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.

"WHAT IS GW THINKING??"

They're thinking from the perspective of professional rules writers that have been writing rules for this game and others for decades, combining a mixture of playtesting from groups in the US and England as well as feedback from every other department in the company to create new mechanics and try to price things accordingly. They look at it from a scientific perspective and a fun perspective.

Is it good? Who knows? All this 'sky-is-falling' mentality and conjecture of comparing Orks and GSC is useless. The two armies have different stratagems, bonuses, traits, warlord abilities, relics, etc. The GSC have a deployment function that works totally different than any other in the game thus far. Every point cost is going to reflect that to some degree, in the same way that Necron pay for Reanimation Protocols whether they get to benefit from it or not.

My recommendation? Play it. See what works and what doesn't. Throw Orks up against GSC and see who wins and why. Put ACTUAL models on the table instead of just running simulations and math equations. A lot changes when you factor in line of sight, deployment, movement, and a dozen other factors that have nothing to do with d6 math.

I don't care if you use bottle caps and soda cans to represent your units to playtest it, but playtest it. If there are grievous issues, they'll show up then. THEN you can send an informed message to GW FAQ and they might just address it.

All this doom and gloom toxicity in this forum is really getting on my nerves. It's like people forget to have fun with their plastic toys.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Gotta love those desperate defenders.

I don't remember an 8 page call to arms about any other codex release, including the Orks one that was considered strong.

Regardless of the tricks and mad combos, can someone explain why their units are flat better (more durable, more damaging and often less expensive) than those of other armies?

Compare Burna boyz to Hand Flamer Acolytes.
Compare Acolytes to Boys.
Compare Aberrants to Nobs.
Compare the GSC buggy to any of the Ork buggies.
Compare warbikers to GSC bikes.

Please do explain, anyone, how this makes any sense? These comparisons aren't even close.

This is in an army that also has literally the best stratagem in the game. Vect is fething broken, it is way, way too powerful to be given to only a few factions. I said this when it was previewed for DE and look at that they're the best mono faction army. Surprise surprise. It's literally mechanic breaking and game winning. Such a stupid, stupid move by GW.

Imbalance on this scale isn't good for the game. It isn't fun and it isn't conductive to maintaining a growing community. GW have already fethed around with Imperial Guard, particularly Catachans who still dominate. They have yet to balance Castellans. Dark Eldar are proving they have some imbalanced combinations and GW have made no effort to bring them in line. Ynarri anyone? The most broken thing in 8th ed 40k's existence with a win rate to prove it? People are losing confidence in GW and threads like this, by a poster who is level headed for the most part, are your proof.

E - and are we forgetting that Index GSC were top tier? They have only gotten better.

Burna Boyz vs Hand Flamer Acolytes: Burna Boyz are definitely overpriced for what they do. They are comparable units, burna boyz are considered terrible by any metric of any unit. You can also compare practically any unit to Space Marine tacticals or GK terminators and make it look OP as well - and surely nobody on this board would do THAT.

Boyz vs Acolytes: Best comparison seems to be choppa boy vs basic acolyte. Basically the same shooting (higher BS but lower strength on the acolyte). Ork Boyz re-roll one or both dice on the charge base. They have a 30-man unit cap and a rule that gives them +1A at 20 or more. They also have leadership equal to their number, or the number of a nearby squad. Defenses are about equal vs most small arms, with 1 better armor and 1 lower toughness on the acolyte. Acolytes get cult ambush, more and better weapon upgrades, and UL. I'd say they have about comparably good stratagems, with GSC having more ways to get in to combat and boyz having more ways to be durable (through Endless Green Tide and things like Loot It/Ard Boyz) which makes sense because the GSC are more likely to be deep striking with less inbuilt ways to get in to combat. Even with the best tactic for that, GSC still only get in to combat 36% of the time, 28% for any other tactic. Boyz of any clan get in 58% of the time - more like 76% if you're Evil Sunz.

