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.

Yeah, if killing guards is all you have to do then it's easy. 9 Warriors (with prime) kill 60 guards per turn (70 in perfect conditions) on paper, doesn't mean that it can actually happen.

Flamers are short enough ranged as to be a none starter for many, unless they have something special. The Heavy Flamers attached to the Avenger Gatling cannon, The Ultramarine dread that can step back and fire from CC, doing some damage.

Overall though, the idea isn't to make the flamer better or worth it, but to re-add something in the game to fix Hordes are the most durable fixture of the game. Every faction has access to flamers of some kind, so a rework of this mechanic would fix a issue, but not specifically exclude anyone.

Spoletta wrote:
Yeah, if killing guards is all you have to do then it's easy. 9 Warriors (with prime) kill 60 guards per turn (70 in perfect conditions) on paper, doesn't mean that it can actually happen.

Well, to be fair, tunneling 30 Termagants within range is easier than getting the Warriors to maximize their shooting + CC. Then again I play Jorm, so maybe I take tunneling for granted.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
The only people celebrating the Fly change were people who are upset their screens weren't 100% effective 100% of the time. Now Shooting armies are even more brain dead, and how dare their opponent not be forced to run into their guns if they're not playing one of the chosen few.

You think banana bikes and smash captains weren't braindead? Hoo boy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
Yeah, if killing guards is all you have to do then it's easy. 9 Warriors (with prime) kill 60 guards per turn (70 in perfect conditions) on paper, doesn't mean that it can actually happen.

I'm actually a little curious why Roboute and Assbacks haven't made a return yet. They probably should since they can get 2+ saves now.

Bobby G plus 6 Asscan RBs w/ HKMs is 1100 or so. On the move kill 45 IG and remove their board control in two turns or less. 900 points to fill out the list and bring something that distracts the Castellan.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
The only people celebrating the Fly change were people who are upset their screens weren't 100% effective 100% of the time. Now Shooting armies are even more brain dead, and how dare their opponent not be forced to run into their guns if they're not playing one of the chosen few.

You think banana bikes and smash captains weren't braindead? Hoo boy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
Yeah, if killing guards is all you have to do then it's easy. 9 Warriors (with prime) kill 60 guards per turn (70 in perfect conditions) on paper, doesn't mean that it can actually happen.

I'm actually a little curious why Roboute and Assbacks haven't made a return yet. They probably should since they can get 2+ saves now.

Bobby G plus 6 Asscan RBs w/ HKMs is 1100 or so. On the move kill 45 IG and remove their board control in two turns or less. 900 points to fill out the list and bring something that distracts the Castellan.

24" range and get turns off in assault. They are trash units. Very easy to destroy too. Cover will help them.

 Xenomancers wrote:

24" range and get turns off in assault. They are trash units. Very easy to destroy too. Cover will help them.

Small worries on getting assaulted. RG can handle any smash captain. A screen will work wonders now, too. Banana bikes don't have the hitting power, I think. Not with RG around to hit back.

^ +1 for the moniker "Banana Bikes"

And yeah, I may look at SM tanks again.

glados wrote:
Am I the only one OK with the prevalence of so many troops on the battlefield now?

It was something sorely missing from 7th. If someone had said then that IG infantry, cultists, Kabalite Warriors etc we’re going to be a great choice next edition we would have all been thrilled.

Troops should be a 100% auto pick in any list and this edition widely does that. The only thing left to do is fix a few of the subpar troops like Tac’s and CSM squads and we’re golden.

By no means are you alone concerning Troops. Returning to the game from 6e & earlier, most of my armies are built on that foundation. Though I don't think they should be 100% an auto pick - as that would screw up my ability to run a pure Deathwing/Ravenwing, all dreadnought, IG tank company, etc.....

glados wrote:
It might be the age group I’m at but trying to ask anyone for a game that isn’t matched play you’ll be laughed at and assumed you’re trying to crack out some broken cheese list.

Oh exactly. That pretty well killed any WHFB play in my area when AoS arrived. Sure, a few of us are in (fairly close) agreement on what to bring etc. But without pts & a force chart it made it REALLY hard for anyone else/new to join us. Much easier to just post bring x points according to the/a standardized force org chart. Without that things usually bogged down to a non-fun negotiation prior to each game. Wich led to no one wanting to play. Wich in turn killed sales of 1/2 he GW range on the shops shelves - to the point where now the shop doesn't even stock AoS. They'll of course order it for you if you want something

glados wrote:
GW had the right idea with organised play rules. That’s where they need to go nuts with hard restrictions and continuous rules updates. The US tournament scene needs to be insulated from the rest of the hobby, it’s leaking is toxic to the rest of us

Amen.

