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.

Think of it this way: ALL the books suffer from codex creep one way or another. In the order of release, their rough effectiveness in the competitiveness:

1. SM: Possibly competitive - maybe 1 or 2 possible builds for friendly competitive
2. CSM: Less than likely competitive - not sure after Forward operative nerf - the only thing CSM had going
3. GK: Who?
4. DG: Possibly competitive - rule of three crippled DG
5. AdMech: Less than likely competitive - few decent units; special rules & unit synergy is weak.
6. AM: Highly competitive - they have everything needed for a decent list - board-wide range no LOS weapons, CP farm, board control, expendable W
7. CWE: Competitive - effectiveness reduced by rule of three
8. Tyranids: Competitive - rule of three crippled certain win-all builds, but still highly competitive with no set cookie cutter army build. Players often get caught off guard rather that outplayed by nid player though.
9. BA: Possibly competitive - only thing they have going is smash captain. flying lib dread sounded cool pre-release.
10. DA: Possibly competitive - few decent builds revolving CT and rerolls, but otherwise severely limited in build - maybe 2 or 3 working lists
11. Daemons: I know not much so I won't comment.
12. Custodes: Competitive - the only true "elite" army in the game currently - great offense, great defense, built-in MW mitigation
13. Tsons: Possibly competitive - I've heard some good stuff about them but same as daemons.
14. Tau: Possibly competitive - very weak internal balance, handful of good units.
15. Necrons: Possibly competitive - workable synergy, limited amount of builds, overcosted
16. DE: Highly competitive - current codex structure makes it possible to combine three different armies with part being playing a solid part. Great internal balance, synergy, stratagems, special rules. Currently best mono-faction army.
17. Deathwatch: n/a
18. IK: Competitive - not so great as mono-faction but often the center piece of the standard AM+IK+Flavor of the month imperium. Deals alot of damage, best distraction carnifex in the game that actually kills stuff.
19. Harlequins- no comment.
20. SW: Possibly competitive - still not sold on the whole uber-priest on calvary thing.

In total of 20 codex and 15 codex after release, AM is still under fire of cry for nerfs. There has to be something about AM that people are overlooking/ignoring how broken DE and Xenos soup is right now.

 vipoid wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
No, as is. They are way too good at their price point.

The fact that you can say this with a straight face proves that you have no interest in balance and won't be happy until guard have been nerfed into the ground.

You want a Primaris Psyker - who can cast a single spell per turn and is T3 with no save and no other meaningful abilities or weapons - to cost just 9pts less than a Psyker with better toughness, a 3++, Fly, the ability to heal off wounds caused, an aura buff for itself and similar units, an aura debuff for enemy psykers, and which can cast 2 powers per turn.

Get stuffed.

You have shown time and again that you don't want to see IG balanced, you just want to see them ruined. You won't be happy until every last model in the book is overcosted beyond all reason.

47 pts is too cheap for access to full powered smite, as well as +1 armor and -1 to hit spells. And that's from someone who uses them. I'm using these units now and I STILL think they should be nerfed signficantly. Because they are no-brainer choices, and no-brainer choices shouldn't exist. Defensive stats don't matter b/c of the magical character force barrier. And these bastards have force weapons. I've finished off plenty of T7 vehicles with them in CC. I'd never take a gakky ass librarian when I can get two of these guys. No brainer. More denies, more options, same casts, more wounds, can hold two objectives.

How about you get stuffed for not taking the absurdity of the IG codex seriously? 30 pts to double TWO squads firepower? Really? IG players are truly the Eldar players of 8th.

And, yes, it's getting to the point that I don't want to see an IG model for a long time. Because they are EVERYWHERE, including my own fething lists. By necessity.

Weapons:
Mortar: unchanged, but heavy weapon squads cost more for little help to the mortar
Missile Launcher: -5pts
Multi-laser: becomes Assault 4

Flamer - -5pts
Grenade Launcher - becomes assault 2

Doctrines:
Cadia gives Born Soldiers ability to Mordia under, new rule is that any time a Cadian unit uses Voice of Command or Tank Commander, they may issue two orders to the same unit.