These units seem roughly comparable to me. Which makes sense, because they are the same point cost.

Nob Vs Aberrant: I'm going to have a hard time with this one because I don't exactly know the new points costs. The nice, high def set of images we have shows only the second points page, and the primary one I'm looking at is the blurry video. So it looks like an aberrant is base cost...18 or 19, Power Pick right now is 9, can't see it on the new page, and heavy rock hammer also looks like it's in the teens. Current points via battlescribe are 27 for pick, 33 for hammer - which would make hammers 15 and picks 9.

I guess it would make the most sense to compare a big choppa nob to a pick and a killsaw to a hammer?

Aberrants are T4 W2 SV5+ with a -1 damage rule, Nobz are T4 W2 no -1 damage. The picks throw 2 WS3+ S5 AP-2 D3 damage attacks. The big choppas throw 3 S7 AP-1 D2 attacks and 1 S5 AP- D1 attack if you give them also a choppa. That's 19pts vs theoretically 27 points (unless the pick has changed drastically). Aberrants seem...like you better be using some auras, strats or combos on them to make them worth it? Gotta say the big choppa looks pretty good here.

Looking at the hammer, Aberrants throw 2 WS4+ S10 AP-3 3D attacks for 33pts, Nob with killsaw throws 3 WS4+ S10 AP-4 D2 attacks for 29pts. Seems like the Aberrant is slightly more durable, nob does slightly more damage (because of the AP and bonus choppa attack).

I'd say I like hammer aberrants a bit better than saw nobz, big choppa nobz better than pick aberrants?

GSC buggy to Ork Buggy (Shokkjump vs HML makes the most sense here probably?)

GSC buggy gets a scout move and a 6++ FNP. Gun has +1S. Also costs 40 points less - nice.

Shokkjump gets +1BS, Gun is Assault vs Heavy, and its secondary armament is a rokkit rather than 2 heavy stubbers. It gets a clan trait, which can be something as good as 1 reroll to hit, wound, and damage, and a 6++. It also teleports, which is kind of pointless.

I guess it depends on how much value you put on the ability to actually move and shoot, 40% more damage vs tanks (assuming the ridgerunner stays stationary), and a clan trait.

Warbikers to GSC bikes:

10pts gets you: BS4/WS4 T4 W2 Sv5+ M14 with 2 S3 attacks, -1 to hit vs shooting, and a guard shotgun (assault 2 12" S3 becomes S4 at 6" range)
23pts gets you: BS5/WS3 T5 W2 Sv4+ M14 with 3 S4 attacks, two dakkagunz (assault 6 18" S5)

65% more cost
73% more damage vs T4 with shooting
60% more durability vs S4 shooting
66% more damage in melee vs T4/T3

The way I see it the biggest problem with the warbike is the increased damage spike vs anti-elite weaponry (you're more likely to fire plasma equivalent antielite weapons at them, though if you do use specifically plasma they can kind of punk you with a -1 to hit stratagem and make you explode more often) and the fact that S5 guns is kind of "the awkwardest number" in current 40k with so much T3 light infantry running around. If you don't cherrypick a scenario where one of the warbike's stats is lost (shooting vs T3 targets for example) then you can see where someone might have figured it was a fair cost differential. TBF, I don't think either is a unit that has a real role/purpose in life.

drbored wrote:
They're thinking from the perspective of professional rules writers that have been writing rules for this game and others for decades, combining a mixture of playtesting from groups in the US and England as well as feedback from every other department in the company to create new mechanics and try to price things accordingly. They look at it from a scientific perspective and a fun perspective.

As much as I respect the tonal change you're trying to bring to this pity party, that's a very generous interpretation of the skills associated with the GW game design interns.

Their mistakes are almost always slanted towards selling new models, almost to the point of discouraging the use of old models. If this had happened once or twice, I'd chalk it up to an honest mistake, but the pattern is pretty indisputable at this point.

