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.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Azreal cents with HB and Huricanes gonna be a thing?

It's an imperial fists stratagem only. That said, Azrael is amazing and before his nerf he was absolutely baller in early 8th, better than Guilliman. You know, back when his 4++ would transfer to the pre-boots-on-the-ground triple-fire raptor lists, screened by morale immune conscripts from the same detachment. It's entirely possible he'll be good if he has something worthwhile to buff.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Azreal cents with HB and Huricanes gonna be a thing?

Dark Angels don't have Centurions. Because reasons.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Azreal cents with HB and Huricanes gonna be a thing?

Dark Angels don't have Centurions. Because reasons.

Yep. They need to be somewhat different to justify a codex

 Marmatag wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Azreal cents with HB and Huricanes gonna be a thing?

It's an imperial fists stratagem only. That said, Azrael is amazing and before his nerf he was absolutely baller in early 8th, better than Guilliman. You know, back when his 4++ would transfer to the pre-boots-on-the-ground triple-fire raptor lists, screened by morale immune conscripts from the same detachment. It's entirely possible he'll be good if he has something worthwhile to buff.

Isn't he good in that new formations, shoting at something big and leting him buff other raven captins in their speeders ? Just asking I don't have much expiriance playing vs DA, only one guy plays them and he only plays 2250pts.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Azreal cents with HB and Huricanes gonna be a thing?

Dark Angels don't have Centurions. Because reasons.

Wow….that makes no sense...I think Azreal is the only way to make something like a centurion work right now.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Azreal cents with HB and Huricanes gonna be a thing?

Dark Angels don't have Centurions. Because reasons.

Wow….that makes no sense...I think Azreal is the only way to make something like a centurion work right now.

GW has to somehow convince you they're TOTALLY two different armies. No Dark Angels army or successor would ever have even one Centurion. Not one. Not ever.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
GW has to somehow convince you they're TOTALLY two different armies. No Dark Angels army or successor would ever have even one Centurion. Not one. Not ever.

Well Chaos factions can't take many things that are readily available to loyalist forces.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Azreal cents with HB and Huricanes gonna be a thing?

Dark Angels don't have Centurions. Because reasons.

Wow….that makes no sense...I think Azreal is the only way to make something like a centurion work right now.

If you want them to have an invulnerable save, *cough*Deredeo*cough* which I think also got cheaper in CA2018.

 Trickstick wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
GW has to somehow convince you they're TOTALLY two different armies. No Dark Angels army or successor would ever have even one Centurion. Not one. Not ever.

Well Chaos factions can't take many things that are readily available to loyalist forces.

Because putting spikes on yourself means you cant put a gun on your transport at the cost of some space.

 Sir Heckington wrote:
Because putting spikes on yourself means you cant put a gun on your transport at the cost of some space.

What do you mean? Dark Angels don't have spikes...

 Trickstick wrote:

 Sir Heckington wrote:
Because putting spikes on yourself means you cant put a gun on your transport at the cost of some space.

What do you mean? Dark Angels don't have spikes...

why do you think they have to cover their power armour in dressing gowns dude.

Ice_can wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

 Sir Heckington wrote:
Because putting spikes on yourself means you cant put a gun on your transport at the cost of some space.

What do you mean? Dark Angels don't have spikes...

why do you think they have to cover their power armour in dressing gowns dude.

Gold!

 Trickstick wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
GW has to somehow convince you they're TOTALLY two different armies. No Dark Angels army or successor would ever have even one Centurion. Not one. Not ever.

Well Chaos factions can't take many things that are readily available to loyalist forces.

Well that's why I'm for Renegades being incorporated into the main Vanilla codex via using Chapter Tactics and switching around your keywords. You'd lose your special Chapter units but gain a few of the Chaos codex ones (like Possessed and Spawn).

It's an idea I've been working on and I truly believe it would work better than what's being done now.

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Azreal cents with HB and Huricanes gonna be a thing?

Dark Angels don't have Centurions. Because reasons.

Wow….that makes no sense...I think Azreal is the only way to make something like a centurion work right now.

If you want them to have an invulnerable save, *cough*Deredeo*cough* which I think also got cheaper in CA2018.

Two words for you: Custodes Vexus.

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Azreal cents with HB and Huricanes gonna be a thing?

