn structure. 40k will always be impossible to balance as long as they insist on this outdated turn structure of entire armies going before the other army gets to do anything to react.
I don't know maybe am more strange then I think I really are. But does something like "clan" loyality exist in w40k? You know those people for which, and am not saying am one of them, just play other army or game isn't a fix for their army problems? I could imagine if someone played BAs and the two good things about their codex was the cpts and scouts, and someone took the cpts away and gave nothing in return, they may have a problem with adjusting. Or is it totally not the thing and the norm is that each year or new faq/errata your exepcted to go and buy a new army, just like in AoS, and if you are lucky some models maybe will transfer from the old list to the new list.
also pardon me about the tournament question. Was the BA+castellan+Ig list considered bad for tournaments, because it was too efficient and had no real counters that could also win games vs other armies? Because if yes why not just leave the changes to the tournament folk? Their orgenisers can just say a combinations of X units won't be allowed at the event, or that the stratagem can't be used. The changes wouldn't require, the nerfing of armies that do not play at the top tables of big tournaments on the other side of the ocean.
Swapping codexes is absolutely thing. With marines can even made to extreme so that same models can be used for any variant. Whether imperial or chaos!
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.
Thousand Sons were working as a Smite spam army, not a major assault army.
Tzaangor bombs had a little success, so I guess if you wanted to smash 1/10 of the top lists; mission accomplished.
Not true. NOVA finals was a Tzaangor Bomb. And plenty more in the Top 30. Aside from Castellan-lists, it was easily the top list out there, and with Castellan/BA lists getting a nerf, it wouldn't do to just not address the 3-4 lists below that (Cultist-Spam with Abaddon and 120 infiltrating Alpha Legion Cultists being probably no. 3), or you're not really changing anything other than the flavour of the problem.
Uh, no, not at all. Let's review the lists, shall we?
I have no idea why you decided to say "Top 30" except maybe because it helps you. Most places generally settle on top 10 and occasionally top 15. In order to include as many lists as possible, here's the top 16 (cause I found na extra):
1. Knights/CP Farm
2. Knights/CP Farm
3. Ynnari
4. Knights/CP Farm
5. Morty+Magnus Party
6. Knights/CP Farm
7. Custodes Mass Jetbikes
8. Dark Eldar
9. Blood Angels
10. Harlequinns
11. Knight/CP Farm
12. Custodes (Infantry of all things)
13. Knights/CP Farm
14. Tau
15. Adeptus Astartes
16. Daemons
So looking at this, the top lists aside from Knight/CP Farm are almost certainly Eldar of some sort or another. There were only two Chaos lists at all that could even TAKE Tzaangoer bombs. Cultist Spam, even with Abaddon, has like no presence at all. Honestly, your idea of the current meta just seems wildly off base or based on early 2018 as opposed to late 2018.
Why would you ignore evidence just because it helps your perspective lol. It's a fact that they are taking spots in the top 30 so that isn't bad at all, it helps his perspective so he stated it. What the hell is this logic that the cut off point for success has to be where you deem it lol
P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it.
Quasistellar wrote: I do like that they're addressing the particularly strong strategems and upping their price, along with limiting CP regen.
Since they haven't done anything else to limit "soup", though, I think it's pretty clear that it's here to stay, and they're just going to try to balance around it.
Didn't they make official that you need to have a keyword other than Chaos, Imperium, etc.? Doesn'y that kill most soup armies, as I am pretty sure that means I can't take daemons in my TS army anymore (other than summon which sucks)
Not in the same detachment.
You can have a Nurgle Daemon Battalion and a TS Battalion no problem. You just cannot have Ahriman be a HQ for your Nurgle Daemon Battalion solely on the Chaos Keyword.
Thank you. Did anyone actually do this? I mean then you lose your army trait. Wow that rule is pointless and stupid
It was more of an issue with index armies. Some armies (like Inquisition, Assassins and Sisters of Silence) relied more heavily on it than others.
How soon do the leaks from something like the CA start, 1-2 months before or is it just like the codex where it is one week before?
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.
Danny slag wrote: And that shows the asinine bias of your argument because you wouldn't say the same thing about shooting a unit. But doesn't shooting them dead also stop them from doing anything? Oh but that's different because that's what the armies you play do. Your entire argument still sums up in "units I don't use shouldn't be able to do anything to units I use."
You're dense.
I play an all mono-faction all Primaris Imperial Fists army. I can't gunline the way you claim if I wanted to and have to rely on controlling the board center to win games. But nice projection of how my army is the cancer of the game despite not being in the top 10 this entire edition.
The current meta is already a result of the builds we've mentioned being nerfed and the game is better for it. Your bias for melee only armies is basically insane if only for the fact that the game shouldn't allow one player to lock the other player completely out of every phase save for assualt on turn 1. Even if you want to argue that shooting is strong it doesn't prevent you from doing other things in the game and they even gave you a means on increasing the durability of your army against shooting on turn 1 (and making transports better since they'll weather shooting on turn 1 better).
Says they don't play gunline then proceeds to say they play a gunline army.