Luckily they manage to 'correct' their mistakes once they've hit their sales goals, which, given the rabid nature of the fanbase, usually happens within the first few months. Clearly Knights have not hit their sales goals yet.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
The difference in the scrapjet (or any other Ork buggy) and the GSC buggy is that I have no choice but to take those small arms. So the comparison has to include them in the cost. You're also missing the Rokkit Launch a that we must pay for (12pts). So its either 75vs 102 or 84 vs 110. Not favourable. You aren't going to finish the kind of targets your scrapjet should be shooting with its melee profile unless you really luck out on MW rolls.

Twin Big Shootas and their single variants are generally considered a waste of points FYI.

Against Predator Equivalent

Rokkit kannon + wing missle
5 * 1.167 * .333 * .666 * .666 * 3 = 2.6

Heavy mining laser
2 * .5 * .666 * .833 * 3.5 = 1.9

Granted the laser will do better against T8. The 12 S5 BS shots are also far superior to 6 S4 stubber shots.

I don't think there is a big enough grievance on Ork buggies. T6 might not be blisteringly better than T5, but it can matter (e.g. disintegrators, heavy bolters, asscans, etc)

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Boyz vs Acolytes

We'll call the T4 v T3 and 6+ v 5+ a wash. I dare say the T4 is better, because they paid for that and not a removable armor save.

Acolytes get 3 attacks. Boyz get 3 and usually 4. This edge is for Acolytes, because of rending. They both have easy access to +1 to hit.

I actually think Acolytes are close to proper cost IF they didn't have the wargear rules that they do. It falls apart with unit sizes of 20 that get 2 per 5 special and full access to hand flamers.


Nobz vs Aberrants

Yea...might be a little nuts. I can't really defend this. The level that these can be amped to is crazy.

Burna Boyz

...I got nothin'.

Aberrants are twice the cost of Nobz, they HAVE to be better.
Acolytes only have 2 attacks that are rending, the third is a normal Strenght user AP - D1 attack

Before writing this you should have looked at rules first

I'm thinking something like:

Models Role Unit Name
1 HQ Patriarch
1 HQ Abominant
1 HQ Primus
20 Troops Acolytes - Flamers
20 Troops Acolytes - Flamers
20 Troops Acolytes
10 Troops Brood
10 Troops Brood
10 Troops Brood
1 Elites Clamavus
1 Elites Locus
1 Elites Nexos
1 Elites Kellermorph
10 Elites Abberants - 2 hammers, 6 picks.
5 Fast Attack Jackals - Demo
5 Fast Attack Jackals - Demo
1 Fast Attack Sentinel - Multi
3 Heavy Support Mortars
3 Heavy Support Mortars
3 Heavy Support Mortars

1 HQ Icon Ward
1 HQ Magus
10 Troops Brood
10 Troops Brood
10 Troops Brood
1 Elites Kellermorph

Works out about 1930. 20+ command points which *might* be too many with the Nexos (which might not be necessary given 20 CP, but there are good strats to use).You have the fully souped up Mental Onslaught Timmy Bomb potential. Plenty of Brood squads to hold the back field. 3 Acolytes+Abberants for turn 2 burn and turn (one unit can't charge/sad face). Kellers to appear as appropriate - if they can't target characters they can just add screen clear potential for the Abbs.

Not married to the Demo-Jackals. 150 points is expensive versus say 70 for another 2 sentinels. Need some empirical testing to see whether this is a strategem you want to try and use every turn until they are dead.

Also tempted to upgrade the Brood Brothers to Neophytes to grab some mining lasers+webbers. This was more about theory and need to play about with the points. 4 armed emperor though doesn't hugely help backfield objective holding squads and thats probably what the brigade is going to be. Rusted claw does, so some tweaking across the detachments might be possible.