 ZergSmasher wrote:
My takeaways on the whole thing:
General stuff:

Orks: Overall I think Orks got better, as the only unit that really cares about the FLY nerf is Stormboyz, and they are still pretty good for their cost. The Prepared Positions strat will really help them survive going second, as it will cut their casualties from small arms in half. They are of course also expecting a codex soon...

Prepared positions will not cut my casualties in half, Prepared positions makes my army go from a 6+ to a 5+ so if I was losing 60 boys on turn 1 I am now losing 50. that is a 16% buff not a 50% buff. It does DOUBLE the number of saves i'll make statistically but that is a completely different statement to halving my losses turn 1. Plus, as someone mentioned, a lot of players still bring a KFF Big mek turn 1 which costs like 75pts and gives 90-120 Boyz a 5++ turn 1 (and yes I have done this and it is fairly easy to cram 90 boyz into a 9' bubble).

Overall this FAQ was a negative for stormboyz but not really that big a deal since Stormboys are just over priced boyz and not taken too often due to their loss of +1 attack and the fact that they tend to die to morale since they aren't in range of other units. I already covered prepared positions but just to summarize, it is a buff for ork players, but not nearly as good as it is for more elite armies like Spess Mehreens.

At this point I am just praying our codex is good.

glados wrote:
Am I the only one OK with the prevalence of so many troops on the battlefield now?

It was something sorely missing from 7th. If someone had said then that IG infantry, cultists, Kabalite Warriors etc we’re going to be a great choice next edition we would have all been thrilled.

Troops should be a 100% auto pick in any list and this edition widely does that. The only thing left to do is fix a few of the subpar troops like Tac’s and CSM squads and we’re golden.

The problem is that this isn't the case across every army, just the ones where the troops are cheap. Troops that pay for durability rules or stronger weapons like Necron Immortals or Rubric Marines are significantly less viable.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^ +1 for the moniker "Banana Bikes"

And yeah, I may look at SM tanks again.

I did but unless the Repulsor gets a points drop it's more points efficient to just take a Brigade of Primaris and rely on the shooting from that instead. Shame since I was looking forward to building a 2k list with only 4 drops.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

24" range and get turns off in assault. They are trash units. Very easy to destroy too. Cover will help them.

Small worries on getting assaulted. RG can handle any smash captain. A screen will work wonders now, too. Banana bikes don't have the hitting power, I think. Not with RG around to hit back.

I think you have never experience the event that Guilliman being drowned by a dozen Nurglings, and watching helplessly his man being slaughtered.

Yes, Guilliman can solo Daemon Princes, Smash Captains, and even Imperial Knights, but he is vunerable to a sea of Nurglings, hordes of Tzaangors, several Rhinos / Trukks charging into him, especially the first one who can infiltrate and make a latest 2nd turn charge.

Similar things goes for all Ultramarine vehicles, neutralize them doesn't always means you need to destroy them, if you make the charge with a horde, you basically turn those 100+pts warmachines into dead weight. That is also the main reason Land Raiders are so bad. Because it is easily a 300+pts dead weight.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Winning a shootout point for point wasn't the challenge, simply showing you could kill 150 Guardsmen was. And there's 1760 more points in a 2000 point army to do it with. 1/9th of the army gets you 1/3rd the way there in a single turn.

Honestly whenever I fight Guard, the Guardsmen themselves are the least of my worries, and in general are part of the "cleanup" phase of the battle. The tanks and allied Shield Captains (or whatever) are the things I have to look out for.

Killing 150 guardsmen isn't all that special though.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^ +1 for the moniker "Banana Bikes"

And yeah, I may look at SM tanks again.

I did but unless the Repulsor gets a points drop it's more points efficient to just take a Brigade of Primaris and rely on the shooting from that instead. Shame since I was looking forward to building a 2k list with only 4 drops.

Well I'm the opposite, no Primaris for me. I was thinking Razors and sorta toying with the idea of Land Raiders for no good reason. 1+ with cover is sorta tempting though.