Catachan: Relic becomes D3, replace "vicious traps" with Catachan Devils: 1CP, target Catachan unit rerolls all hit and wound rolls in close combat. Change "Burn it out" to instead make all flamers or heavy flamers roll 2d6 for hits.

Tallarn: change Ambush to count units as having moved, but only slightly, drop cost to 2CP. Allow Claw of Desert Tiger's bearer to advance and charge.

Vostroyan: Add to "Repel the Enemy" that the squad gets +1 to hit with pistols and combat attacks.

Valhallan: Replace Grim Demeanor with Grim Toughness - All Valhallan units gain +1 toughness. Replace "Send in the Next wave" with "Ignore Wounds" - 5+++ FNP for an infantry squad (not conscripts).

Mordian: replace parade drill with born soldiers - reroll ones if you stand still.

Armageddon: add to industrial efficiency: Armageddon officers can issue orders while embarked in Chimeras, and Armageddon Infantry squads can fire out of Chimeras"

 skchsan wrote:

In total of 20 codex and 15 codex after release, AM is still under fire of cry for nerfs. There has to be something about AM that people are overlooking/ignoring how broken DE and Xenos soup is right now.

We know what it is. It's people complaining about CP batteries but refusing to admit it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

In total of 20 codex and 15 codex after release, AM is still under fire of cry for nerfs. There has to be something about AM that people are overlooking/ignoring how broken DE and Xenos soup is right now.

We know what it is. It's people complaining about CP batteries but refusing to admit it.

And yet none of the "mono-guard armies will be ruined if you make guardsmen 5 ppm" has yet to give us non-mono-guard players exactly how your army will be crippled if guardsmen go up to 5 ppm.

Sounds like all bark and no bite.

Let's not forget that super tough gak in this game is T8. But the IG has TWO platforms that fire indirectly with strength greater than 8 for less than each are less than 150 pts. WTF?

 skchsan wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

In total of 20 codex and 15 codex after release, AM is still under fire of cry for nerfs. There has to be something about AM that people are overlooking/ignoring how broken DE and Xenos soup is right now.

We know what it is. It's people complaining about CP batteries but refusing to admit it.

And yet none of the "mono-guard armies will be ruined if you make guardsmen 5 ppm" has yet to give us non-mono-guard players exactly how your army will be crippled if guardsmen go up to 5 ppm.

Sounds like all bark and no bite.

People HAVE explained it. You just refuse to listen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Polonius wrote:
Weapons:
Mortar: unchanged, but heavy weapon squads cost more for little help to the mortar

Just make it so it can't be taken by Infantry/Veteran/Command Squads and give it a rule where it can't be fired if the HWT moved.

Doctrines:
Cadia gives Born Soldiers ability to Mordia under, new rule is that any time a Cadian unit uses Voice of Command or Tank Commander, they may issue two orders to the same unit.

So you want to give them the same thing as a Relic, instead of a useful ability...and give their currently useful ability to one that already has a fairly decent one?

Armageddon: add to industrial efficiency: Armageddon officers can issue orders while embarked in Chimeras, and Armageddon Infantry squads can fire out of Chimeras"

No. Those just need to be made mandatory parts of the Chimera. The Chimera isn't really worth its points right now.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

In total of 20 codex and 15 codex after release, AM is still under fire of cry for nerfs. There has to be something about AM that people are overlooking/ignoring how broken DE and Xenos soup is right now.

We know what it is. It's people complaining about CP batteries but refusing to admit it.

And yet none of the "mono-guard armies will be ruined if you make guardsmen 5 ppm" has yet to give us non-mono-guard players exactly how your army will be crippled if guardsmen go up to 5 ppm.

Sounds like all bark and no bite.

People HAVE explained it. You just refuse to listen.