Tyel wrote:
I'm thinking something like:

Models Role Unit Name
1 HQ Patriarch
1 HQ Abominant
1 HQ Primus
20 Troops Acolytes - Flamers
20 Troops Acolytes - Flamers
20 Troops Acolytes
10 Troops Brood
10 Troops Brood
10 Troops Brood
1 Elites Clamavus
1 Elites Locus
1 Elites Nexos
1 Elites Kellermorph
10 Elites Abberants - 2 hammers, 6 picks.
5 Fast Attack Jackals - Demo
5 Fast Attack Jackals - Demo
1 Fast Attack Sentinel - Multi
3 Heavy Support Mortars
3 Heavy Support Mortars
3 Heavy Support Mortars

1 HQ Icon Ward
1 HQ Magus
10 Troops Brood
10 Troops Brood
10 Troops Brood
1 Elites Kellermorph

Works out about 1930. 20+ command points which *might* be too many with the Nexos (which might not be necessary given 20 CP, but there are good strats to use).You have the fully souped up Mental Onslaught Timmy Bomb potential. Plenty of Brood squads to hold the back field. 3 Acolytes+Abberants for turn 2 burn and turn (one unit can't charge/sad face). Kellers to appear as appropriate - if they can't target characters they can just add screen clear potential for the Abbs.

Not married to the Demo-Jackals. 150 points is expensive versus say 70 for another 2 sentinels. Need some empirical testing to see whether this is a strategem you want to try and use every turn until they are dead.

Also tempted to upgrade the Brood Brothers to Neophytes to grab some mining lasers+webbers. This was more about theory and need to play about with the points. 4 armed emperor though doesn't hugely help backfield objective holding squads and thats probably what the brigade is going to be. Rusted claw does, so some tweaking across the detachments might be possible.

I don't think it would be too many considering how much CP GSC will eat. That said, you also get a lot of value out of the GSC CP so i'd imagine that this list will perform.

Cult of 4 Armed Emperor is a trap, GSC spends CPs like CRAZY and I really doubt you can use it throughout the game
Best Creeds are definitely Twisted Helix and Rusted Claw

I think these are mostly spot on. The differing factor between boyz and acolytes are the specials and flamers.

As for Aberrants - they are 16 points and pick is indeed 9 for a total of 25. The pick also grants them a rending claw attack.

But let's look at that base cost...T4 5+/5+++ (can be boosted to 4++ with reroll 1s) AND -1 damage for 16. A nob is T4 W2 4+ for 14. I find it really hard to justify that for 2 points.

That means a disintegrator takes TWICE as many shots to kill an aberrant BEFORE you factor in 5+++ or better. That's insane. One salvo kills one or maybe two Aberrants, but straight four Nobz.

And all of this is before we *really* amp them up.

drbored wrote:
"WHAT IS GW THINKING??"

They're thinking from the perspective of professional rules writers that have been writing rules for this game and others for decades, combining a mixture of playtesting from groups in the US and England as well as feedback from every other department in the company to create new mechanics and try to price things accordingly. They look at it from a scientific perspective and a fun perspective.
.

When anyone ever brings up this argument I look at the rules GK got, and ask two question A was there a lock out after GW made the GK codex and B where were those professionals and testers when they were writing the GK codex.


Boycotting seems like a strange idea though. It only works if you can force people to do it and this is almost always never. Those who like the codex and army or own it already will buy the rules, the rules seem good enough for some nid players to dip their toes in to GSC. The non gsc players can technically rave about the codex, but GW does not change stuff so that codex that already came out are made better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

KurtAngle2 wrote:
Cult of 4 Armed Emperor is a trap, GSC spends CPs like CRAZY and I really doubt you can use it throughout the game
Best Creeds are definitely Twisted Helix and Rusted Claw

But you don't have to spam all stratagems. It is enough to stop a knight rotating once to kill it. Stop wings once for BA cpts to not work. Heed if stoped means the NDK GM is now dead and next turn the GK player may not have a target to spend his CP on.

