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.

If the rule is that infantry can assault into buildings with wobbly model then I think the way FLG does things is more or less fine. Gives you a reason to use those footslogging assault units instead of just spamming custodes jetbike captains. I'm preeeeetty sure that isn't actually how it works though given the FAQ.

 Crimson wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.

Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.

The bonus makes up for the anemic options and access to wargear that regular SM get and deathwatch don't. They are pointed in a vacuum (mono dex) and in that case are pointed appropriately. Nobosy should be complaining about Deathwatch.....literally at all.

 bullyboy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.

Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.

The bonus makes up for the anemic options and access to wargear that regular SM get and deathwatch don't. They are pointed in a vacuum (mono dex) and in that case are pointed appropriately. Nobosy should be complaining about Deathwatch.....literally at all.

Just no. This is not how this works. A lot of people are trying to build pure Primaris armies and it is completely ludicrous how much better DW are for such a build. No one is saying that DW are OP as a faction, they aren't. However, the cost difference between DW Intercessor and Vanilla intercessor is way too little (the solution is to make vanilla Intercessors cheaper instead of making DW Intercessors more expensive.) And of course as soup exists, you can't balance things for monofaction alone, you need to think about the internal balance of the entire 'Grand Alliance.'

 bullyboy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.

Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.

The bonus makes up for the anemic options and access to wargear that regular SM get and deathwatch don't. They are pointed in a vacuum (mono dex) and in that case are pointed appropriately. Nobosy should be complaining about Deathwatch.....literally at all.

I sure hope GW doesn't use that logic...

 Crimson wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.

Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.

The bonus makes up for the anemic options and access to wargear that regular SM get and deathwatch don't. They are pointed in a vacuum (mono dex) and in that case are pointed appropriately. Nobosy should be complaining about Deathwatch.....literally at all.

Just no. This is not how this works. A lot of people are trying to build pure Primaris armies and it is completely ludicrous how much better DW are for such a build. No one is saying that DW are OP as a faction, they aren't. However, the cost difference between DW Intercessor and Vanilla intercessor is way too little (the solution is to make vanilla Intercessors cheaper instead of making DW Intercessors more expensive.) And of course as soup exists, you can't balance things for monofaction alone, you need to think about the internal balance of the entire 'Grand Alliance.'

The Deathwatch one is barely worth the 20 points already!

But it is still more appropriately costed than the vanilla one. This really cannot be that hard to understand...

tneva82 wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.

Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.

The bonus makes up for the anemic options and access to wargear that regular SM get and deathwatch don't. They are pointed in a vacuum (mono dex) and in that case are pointed appropriately. Nobosy should be complaining about Deathwatch.....literally at all.

I sure hope GW doesn't use that logic...

well, you see GW assigning chapter tactics of massively varying power at no point cost so why would it surprise you to think they don't overcost SIA simply because DW does not have access to the same tools that SM get. And of course they don't point things with Soup in mind otherwise we wouldn't have the mess that we have right now, or the knee jerk reactions following tournament results.

If someone wants to play mono Primaris (which DW have access to the same units, and actually better in mixed versions) then yes, you'd lean toward DW. Unless perhaps you want to make the most out of Bobby G, or perhaps plasma spamming for DA (there may be a couple other exceptions). Does not mean that SIA is overcosted, it just means that the unit choices for Primaris are too prohibitive right now.

It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.

It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.

Which is why army-wide traits should have their own point cost. It would at least help to differentiate the power level of each trait and people would not feel hampered by playing Saim-hann when Alaitoc would obviously serve them better.

 Eldarsif wrote:

It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.

Which is why army-wide traits should have their own point cost. It would at least help to differentiate the power level of each trait and people would not feel hampered by playing Saim-hann when Alaitoc would obviously serve them better.

But that leads to other problems. Some traits are better with some units and terrible with others. But across a dex it becomes a bit more balanced (except the minus to hit traits). If Alaitoc was changed to something more mellow, which Craftworld would you see? Probably some Ulthwe, some Biel Tan, Saim Hann....maybe a few Iyanden. It would be more diverse. They don't need to be pointed (as you'd have to do it for each unit, not just each attribute), you just can't have one be so much better than the others.

 bullyboy wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:

It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.

Which is why army-wide traits should have their own point cost. It would at least help to differentiate the power level of each trait and people would not feel hampered by playing Saim-hann when Alaitoc would obviously serve them better.

But that leads to other problems. Some traits are better with some units and terrible with others. But across a dex it becomes a bit more balanced (except the minus to hit traits). If Alaitoc was changed to something more mellow, which Craftworld would you see? Probably some Ulthwe, some Biel Tan, Saim Hann....maybe a few Iyanden. It would be more diverse. They don't need to be pointed (as you'd have to do it for each unit, not just each attribute), you just can't have one be so much better than the others.

I agree - traits costing points is just another can of worms. Just bring the weaker traits up and occupy the game with enough tools that taking certain traits isn't a sure win (like with what Orks will do to the meta).

 bullyboy wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:

It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.

Which is why army-wide traits should have their own point cost. It would at least help to differentiate the power level of each trait and people would not feel hampered by playing Saim-hann when Alaitoc would obviously serve them better.

But that leads to other problems. Some traits are better with some units and terrible with others. But across a dex it becomes a bit more balanced (except the minus to hit traits). If Alaitoc was changed to something more mellow, which Craftworld would you see? Probably some Ulthwe, some Biel Tan, Saim Hann....maybe a few Iyanden. It would be more diverse. They don't need to be pointed (as you'd have to do it for each unit, not just each attribute), you just can't have one be so much better than the others.

Then I'll bring up the counterpoint. Kill the Batm... I mean remove traits altogether.