Link please - or at least in the right direction. My search in Army List, General Discussion nor Proposed Rules aren't yielding anything/one giving an example of army lists that gets crippled by increase in 30~120 pt in their army.

 skchsan wrote:

Link please - or at least in the right direction. My search in Army List, General Discussion nor Proposed Rules aren't yielding anything/one giving an example of army lists that gets crippled by increase in 30~120 pt in their army.

Then you're not reading, because people have explained how doing this won't do gak to soup but will be detrimental to mono-Guard.

You can go on ignore like Martel from now on though.

 skchsan wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

In total of 20 codex and 15 codex after release, AM is still under fire of cry for nerfs. There has to be something about AM that people are overlooking/ignoring how broken DE and Xenos soup is right now.

We know what it is. It's people complaining about CP batteries but refusing to admit it.

And yet none of the "mono-guard armies will be ruined if you make guardsmen 5 ppm" has yet to give us non-mono-guard players exactly how your army will be crippled if guardsmen go up to 5 ppm.

Sounds like all bark and no bite.

People HAVE explained it. You just refuse to listen.

Link please - or at least in the right direction. My search in Army List, General Discussion nor Proposed Rules aren't yielding anything/one giving an example of army lists that gets crippled by increase in 30~120 pt in their army.

That's bc there arent any.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

Link please - or at least in the right direction. My search in Army List, General Discussion nor Proposed Rules aren't yielding anything/one giving an example of army lists that gets crippled by increase in 30~120 pt in their army.

Then you're not reading, because people have explained how doing this won't do gak to soup but will be detrimental to mono-Guard.

You can go on ignore like Martel from now on though.

I know you get very sentimental when it comes to nerfing guard in anyway, but I'm not trying to be confrontational and demanding a proof of your statement. I'm actually genuinely curious as to the effect of changes that 30~120 pts increase has on an army to a point of crippling it.

I play primarily DA and the last CA nerf on the dark talons increased points on my army by 60 points. I had to take out a HB on the scouts and 1 less RBK and another toy, but I don't feel that my army is no longer playable because of the 60 pt increase.

My friend and I theorycraft with battlescribe - we draft up some nasty mono-guard lists and I just don't see how increase in few points will cripple it and make mono-guard unplayable.

I'd imagine increase in 60 pts in a guard brigade to be something like taking out a primaris psyker, crusader, swap one artemia with barebone scout sentinel, few less mortars on infantries, etc.

Because it won't.

Don't worry; being ignored by kan is bliss.

Martel732 wrote:
Because it won't.

Don't worry; being ignored by kan is bliss.

Meanwhile 30 pt increase in the meta would mean a smash captain without his smasher...

I've already made plans to quit using that model. I never liked it, and knew it wouldn't last.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Conscripts:
6" WS/BS 5+ S3 T3 1W 1A LD4 6+ save
Unit starts at 20 models, can have an additional 10 to max out at 30.
Lasgun(which would be their only weapon once Frag Grenades are removed) 24" Rapid Fire 1 S3 AP0 1D
Removing <Regiment> means Raw Recruits(receives Orders on a 4+) can be removed, since they can't have Officers with Auxilia.

Gretchin:
5" WS5+ BS4+ S2 T2 1W 1A LD4 6+
Unit starts at 10 models, can have an additional 20. Presumably retains "Surprisingly Dangerous in Large Numbers"(unit including 20+ models adds 1 to their Hit rolls)
Grot Blasta 12" Pistol 1 S3 AP0 1D
<Clan>

Do you really need me to hold your hand through why having <Clan> is better than Auxilia? Do you really need me to explain that I've not said Gretchin are better than Conscripts, but rather I'm refuting your nonsensical stance that the changes suggested still make Conscripts somehow a ridiculously better choice?