KurtAngle2 wrote:


Aberrants are twice the cost of Nobz, they HAVE to be better.
Acolytes only have 2 attacks that are rending, the third is a normal Strenght user AP - D1 attack

Before writing this you should have looked at rules first

Not twice - 2 points more. Sure, you need to drag a power pick along for 25, but they can get S8 without blinking on that.

I did look at the rules and I've stated exactly that on rending attacks in previous posts that you should read before attacking me.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Gotta love those desperate defenders.

I don't remember an 8 page call to arms about any other codex release, including the Orks one that was considered strong.

Regardless of the tricks and mad combos, can someone explain why their units are flat better (more durable, more damaging and often less expensive) than those of other armies?

Compare Burna boyz to Hand Flamer Acolytes.
Compare Acolytes to Boys.
Compare Aberrants to Nobs.
Compare the GSC buggy to any of the Ork buggies.
Compare warbikers to GSC bikes.

Please do explain, anyone, how this makes any sense? These comparisons aren't even close.

This is in an army that also has literally the best stratagem in the game. Vect is fething broken, it is way, way too powerful to be given to only a few factions. I said this when it was previewed for DE and look at that they're the best mono faction army. Surprise surprise. It's literally mechanic breaking and game winning. Such a stupid, stupid move by GW.

Imbalance on this scale isn't good for the game. It isn't fun and it isn't conductive to maintaining a growing community. GW have already fethed around with Imperial Guard, particularly Catachans who still dominate. They have yet to balance Castellans. Dark Eldar are proving they have some imbalanced combinations and GW have made no effort to bring them in line. Ynarri anyone? The most broken thing in 8th ed 40k's existence with a win rate to prove it? People are losing confidence in GW and threads like this, by a poster who is level headed for the most part, are your proof.

E - and are we forgetting that Index GSC were top tier? They have only gotten better.

Index GSC were top tier? Dang, which events? As far as I know, most of the recent GSC tops were by one guy...

Also, I’d like to throw out the Syndrome argument - if everything is broken, nothing is. According to you there is so many broken things in 40K right now, namely imperial and eldar soup, that if GSC are as overpowered as they say you are, what’s the problem in having one more army that can compete at a high level?

If all flavors of space marine didn't exist, the game is actually reasonably balanced. They're really the only ones that don't have a snowballs chance in hell in most games. Everyone else has something to at least act as a counter-meta force, or can do well with decent dice. Yeah, some armies are stronger than others, but if you delete the extreme, the game isn't nearly as imbalanced.

Genestealer cult is a good codex. Even a meta-shifting one perhaps (although Orks was already doing much of the same thing, so having more Ork-like armies is going to....do not much more for the meta than having twice as many actual ork armies.

Is it broken? No. Screen properly. Block deep strike like you always have and you’ll be fine. If you’re in that corner or the world that is still allowing deep strike turn 1 outside of your own deployment zone....well yeah I’d think that was broken too if I was an army going second against this deep strike stuff.

As is, you’re not going to see the win rate of GSC be all that high. It is not a “face roll all over the keyboard” kind of army. Good generals will be able to take advantage of the power of the book, but average to poor players will struggle to see this as even a good book after playing some games with it.

Boycott whatever you want. I love this army and GW knocked it out of the park thematically. Having rules that work well in game is just icing on the cake.

And just for the record, it’s not codex creep when most other books have good things going for them (sorry Grey knights). The perceived power of this book is more due to the current meta. They match up well against it, so of course the book will look good.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

the_scotsman wrote:


Burna Boyz vs Hand Flamer Acolytes: Burna Boyz are definitely overpriced for what they do. They are comparable units, burna boyz are considered terrible by any metric of any unit. You can also compare practically any unit to Space Marine tacticals or GK terminators and make it look OP as well - and surely nobody on this board would do THAT.