Dark Angels don't have Centurions. Because reasons.

Wow….that makes no sense...I think Azreal is the only way to make something like a centurion work right now.

If you want them to have an invulnerable save, *cough*Deredeo*cough* which I think also got cheaper in CA2018.

Yeah, the problem is a 5++ only kicks in if they get hit by AP-4 or harder. Most thing you wanna stop are -3 so they're 5+ anyway.

Dark Angels don't get Centurions.......and I strongly support that choice, keep the fuglies out of the DA army please.

Just realised that dark reapers technically got a points buff, with the aeldari missile launcher going down to 20 if the exarch takes one the minimum price of a unit goes down by two points...

kingheff wrote:
Just realised that dark reapers technically got a points buff, with the aeldari missile launcher going down to 20 if the exarch takes one the minimum price of a unit goes down by two points...

And the rocket launcher is even better because of crack shot :/

I mean I love my reapers (have twelve of em....) but come on they didn't need me to take more anti-armor and anti-horde.

kingheff wrote:
Just realised that dark reapers technically got a points buff, with the aeldari missile launcher going down to 20 if the exarch takes one the minimum price of a unit goes down by two points...

Competitive lists almost always take Tempest Launchers.

 Ordana wrote:

kingheff wrote:
Just realised that dark reapers technically got a points buff, with the aeldari missile launcher going down to 20 if the exarch takes one the minimum price of a unit goes down by two points...

Competitive lists almost always take Tempest Launchers.

But it is good that GW noticed that some options are much weaker and decided to fix it a little bit. Didn't make them auto take, but if someone decides to take the missle launcher, he doesn't feel totaly gimped.

 Ordana wrote:

kingheff wrote:
Just realised that dark reapers technically got a points buff, with the aeldari missile launcher going down to 20 if the exarch takes one the minimum price of a unit goes down by two points...

Competitive lists almost always take Tempest Launchers.

Yeah, I was just making an observation. I normally run with AML just because that's what I've got modelled, so it's handy for me, I know most competitive lists will take zero benefit from this, I just found it kind of ironic.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

 Sir Heckington wrote:
Because putting spikes on yourself means you cant put a gun on your transport at the cost of some space.

What do you mean? Dark Angels don't have spikes...

why do you think they have to cover their power armour in dressing gowns dude.

Gold!

No, iron pyrite.

Remember you can take the exarch with shuriken cannon to save even more points and use him as the first wounds.

 SHUPPET wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
@ SHUPPET: Sadly I don't have time atm to properly respond to the above, but in the meantime: A: Ok, thanks for the response, that's nicely layed out. B: I'd say that we're potentially looking at different types of complexity. I'll say one is more technical/explicit, and one is more . . . Abstract? Deep vs. Broad? And the differences have effects on what is realistically achievable balance.

Something like that. Maybe I can do a better job with this tomorrow.

Which is which? And no worries. I don't quite get what you mean, but I'll still be checking the thread tomorrow.

Delayed because super busy. Checked watched Guilty Gear a bit, but I have essentially no experience with fighting games beyond playing a bit of Street Fighter II like three decades ago. So feel free to educate me if it becomes necessary.

I categorized the complexity of the two games as "deep" and "broad" primarily on the basis of the choices that occur before a match takes place. Listening to people talk about Guilty Gear on the youtubes was definitely interesting, and very intimidating from the standpoint of a guy who's really not into fighting games. Obviously there's a lot to learn and a lot to master going on in that game. I wouldn't dare challenge the notion that it's a complex game. However I describe the complexity as "deep" rather than "broad" because the arena of the game is very tight. A player picks a character and fights another player who has picked their character, and they fight on a very limited 2D plane. Each character that can be chosen has a ton of abilities and the interaction between opposing characters can get very nuanced, and the skill involved is obviously extreme. But despite having an exponential amount of combinations and potential meaningful interactions between fighters, all of those combinations still happen within a tightly bound design space. The potential characters are finite, the match space is very finite, the goal is finite. The parameters defining the game are deceptively simple, "choose a character, beat up the other players character". But it's like looking at a small puddle in the road, if you stepped into it you'd be in way over your head. The complexity is all happening after a few relatively simple initial choices.