Kdash wrote:
So, i've been trying to think of ways to make the new Raven Guard strat work... What i have currently is...

Shrike, 2 units of 6 Bolter Inceptors and 1 unit of 4 Plasma Inceptors... Then 1 Knight, 2 mini Knights and a Guard battalion... It just sucks that i realised as soon as i think of ways to take advantage of the free 9" move (still hoping it allows FLY units to... Fly...), it turns into costing so so so many points and you're then left with not a lot of options in the Marine dex to cover all the big gaps - thus leading you to needing something to hit a bit harder and some for of additional CP.

Right now, the only options for the Raven Guard strat imho is Jump Pack units. You could run a couple of big squads of Vanguard Vets (or assault marines lol) down the table with it for a turn 1 charge, but, now that you can't jump screens there is no real reason for you to spend all those points on the melee Marines when another unit can just do a whole lot more for you shooting.

You're over thinking it. Before you were 9" away. Now you're 15" away. Still in double tap range for hellblasters and aggressors.
Still in easy charge range for bikes and jump packs.

Neophyte2012 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

24" range and get turns off in assault. They are trash units. Very easy to destroy too. Cover will help them.

Small worries on getting assaulted. RG can handle any smash captain. A screen will work wonders now, too. Banana bikes don't have the hitting power, I think. Not with RG around to hit back.

I think you have never experience the event that Guilliman being drowned by a dozen Nurglings, and watching helplessly his man being slaughtered.

Yes, Guilliman can solo Daemon Princes, Smash Captains, and even Imperial Knights, but he is vunerable to a sea of Nurglings, hordes of Tzaangors, several Rhinos / Trukks charging into him, especially the first one who can infiltrate and make a latest 2nd turn charge.

Similar things goes for all Ultramarine vehicles, neutralize them doesn't always means you need to destroy them, if you make the charge with a horde, you basically turn those 100+pts warmachines into dead weight. That is also the main reason Land Raiders are so bad. Because it is easily a 300+pts dead weight.

Smash captain can easily kill G man to. He only has 9 wounds. Plus hes gonna fight again for 2 CP if gman kills smash cap. So basically G man is taking 14 -18 thunder hammers to the face no matter what he does. He's probably gonna die.

Razor backs are crap. Anyone that can't beat them just isn't playing at a high lvl.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^ +1 for the moniker "Banana Bikes"

And yeah, I may look at SM tanks again.

I did but unless the Repulsor gets a points drop it's more points efficient to just take a Brigade of Primaris and rely on the shooting from that instead. Shame since I was looking forward to building a 2k list with only 4 drops.

Repulsor is on the better end of marine units and it's about 30-50 points over costed. This is a good indicator of how bad the book is.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
The only people celebrating the Fly change were people who are upset their screens weren't 100% effective 100% of the time. Now Shooting armies are even more brain dead, and how dare their opponent not be forced to run into their guns if they're not playing one of the chosen few.

You think banana bikes and smash captains weren't braindead? Hoo boy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
Yeah, if killing guards is all you have to do then it's easy. 9 Warriors (with prime) kill 60 guards per turn (70 in perfect conditions) on paper, doesn't mean that it can actually happen.

I'm actually a little curious why Roboute and Assbacks haven't made a return yet. They probably should since they can get 2+ saves now.

Bobby G plus 6 Asscan RBs w/ HKMs is 1100 or so. On the move kill 45 IG and remove their board control in two turns or less. 900 points to fill out the list and bring something that distracts the Castellan.

Because the game isn't resolved on turn 1.

And a 2+ for potentially 1 battle round doesn't remedy the core issues with that list.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
The only people celebrating the Fly change were people who are upset their screens weren't 100% effective 100% of the time. Now Shooting armies are even more brain dead, and how dare their opponent not be forced to run into their guns if they're not playing one of the chosen few.

You think banana bikes and smash captains weren't braindead? Hoo boy.

At least a smashcaptain needs to burn a ton of CP to be truly effective (Fire Wings + 3D6 charge + fight twice, that's I think 6CP pre-nerf?). Better solution would probably have been to limit the amount of stratagems you can use on a given unit each turn, because that way you can't buff a single Smashcaptain to godlike proportions as long as you have the CP to burn. I mean, it's clear that Smashcaptains needed to get hit in some way, but it sucks that GW thought it was necessary to do so in a way that hits ALL flying assault units (most of which were just decent or already underperforming).