Boyz vs Acolytes: Best comparison seems to be choppa boy vs basic acolyte. Basically the same shooting (higher BS but lower strength on the acolyte). Ork Boyz re-roll one or both dice on the charge base. They have a 30-man unit cap and a rule that gives them +1A at 20 or more. They also have leadership equal to their number, or the number of a nearby squad. Defenses are about equal vs most small arms, with 1 better armor and 1 lower toughness on the acolyte. Acolytes get cult ambush, more and better weapon upgrades, and UL. I'd say they have about comparably good stratagems, with GSC having more ways to get in to combat and boyz having more ways to be durable (through Endless Green Tide and things like Loot It/Ard Boyz) which makes sense because the GSC are more likely to be deep striking with less inbuilt ways to get in to combat. Even with the best tactic for that, GSC still only get in to combat 36% of the time, 28% for any other tactic. Boyz of any clan get in 58% of the time - more like 76% if you're Evil Sunz.

These units seem roughly comparable to me. Which makes sense, because they are the same point cost.

Nob Vs Aberrant: I'm going to have a hard time with this one because I don't exactly know the new points costs. The nice, high def set of images we have shows only the second points page, and the primary one I'm looking at is the blurry video. So it looks like an aberrant is base cost...18 or 19, Power Pick right now is 9, can't see it on the new page, and heavy rock hammer also looks like it's in the teens. Current points via battlescribe are 27 for pick, 33 for hammer - which would make hammers 15 and picks 9.

I guess it would make the most sense to compare a big choppa nob to a pick and a killsaw to a hammer?

Aberrants are T4 W2 SV5+ with a -1 damage rule, Nobz are T4 W2 no -1 damage. The picks throw 2 WS3+ S5 AP-2 D3 damage attacks. The big choppas throw 3 S7 AP-1 D2 attacks and 1 S5 AP- D1 attack if you give them also a choppa. That's 19pts vs theoretically 27 points (unless the pick has changed drastically). Aberrants seem...like you better be using some auras, strats or combos on them to make them worth it? Gotta say the big choppa looks pretty good here.

Looking at the hammer, Aberrants throw 2 WS4+ S10 AP-3 3D attacks for 33pts, Nob with killsaw throws 3 WS4+ S10 AP-4 D2 attacks for 29pts. Seems like the Aberrant is slightly more durable, nob does slightly more damage (because of the AP and bonus choppa attack).

I'd say I like hammer aberrants a bit better than saw nobz, big choppa nobz better than pick aberrants?

GSC buggy to Ork Buggy (Shokkjump vs HML makes the most sense here probably?)

GSC buggy gets a scout move and a 6++ FNP. Gun has +1S. Also costs 40 points less - nice.

Shokkjump gets +1BS, Gun is Assault vs Heavy, and its secondary armament is a rokkit rather than 2 heavy stubbers. It gets a clan trait, which can be something as good as 1 reroll to hit, wound, and damage, and a 6++. It also teleports, which is kind of pointless.

I guess it depends on how much value you put on the ability to actually move and shoot, 40% more damage vs tanks (assuming the ridgerunner stays stationary), and a clan trait.

Warbikers to GSC bikes:

10pts gets you: BS4/WS4 T4 W2 Sv5+ M14 with 2 S3 attacks, -1 to hit vs shooting, and a guard shotgun (assault 2 12" S3 becomes S4 at 6" range)
23pts gets you: BS5/WS3 T5 W2 Sv4+ M14 with 3 S4 attacks, two dakkagunz (assault 6 18" S5)

65% more cost
73% more damage vs T4 with shooting
60% more durability vs S4 shooting
66% more damage in melee vs T4/T3

The way I see it the biggest problem with the warbike is the increased damage spike vs anti-elite weaponry (you're more likely to fire plasma equivalent antielite weapons at them, though if you do use specifically plasma they can kind of punk you with a -1 to hit stratagem and make you explode more often) and the fact that S5 guns is kind of "the awkwardest number" in current 40k with so much T3 light infantry running around. If you don't cherrypick a scenario where one of the warbike's stats is lost (shooting vs T3 targets for example) then you can see where someone might have figured it was a fair cost differential. TBF, I don't think either is a unit that has a real role/purpose in life.