Actually, I have a more interesting idea. What if you made a chapter/craftworld specific army(basically there would be requirements to what you must field) and it would net you a few extra Command Points? No armywide ability, no special snowflake thing going on, only a slightly more efficient army command point-wise.

The other way would be to have a trait only apply to a certain unit. Saim-hann would only be Windrunner jetbikes, Iyanden would only be wraithguard, Alaitoc apply only to Rangers, Ulthwe would only be guardians, and so on and so on. It would limit their force multiplier drastically while encouraging thematic Craftworld units.

The system is fine, just alter the alaitoc keyword so that it *specifically* doesn't stack with other -1 to hit abilities.

 bullyboy wrote:

It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.

Actually were gw designers professionals they would


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
The system is fine, just alter the alaitoc keyword so that it *specifically* doesn't stack with other -1 to hit abilities.

Sure it's fine if you care nothing about fluff and balance. Traits kill fluff and the way they are implemented kills balance as well

tneva82 wrote:


Sure it's fine if you care nothing about fluff and balance. Traits kill fluff and the way they are implemented kills balance as well

Well, he cares about balance, which is why there shouldn't be stacking.

As for fluff - nothing is ever going to perfectly match fluff.

 Crimson wrote:
But it is still more appropriately costed than the vanilla one. This really cannot be that hard to understand...

I demonstrated unbuffed DW intercessors outperforming guilliman buffed ultramarine intercessors...If that doesn't make you understand. Nothing will.

What will GW do in CA? Nerf Guilliman. Give no point reductions to SM.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Sure it's fine if you care nothing about fluff and balance. Traits kill fluff and the way they are implemented kills balance as well

Well, he cares about balance, which is why there shouldn't be stacking.

As for fluff - nothing is ever going to perfectly match fluff.

Haha, thank you.

And it's always funny seeing people post these "simple" suggestions like a wonky points system that needs to be completely implemented from scratch for traits, or complete top to bottom redesign of the system based purely on Eldar.

The problematic Eldar army is Ynnari. And Ynnari detachments don't get the trait bonus anyway, if you're really interested in toning Eldar down, just look at Ynnari. That's where the problem lives, end of story.

 Crimson wrote:
But it is still more appropriately costed than the vanilla one. This really cannot be that hard to understand...

Which is why I'm for Intercessors to be 16-17 points standard. Deathwatch being MORE appropriately priced doesn't mean they are, though. It just means we get frustrated trying to make the Vanilla codex work. Quite honestly the only thing they got that I personally want is access to Ancients. That would be INSANE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
But it is still more appropriately costed than the vanilla one. This really cannot be that hard to understand...

I demonstrated unbuffed DW intercessors outperforming guilliman buffed ultramarine intercessors...If that doesn't make you understand. Nothing will.

What will GW do in CA? Nerf Guilliman. Give no point reductions to SM.

Against certain targets. Deathwatch don't get the reroll to wound against every target.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
But it is still more appropriately costed than the vanilla one. This really cannot be that hard to understand...

Which is why I'm for Intercessors to be 16-17 points standard. Deathwatch being MORE appropriately priced doesn't mean they are, though. It just means we get frustrated trying to make the Vanilla codex work. Quite honestly the only thing they got that I personally want is access to Ancients. That would be INSANE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
But it is still more appropriately costed than the vanilla one. This really cannot be that hard to understand...

I demonstrated unbuffed DW intercessors outperforming guilliman buffed ultramarine intercessors...If that doesn't make you understand. Nothing will.

What will GW do in CA? Nerf Guilliman. Give no point reductions to SM.

Against certain targets. Deathwatch don't get the reroll to wound against every target.

I didn't even factor the reroll to wound.

Deathwatch effortless get reroll to wound with their captain. And since they're deep striking with 30+ inch rapid fire guns, it's not far fetched to assume they'll be rerolling their 1s. Because in practice they are.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I mean I appreciate it's even on all sides but it's super bland.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.

Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.

Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.

They actually *are* quite good. Better if you have a table with lots of ruins.

Wounding Grotesques on 2s? Flyrants on 2s? Primarch's on 2s? Dropping all to invuln save? You can't make the case this isn't good. The rest of the codex may have problems but that isn't what we're discussing here. You can also mix and match squads so they can fall back and shoot, or put a stormshield in a unit... so flexible. And can deep strike.

These guys are still cheaper than a PAGK.

If you're required to have VERY specific terrain for a unit to be good...the unit isn't good. That's not even up for discussion.

Regarding Strike Squads, they get the native Deep Strike and have 2 attacks at AP-2 DD3. I'm not defending them as fantastic but they're at least not garbage like the rest of the codex.

They have 1 attack base.

chnmmr wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I mean I appreciate it's even on all sides but it's super bland.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.

Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.

Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.

They actually *are* quite good. Better if you have a table with lots of ruins.

Wounding Grotesques on 2s? Flyrants on 2s? Primarch's on 2s? Dropping all to invuln save? You can't make the case this isn't good. The rest of the codex may have problems but that isn't what we're discussing here. You can also mix and match squads so they can fall back and shoot, or put a stormshield in a unit... so flexible. And can deep strike.

These guys are still cheaper than a PAGK.

If you're required to have VERY specific terrain for a unit to be good...the unit isn't good. That's not even up for discussion.

Regarding Strike Squads, they get the native Deep Strike and have 2 attacks at AP-2 DD3. I'm not defending them as fantastic but they're at least not garbage like the rest of the codex.

They have 1 attack base.

If you read my post you'll see I assumed they're equipped with Falcions

They still have 1 attack base. Falchions aren't free (opportunity cost), they come with a trade off. You will wound T8 on 6s rather than 5s, or T5 on 5s rather than 4s or 3s. And, the warding stave grants an invulnerable save in melee. Another trade off.