I'm really struggling to see how you can suggest that a 24" rapid fire weapon on a chassis with +1S, +1T and +1Move (but -1BS ) are in any way equal to the alternative. It's unfathomable. It's quite obvious that having <Clan> is better than not having the equivalent in your faction. But when you have +1S, +1T and a way better weapon it all seems a little irrelevant. Not sure why you've made bold the starting size of the squad either, like that's some big issue to be discussed and some reason that Conscripts are clearly not better than Gretchin at 3ppm.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

I'm really struggling to see how you can suggest that a 24" rapid fire weapon on a chassis with +1S, +1T and +1Move (but -1BS ) are in any way equal to the alternative. It's unfathomable.

24" rapid fire weapon means nothing when you're locked in combat.

It's quite obvious that having <Clan> is better than not having the equivalent in your faction.

You would think so, but yet you kept insisting that the Conscripts with Auxilia are still leaps and bounds better.

But when you have +1S, +1T and a way better weapon it all seems a little irrelevant.

Not when your unit is quite literally meant to be a tarpit. That's what Conscripts are always argued by people like yourself to be, that's what people like yourself always suggest that Gretchin are.

Not sure why you've made bold the starting size of the squad either, like that's some big issue to be discussed and some reason that Conscripts are clearly not better than Gretchin at 3ppm.

Really? In yet another edition of MSUs you don't understand why I would bold the starting size of the squad?

Yes, the points are the same--the ability to field smaller versions of the same units is a Big Deal.

 Kanluwen wrote:

But when you have +1S, +1T and a way better weapon it all seems a little irrelevant.

Not when your unit is quite literally meant to be a tarpit. That's what Conscripts are always argued by people like yourself to be, that's what people like yourself always suggest that Gretchin are.

You can't see the importance of S3 T3 vs S2 T2 in a 'tarpit' unit? Really? I know you Guard players don't traditionally engage in melee but cmon.

You've assumed for the rest of your post very specific things that kind of vaguely suit your argument, which a)isn't objective and b) still proves Gretchin weaker.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

I'm really struggling to see how you can suggest that a 24" rapid fire weapon on a chassis with +1S, +1T and +1Move (but -1BS ) are in any way equal to the alternative. It's unfathomable.

24" rapid fire weapon means nothing when you're locked in combat.

It's quite obvious that having <Clan> is better than not having the equivalent in your faction.

You would think so, but yet you kept insisting that the Conscripts with Auxilia are still leaps and bounds better.

But when you have +1S, +1T and a way better weapon it all seems a little irrelevant.

Not when your unit is quite literally meant to be a tarpit. That's what Conscripts are always argued by people like yourself to be, that's what people like yourself always suggest that Gretchin are.

Not sure why you've made bold the starting size of the squad either, like that's some big issue to be discussed and some reason that Conscripts are clearly not better than Gretchin at 3ppm.

Really? In yet another edition of MSUs you don't understand why I would bold the starting size of the squad?

Yes, the points are the same--the ability to field smaller versions of the same units is a Big Deal.

1) Why are you assuming that you are always in H2H combat, and if you are in combat did you not get to at least shoot in overwatch with your RF 1 weapons?

2)Lets assume that both gretchin and conscripts are only tarpits and for some reason you are locked in combat without getting to shoot at anything so conscripts having the better ranged weapon isn't relevant. Are you really arguing that having +1T and +1S compared to gretchen doesn't make conscripts better tarpits than them? T3 means you aren't going to be doubled out by S4 weapons so you are quite a bit more durable and you are going to hit back harder than the gretchin when you get to swing.

3) Sure, assuming you want a MSU unit to try and sit on an objective and are in a crunch for points then gretchin have the advantage.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

But when you have +1S, +1T and a way better weapon it all seems a little irrelevant.

Not when your unit is quite literally meant to be a tarpit. That's what Conscripts are always argued by people like yourself to be, that's what people like yourself always suggest that Gretchin are.

You can't see the importance of S3 T3 vs S2 T2 in a 'tarpit' unit? Really? I know you Guard players don't traditionally engage in melee but cmon.

You've assumed for the rest of your post very specific things that kind of vaguely suit your argument, which a)isn't objective and b) still proves Gretchin weaker.