I think these are mostly spot on. The differing factor between boyz and acolytes are the specials and flamers.

As for Aberrants - they are 16 points and pick is indeed 9 for a total of 25. The pick also grants them a rending claw attack.

But let's look at that base cost...T4 5+/5+++ (can be boosted to 4++ with reroll 1s) AND -1 damage for 16. A nob is T4 W2 4+ for 14. I find it really hard to justify that for 2 points.

That means a disintegrator takes TWICE as many shots to kill an aberrant BEFORE you factor in 5+++ or better. That's insane. One salvo kills one or maybe two Aberrants, but straight four Nobz.

And all of this is before we *really* amp them up.

Indeed. This is where I went, the durability seems way higher on Aberrants and its for 2pts extra. Just seems mad to me.

Thanks both for humouring me and doing the comparisons though, you're gems.

KurtAngle2 wrote:
Cult of 4 Armed Emperor is a trap, GSC spends CPs like CRAZY and I really doubt you can use it throughout the game
Best Creeds are definitely Twisted Helix and Rusted Claw

I agree it might be something you want to splash - but I don't know about it being a trap.
AoV is a game winning ability. You don't need to run it through a whole game - 1 or 2 is usually decisive.

Most games are decided one way or the or other by the end of turn 3.

Spending CP like crazy when you have relatively easy access to CP suggests good stratagems doesn't it? These are very good stratagems.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

the_scotsman wrote:


Burna Boyz vs Hand Flamer Acolytes: Burna Boyz are definitely overpriced for what they do. They are comparable units, burna boyz are considered terrible by any metric of any unit. You can also compare practically any unit to Space Marine tacticals or GK terminators and make it look OP as well - and surely nobody on this board would do THAT.

Boyz vs Acolytes: Best comparison seems to be choppa boy vs basic acolyte. Basically the same shooting (higher BS but lower strength on the acolyte). Ork Boyz re-roll one or both dice on the charge base. They have a 30-man unit cap and a rule that gives them +1A at 20 or more. They also have leadership equal to their number, or the number of a nearby squad. Defenses are about equal vs most small arms, with 1 better armor and 1 lower toughness on the acolyte. Acolytes get cult ambush, more and better weapon upgrades, and UL. I'd say they have about comparably good stratagems, with GSC having more ways to get in to combat and boyz having more ways to be durable (through Endless Green Tide and things like Loot It/Ard Boyz) which makes sense because the GSC are more likely to be deep striking with less inbuilt ways to get in to combat. Even with the best tactic for that, GSC still only get in to combat 36% of the time, 28% for any other tactic. Boyz of any clan get in 58% of the time - more like 76% if you're Evil Sunz.

These units seem roughly comparable to me. Which makes sense, because they are the same point cost.

Nob Vs Aberrant: I'm going to have a hard time with this one because I don't exactly know the new points costs. The nice, high def set of images we have shows only the second points page, and the primary one I'm looking at is the blurry video. So it looks like an aberrant is base cost...18 or 19, Power Pick right now is 9, can't see it on the new page, and heavy rock hammer also looks like it's in the teens. Current points via battlescribe are 27 for pick, 33 for hammer - which would make hammers 15 and picks 9.

I guess it would make the most sense to compare a big choppa nob to a pick and a killsaw to a hammer?

Aberrants are T4 W2 SV5+ with a -1 damage rule, Nobz are T4 W2 no -1 damage. The picks throw 2 WS3+ S5 AP-2 D3 damage attacks. The big choppas throw 3 S7 AP-1 D2 attacks and 1 S5 AP- D1 attack if you give them also a choppa. That's 19pts vs theoretically 27 points (unless the pick has changed drastically). Aberrants seem...like you better be using some auras, strats or combos on them to make them worth it? Gotta say the big choppa looks pretty good here.