Again you seem to think that shooting a unit dead is "fair" but killing it in melee isn't, somehow. Go ahead and tell me how my units you've shot off the board "still get to do something."
A gunline is a mostly static army that relies on basically trying to table the opponent from their deployment zone. I'm playing a mid to short range shooting army (plus melee Reivers) that requires mobility to win games. It's not a gunline. Just because an army uses it's shooting phase doesn't make it a gunline.
Quasistellar wrote: I do like that they're addressing the particularly strong strategems and upping their price, along with limiting CP regen.
Since they haven't done anything else to limit "soup", though, I think it's pretty clear that it's here to stay, and they're just going to try to balance around it.
Didn't they make official that you need to have a keyword other than Chaos, Imperium, etc.? Doesn'y that kill most soup armies, as I am pretty sure that means I can't take daemons in my TS army anymore (other than summon which sucks)
Inside of a single detachment soup is mostly dead. Multi-detachment soup is fine.
A gunline that balls up around an aura and slowly walks forward a few inches is still a gunline.
Don't get me wrong, that playstyle should be viable, but so should other playstyles. The issue is some of you seem to think that if any combat unit ever has any chance of doing what it's designed to do that's "unfair." You think its wrong fofor melee units to be able to sometimes get into melee. You're fine shooting half the opponents army off the board before it can do anything, but if a combat unit gets a charge off that's "no fun. "
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/09/28 16:25:12
bananathug wrote: 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?
Bananathug coming through with truth and clarity yet again.
Yea,no.
Cheap CP is even more valuable with only limited means of regening it
The CP farms are also the ones with the best regen. The cost for IGCP farms to function just went up.
Nothing done about 3++ castillians. New targeting/shooting rules make rotate ion shields even more powerful.
The cost for CP went up. Smash captains are no longer easily filling in the holes of their list.
DE, ugh.
Chapter Approved also Vect went up.
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 look - the everything will be a gunline argument again. You mean armies that have access to cheap infantry only, right? I'm not sure what point you're making, because those units largely weren't coming until turn 2 last FAQ as well and the world didn't end in gun lines.
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...
Oh no the horror. People might actually use fortifications. I guess they don't want to sell gnarlmaws though.
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.
Terrain does suck. Don't stick your flag out. It's an equitable rule. Character rules are there to prevent abuse and make characters useful so complain all you want.
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.
It lasts a turn. What are you going to do when it wears off? Just stand there?
Quasistellar wrote: I do like that they're addressing the particularly strong strategems and upping their price, along with limiting CP regen.
Since they haven't done anything else to limit "soup", though, I think it's pretty clear that it's here to stay, and they're just going to try to balance around it.
Didn't they make official that you need to have a keyword other than Chaos, Imperium, etc.? Doesn'y that kill most soup armies, as I am pretty sure that means I can't take daemons in my TS army anymore (other than summon which sucks)
Within same detachment. Chaos is valid to connect tz and daemons. How you think knight, ig and ba combo was valid?-)
Danny slag wrote: A gunline that balls up around an aura and slowly walks forward a few inches is still a gunline.
By your definition any army that relies on shooting is a gunline regardless of how it actually plays. You're watering down a term to be next to meaningless just so you can claim to be right.
It lasts a turn. What are you going to do when it wears off? Just stand there?
Well at the speed infantry moves, at least of the marine kind, it is more or less the same. With those huge cover buildings a single move is often not enough to cross one area terrain on foot.
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.
Audustum wrote: Uh, what nerf? They were exempt from Deep Strike rule before today.
They couldn't warp time out of a webway portal to make the charge go from "hard to make" to "impossible to fail".
That's still in the BRBFAQ unchanged (and, frankly, was always rather obvious, aside from a few idiots arguing that the sky is red, because it said right out of the gate when 8th edition was released that units arriving from reinforcement cannot move further except charge).
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/09/28 16:25:15
Quasistellar wrote: I do like that they're addressing the particularly strong strategems and upping their price, along with limiting CP regen.
Since they haven't done anything else to limit "soup", though, I think it's pretty clear that it's here to stay, and they're just going to try to balance around it.
Didn't they make official that you need to have a keyword other than Chaos, Imperium, etc.? Doesn'y that kill most soup armies, as I am pretty sure that means I can't take daemons in my TS army anymore (other than summon which sucks)
Not in the same detachment.
You can have a Nurgle Daemon Battalion and a TS Battalion no problem. You just cannot have Ahriman be a HQ for your Nurgle Daemon Battalion solely on the Chaos Keyword.
Thank you. Did anyone actually do this? I mean then you lose your army trait. Wow that rule is pointless and stupid
For that det they lose. Most common way was supreme commander and couple chars that don't need it. Celestian, 2 others and say tallarn shadowsword outflanking
It lasts a turn. What are you going to do when it wears off? Just stand there?
Well at the speed infantry moves, at least of the marine kind, it is more or less the same. With those huge cover buildings a single move is often not enough to cross one area terrain on foot.
Guess what: YOU CAN RUN. Also transports move even faster than that if you want to max out your turn 1 move. It's like you can't conceive of a game that requires effort to execute things instead of just getting to break the game with turn 1 massed charges that force the person who is going second to basically autolose.