And you've done the same for your argument of why Gretchin are weaker than Conscripts.

Gretchin are backed up by Orks, an army that benefits from having a tarpit to charge into.
What happens when Conscripts in a mono-Guard army tarpit a unit?
The Conscripts have to Fall Back for anyone to follow up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DrGiggles wrote:

1) Why are you assuming that you are always in H2H combat, and if you are in combat did you not get to at least shoot in overwatch with your RF 1 weapons?

I'm "assuming that you are always in H2H combat" because that's why people took Conscripts. To park in front of everything else, take up space, and force the enemy to charge them.

That's what people like Martel constantly whined about, that he'd "charge and then get in, then they'd just fall back next turn" and shoot him off the table.

2)Lets assume that both gretchin and conscripts are only tarpits and for some reason you are locked in combat without getting to shoot at anything so conscripts having the better ranged weapon isn't relevant. Are you really arguing that having +1T and +1S compared to gretchen doesn't make conscripts better tarpits than them? T3 means you aren't going to be doubled out by S4 weapons so you are quite a bit more durable and you are going to hit back harder than the gretchin when you get to swing.

Being doubled out isn't as bad as it used to be. Yes, you get wounded on 2s but it's not guaranteeing a removal.

And WS5 has to be overcame in both cases, but Gretchin can get +1 to their Hit rolls by simply being a large unit.

3) Sure, assuming you want a MSU unit to try and sit on an objective and are in a crunch for points then gretchin have the advantage.

Also for screening characters...multiple units instead of a single unit opens up more blockage.

 DrGiggles wrote:

1) Why are you assuming that you are always in H2H combat, and if you are in combat did you not get to at least shoot in overwatch with your RF 1 weapons?

I'm "assuming that you are always in H2H combat" because that's why people took Conscripts. To park in front of everything else, take up space, and force the enemy to charge them.

That's what people like Martel constantly whined about, that he'd "charge and then get in, then they'd just fall back next turn" and shoot him off the table.

2)Lets assume that both gretchin and conscripts are only tarpits and for some reason you are locked in combat without getting to shoot at anything so conscripts having the better ranged weapon isn't relevant. Are you really arguing that having +1T and +1S compared to gretchen doesn't make conscripts better tarpits than them? T3 means you aren't going to be doubled out by S4 weapons so you are quite a bit more durable and you are going to hit back harder than the gretchin when you get to swing.

Being doubled out isn't as bad as it used to be. Yes, you get wounded on 2s but it's not guaranteeing a removal.

And WS5 has to be overcame in both cases, but Gretchin can get +1 to their Hit rolls by simply being a large unit.

3) Sure, assuming you want a MSU unit to try and sit on an objective and are in a crunch for points then gretchin have the advantage.

Also for screening characters...multiple units instead of a single unit opens up more blockage.

1) Again, it is their job to screen and eat the charge but you are really downplaying just how much better a 24" RF1 weapon is in overwatch compared to a 12" pistol.

2a) It is a 16% increase in durability, that is nothing to scoff at especially in a blob with 30 wounds.
2b) Yes they are WS5 but you still have longer range and when a unit is finally close enough to charge you get more shots to try deal with them. By my math (assuming you are 12" away so the grots can actually shoot at them) 30 conscripts shooting 30 grots would kill 11.11 grots vs 30 grots shooting at 30 conscripts only killing 8.33 . This is assuming you don't give the conscripts any orders either.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

But when you have +1S, +1T and a way better weapon it all seems a little irrelevant.

Not when your unit is quite literally meant to be a tarpit. That's what Conscripts are always argued by people like yourself to be, that's what people like yourself always suggest that Gretchin are.

You can't see the importance of S3 T3 vs S2 T2 in a 'tarpit' unit? Really? I know you Guard players don't traditionally engage in melee but cmon.

You've assumed for the rest of your post very specific things that kind of vaguely suit your argument, which a)isn't objective and b) still proves Gretchin weaker.