 Insectum7 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^ +1 for the moniker "Banana Bikes"

And yeah, I may look at SM tanks again.

I did but unless the Repulsor gets a points drop it's more points efficient to just take a Brigade of Primaris and rely on the shooting from that instead. Shame since I was looking forward to building a 2k list with only 4 drops.

Well I'm the opposite, no Primaris for me. I was thinking Razors and sorta toying with the idea of Land Raiders for no good reason. 1+ with cover is sorta tempting though.

The cover thing is pretty important to me. I mean my army has 17 drops (yay MSU Brigade builds).

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^ +1 for the moniker "Banana Bikes"

And yeah, I may look at SM tanks again.

I did but unless the Repulsor gets a points drop it's more points efficient to just take a Brigade of Primaris and rely on the shooting from that instead. Shame since I was looking forward to building a 2k list with only 4 drops.

Well I'm the opposite, no Primaris for me. I was thinking Razors and sorta toying with the idea of Land Raiders for no good reason. 1+ with cover is sorta tempting though.

The cover thing is pretty important to me. I mean my army has 17 drops (yay MSU Brigade builds).

Yeah, I'm really curious to see how the cover affects things locally. I've always avoided the Brigade build for my marines to try for the alpha, but maybe I can run a more dispersed Salamanders list and go brigade more safely. Unsure.

Of course My Jorm Tyranids which always have cover and also ignore cover will be totally unaffected.

I wonder is Reivers with Grapnel guns are affected since theirs doesnt say fly. but acts similar.

They are not.

 Marmatag wrote:
Because the game isn't resolved on turn 1.

It is if half your army is dead before your first turn. Even with everyone who has the option taking -1 to-hit army traits and hugging cover like it's a Gears of War game that still probably happens one game in four around here.

The Newman wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Because the game isn't resolved on turn 1.

It is if half your army is dead before your first turn. Even with everyone who has the option taking -1 to-hit army traits and hugging cover like it's a Gears of War game that still probably happens one game in four around here.

Taking your Razorbacks from 3+ to 2+ for half of one game turn isn't going to change the fact that their offensive output is mediocre and they'll all be dead before turn 6 anyway.

If you're really interested in Guilliman, take a look at Repulsors and Fire Raptors.

 Marmatag wrote:

The Newman wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Because the game isn't resolved on turn 1.

It is if half your army is dead before your first turn. Even with everyone who has the option taking -1 to-hit army traits and hugging cover like it's a Gears of War game that still probably happens one game in four around here.

Taking your Razorbacks from 3+ to 2+ for half of one game turn isn't going to change the fact that their offensive output is mediocre and they'll all be dead before turn 6 anyway.

If you're really interested in Guilliman, take a look at Repulsors and Fire Raptors.

I trimmed the string of comments down to that one line because I don't have anything to add to the debate about Razorbacks. Or Gulliman or Repulsors for that matter. I was commenting that the game is currently so lethal that it's not uncommon to take unrecoverable losses before your first turn even if you do everything you can to reduce the effectiveness of first-turn fire.

The bigger problem is going to be all of the 4+ guardsmen lined up in front of everything. I hate this change.

Checks Marmatag's post to make sure the Sky is falling...

It is Falling.

Carry on.

Reemule wrote:
Checks Marmatag's post to make sure the Sky is falling...

It is Falling.

Carry on.

Troll on my good sir.

 Marmatag wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Checks Marmatag's post to make sure the Sky is falling...

It is Falling.

Carry on.

Troll on my good sir.

Just because I'm pedantic, that's not really trolling. Trolling is an attempt to make an inflammatory/startling/controversial posting/communication in order to provoke reactions out of others and draw attention to oneself. It's the internet equivalent of l'enfant provocateur. He's just being very dismissive of your opinion.

Audustum wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Checks Marmatag's post to make sure the Sky is falling...

It is Falling.

Carry on.

Troll on my good sir.

Just because I'm pedantic, that's not really trolling.

Are you controlling both accounts?

And the post was nothing but inflammatory. What value does it add? Mine is specific to the change, citing a game example. His post has 0 substance. I mean even the name "Reemule" is a troll on "Reecius"...

Meh, i'll just let the mods sort it out.