On the other hand, we have 40K, which I labeled as "broad". The basic premise of 40K can likewise be easily described("choose an army and fight your opponents army"), but there's a ton to do in between saying you're going to play the game and any actual battle occurring, and all of those decisions have an effect. Is this narrative or competitive? How many points/power level? What factions are involved? What combination of units are involved within those factions? What do those units have? What additional rules will they have on top of that (subfactions) What is the board going to look like? What are the win conditions? All of that needs to get sorted out before a game even happens. The design space is really open-ended in comparison to Guilty Gear. It's also important to note that a lot the design space for any particular match is defined by the players. Players choose their army, they choose the type of mission played, they choose what table they play on, etc. Relative to Guilty Gear this is a huge amount of agency. Then the mechanics on the tabletop itself are relatively simple. The rules themselves being simple doesn't necessarily mean that the interaction between armies is also simple, but pretty obviously the actual mechanical interactions aren't even close to Guilty Gear. I'm sure some people will make the opposite analogy for 40K, that it looks like an ocean but it's only inches deep. I'd argue against that, but it's really beside the point.

And anyways in the original conversation, the comparative complexity wasn't really the point. The point was that one game was better balanced than the other, even though they both were complex.

The difference in difficulty for balance in 40K has to do with it's much more open design space. For the sake of focus/clarity, I think we should avoid talking about narrative vs. competitive, mission types, ITC rules, army value/battle size or anything like that, because I think we can agree that all of that could be standardized if GW wanted it to be. I think I can make my point with just terrain. Even if all of the other stuff was controlled for, you'd still have to contend with terrain. Terrain, even with the sorely lacking terrain rules as they are, is fundamental to 40K, is up to the players to choose, and it's impact on any balance is huge. A lot could be written about this, but I'm sure you can recognize the following to be true: Different units will have a different value on the table because of the terrain setup, regardless of any other factors. Not only that, but because of the nature of the game itself, this is by design and we don't want that statement to be untrue. In effect: 40K would be a worse game if terrain mattered less.

So we have a game in which the battlefield has a direct effect on unit value, but the battlefield is completely under player control. Thus, 40K is inherently difficult to balance. You can make rules for setting up terrain, and tournaments set up terrain for you in order to mitigate potential imbalance, but 40K can't (and shouldn't) get away from the basic truth that terrain is highly varied, and affects the value of units chosen.

Unless my eye's deceive me, twin lascannons went down in points but single lascannons didn't? what gives?

If you look at a few other more recent codexes, twin weapons have been getting minor price breaks over 2xsolo weapons.

You can't split fire with a Twin Weapon, so in theory, it's worth ever so slightly less.

Malfurious wrote:
Unless my eye's deceive me, twin lascannons went down in points but single lascannons didn't? what gives?

Bharring wrote:
If you look at a few other more recent codexes, twin weapons have been getting minor price breaks over 2xsolo weapons.

You can't split fire with a Twin Weapon, so in theory, it's worth ever so slightly less.

^^this.
2 Lascannons can fire at 2 separate targets if desired. 1 Twin-Lascannon cannot. It's a sublte tactical option and the fact that GW knows this and has priced Twin-weapons accordingly gives me hope that they might actually know what they are doing. More than some on Dakka give them credit for, at least.

-

Their argument was they wanted to buff stuff no one is taking. Yet they started this so long ago that they aren't properly addressing dark angels and space wolves. These armies have done worse, overall, than Necrons, even with access to Imperial Soup.

These armies are so bad you can't staple a Castellan & the Loyal 32 onto them and surpass Necrons. Think about that. Why did they not receive significant overhauls in their character pricing, or army specific options?

Bharring wrote:
If you look at a few other more recent codexes, twin weapons have been getting minor price breaks over 2xsolo weapons.

You can't split fire with a Twin Weapon, so in theory, it's worth ever so slightly less.

How much is Splitfire worth is actually a pretty difficult question.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
If you look at a few other more recent codexes, twin weapons have been getting minor price breaks over 2xsolo weapons.

You can't split fire with a Twin Weapon, so in theory, it's worth ever so slightly less.

How much is Splitfire worth is actually a pretty difficult question.

It is very valuable in a general sense.

Just thinking back to 7th edition, where you had a model with 1 hull point left, and you had to devote all of your units shots to kill it.