And you've done the same for your argument of why Gretchin are weaker than Conscripts.

Gretchin are backed up by Orks, an army that benefits from having a tarpit to charge into.
What happens when Conscripts in a mono-Guard army tarpit a unit?
The Conscripts have to Fall Back for anyone to follow up.

What does this even mean? Firstly I haven't assumed anything outside of their stats/proposed stats. Secondly every army in the game benefits from a tarpit. Especially mono Guard. Conscripts fall back, and obliterate the enemy with a firing line. Nothing too unusual there?

You're the one who brought up CQC. I asked you to compare their stats and weapons, but for some reason that didn't sink in so you decided that Conscripts and Gretchin are always in combat because they're a "tarpit" unit. A place where Conscripts notably still fare better than Gretchin.

They are better at range because they have a better gun. They are more survivable because they have T3 instead of T2. They are better in melee because they have T3 and S3.

I'm struggling to see an argument for them not being better than Gretchin, unless we take bizarre, convoluted, nonsensical reasoning? This isn't an insult, I'm genuinely baffled by your stance on this...

The two units serve a variety of functions, "tarpit" is one of them, perhaps (depending on your army). Their primary role is cheap objective camper and screen. Gretchin are smaller models. I guess that makes them easier to hide? There's a benefit for them with their smaller starting numbers (which means you aren't getting the "Dangerous in large numbers" buff, by the way) I suppose. But I don't think it's worth a better gun, +1M, +1S and +1T?

 DrGiggles wrote:

1) Again, it is their job to screen and eat the charge but you are really downplaying just how much better a 24" RF1 weapon is in overwatch compared to a 12" pistol.

And you're downplaying(or more likely ignoring) the fact that a 12" pistol can still fire when enemy units are within 1" of them.

So while yes, those Conscripts are getting 2 shots each in Overwatch...they then are locked in combat and can't do anything next turn without Falling Back and waiting a turn to shoot again.

2a) It is a 16% increase in durability, that is nothing to scoff at especially in a blob with 30 wounds.
2b) Yes they are WS5 but you still have longer range and when a unit is finally close enough to charge you get more shots to try deal with them. By my math (assuming you are 12" away so the grots can actually shoot at them) 30 conscripts shooting 30 grots would kill 11.11 grots vs 30 grots shooting at 30 conscripts only killing 8.33 .

Yes, and part of the proposal in this thread brings the Conscripts into the same 6+ bracket as the Gretchin.

Gretchin, when in units of 20+, are BS3+/WS4+ vs Conscripts BS/WS5+. Gretchin are also able to swing in CC and shoot their Pistols giving them two rounds to inflict damage vs the Conscripts' single round.

This is assuming you don't give the conscripts any orders either.

This requires a roll of a 4+ on a D6 and the proposals in this thread are for them to be classified as "Auxilia" removing their ability to receive Orders entirely.

Conscripts should stay at 4 points and regular guardsmen should be 5. Take away orders from conscripts completely instead of half-donkeying it like it is now and you have a good, crunchy ( for it's points) unit that has a defined niche (to be cheap meatshields). Let them keep regimental tag for the traits.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 DrGiggles wrote:

1) Again, it is their job to screen and eat the charge but you are really downplaying just how much better a 24" RF1 weapon is in overwatch compared to a 12" pistol.

And you're downplaying(or more likely ignoring) the fact that a 12" pistol can still fire when enemy units are within 1" of them.

So while yes, those Conscripts are getting 2 shots each in Overwatch...they then are locked in combat and can't do anything next turn without Falling Back and waiting a turn to shoot again.

2a) It is a 16% increase in durability, that is nothing to scoff at especially in a blob with 30 wounds.
2b) Yes they are WS5 but you still have longer range and when a unit is finally close enough to charge you get more shots to try deal with them. By my math (assuming you are 12" away so the grots can actually shoot at them) 30 conscripts shooting 30 grots would kill 11.11 grots vs 30 grots shooting at 30 conscripts only killing 8.33 .

Yes, and part of the proposal in this thread brings the Conscripts into the same 6+ bracket as the Gretchin.

Gretchin, when in units of 20+, are BS3+/WS4+ vs Conscripts BS/WS5+. Gretchin are also able to swing in CC and shoot their Pistols giving them two rounds to inflict damage vs the Conscripts' single round.

This is assuming you don't give the conscripts any orders either.

This requires a roll of a 4+ on a D6 and the proposals in this thread are for them to be classified as "Auxilia" removing their ability to receive Orders entirely.

I'm sorry I didn't clarify in my earlier post but that was with a 6+ save for the conscripts, with a 5+ save the conscripts would only lose 6.67 when the grots shoot at them. And again that was WITHOUT attempting to give the conscripts any orders as if they lost "regiment". Even with the nerfs proposed in this thread they are just plain better than gretchin in most situations. They would still have have greater range, greater movement, greater strength, and greater toughness. I would gladly pay +1 ppm for grots if they got the same statline as a conscript. It just isn't a statline that a 3 point model should ever have and for good reason.

Are grots 2 points or 3 points, right now?

 JNAProductions wrote:
Are grots 2 points or 3 points, right now?

3.

 Grimskul wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Are grots 2 points or 3 points, right now?

3.

Will they be worth 3 pts with traits later on?
I mean atm with the index i'd say they are at most 2 pts.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Are grots 2 points or 3 points, right now?

3.

Will they be worth 3 pts with traits later on?
I mean atm with the index i'd say they are at most 2 pts.

I think so, but then again I think they are a 3pt model right now. I don't see GW changing anything about their stat line though.

I mean this is a problem, we can't even balance properly or could balance properly since a lot of codices missed.
I suspect that this is one of the reasons why SM got toned down, in order to prevent or counter balance the souping issues. Or they just really were afraid like they sometimes were at the begining of a edition.

Frankly i'd like to see a pts and scalling range along the lines of this:
Grot 2pts
R&H militia /Mutants 3 pts
Cultists and R&H cultists 4 pts aswell as conscripts, altough you can argue that they can go back down to 3 pts.
Ig guardsmen 5 pts
Kabalite / veteran / R&H elites 6pts
I belive personally that skitarii and Firewarriors and the rest of the troop choices are kinda fine, albeit there could be a discussion about Hormagaunts.
Main outlier tho for really bad troops are marines, i'd cut their cost down 2pts. Probably also would not hurt to allow a marine army that is mono codex to get a additional CP for a full 10 man squad, CSM only for a full 20 man squad since cultist kinda fill that roll allready.

Not Online!!! wrote:
I mean this is a problem, we can't even balance properly or could balance properly since a lot of codices missed.

We only have 2 codex left for main factions (orks & GSC) and 1 slated for overhaul (sisters of battle). Aside from that, we have 3 subfactions left (sisters of silence, assassins, inquisition) which could easily be released as 1 book under theme of "imperial agents"

I think the upcoming CA is going to be a good point in time since 8th ed launch to revisit the codex and balance them out.

Not Online!!! wrote:
I suspect that this is one of the reasons why SM got toned down, in order to prevent or counter balance the souping issues. Or they just really were afraid like they sometimes were at the begining of a edition.

Even if this was the case, SM codex was nowhere near as strong as other codex on launch. It was only 'strong' in the comparative sense that they were essentially the only faction with full set of stratagems.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Main outlier tho for really bad troops are marines, i'd cut their cost down 2pts. Probably also would not hurt to allow a marine army that is mono codex to get a additional CP for a full 10 man squad, CSM only for a full 20 man squad since cultist kinda fill that roll allready.

Much calculations have been presented in re-costing marines. 11 ppm are most suited cost for tac marines to bring them up to NEAR par (as in maybe quite possibly if I must use them) with other troop choices.

But this isn't a post about SM.

Currently, only few armies are capable of meeting all the criteria for a competitive army. It's either they get toned down or rest of the armies get a boost.