Looking at the hammer, Aberrants throw 2 WS4+ S10 AP-3 3D attacks for 33pts, Nob with killsaw throws 3 WS4+ S10 AP-4 D2 attacks for 29pts. Seems like the Aberrant is slightly more durable, nob does slightly more damage (because of the AP and bonus choppa attack).

I'd say I like hammer aberrants a bit better than saw nobz, big choppa nobz better than pick aberrants?

GSC buggy to Ork Buggy (Shokkjump vs HML makes the most sense here probably?)

GSC buggy gets a scout move and a 6++ FNP. Gun has +1S. Also costs 40 points less - nice.

Shokkjump gets +1BS, Gun is Assault vs Heavy, and its secondary armament is a rokkit rather than 2 heavy stubbers. It gets a clan trait, which can be something as good as 1 reroll to hit, wound, and damage, and a 6++. It also teleports, which is kind of pointless.

I guess it depends on how much value you put on the ability to actually move and shoot, 40% more damage vs tanks (assuming the ridgerunner stays stationary), and a clan trait.

Warbikers to GSC bikes:

10pts gets you: BS4/WS4 T4 W2 Sv5+ M14 with 2 S3 attacks, -1 to hit vs shooting, and a guard shotgun (assault 2 12" S3 becomes S4 at 6" range)
23pts gets you: BS5/WS3 T5 W2 Sv4+ M14 with 3 S4 attacks, two dakkagunz (assault 6 18" S5)

65% more cost
73% more damage vs T4 with shooting
60% more durability vs S4 shooting
66% more damage in melee vs T4/T3

The way I see it the biggest problem with the warbike is the increased damage spike vs anti-elite weaponry (you're more likely to fire plasma equivalent antielite weapons at them, though if you do use specifically plasma they can kind of punk you with a -1 to hit stratagem and make you explode more often) and the fact that S5 guns is kind of "the awkwardest number" in current 40k with so much T3 light infantry running around. If you don't cherrypick a scenario where one of the warbike's stats is lost (shooting vs T3 targets for example) then you can see where someone might have figured it was a fair cost differential. TBF, I don't think either is a unit that has a real role/purpose in life.

I think these are mostly spot on. The differing factor between boyz and acolytes are the specials and flamers.

As for Aberrants - they are 16 points and pick is indeed 9 for a total of 25. The pick also grants them a rending claw attack.

But let's look at that base cost...T4 5+/5+++ (can be boosted to 4++ with reroll 1s) AND -1 damage for 16. A nob is T4 W2 4+ for 14. I find it really hard to justify that for 2 points.

That means a disintegrator takes TWICE as many shots to kill an aberrant BEFORE you factor in 5+++ or better. That's insane. One salvo kills one or maybe two Aberrants, but straight four Nobz.

And all of this is before we *really* amp them up.

Just looking at the base cost of the aberrant isn’t really fair - their cheapest weapon option is the pick, so at minimum you’re paying 25ppm. A nob can take 2 free choppers for a total of 14ppm

So, for 154 points, you get 11 Nobz with Double Choppas.
For 150, you get 6 Pick-equipped Aberrants.

We'll assume the Aberrants charge the Nobz, and get to swing first.

12 attacks with each weapon
8 hits
4 wounds at AP-2 Dd3, call it 2 at AP-1 D1 and 2 at AP-4 D1.

That's about four dead Nobz.

Nobz swing back, with the remaining 7...

35 attacks
~24 hit
12 wound
8 failed saves
~5 or 6 failed FNP
That's nearly half the Aberrants dead. And the Nobz DIDN'T get the charge.

You can't just ignore mandatory equipment.

 Marmatag wrote:
Spending CP like crazy when you have relatively easy access to CP suggests good stratagems doesn't it? These are very good stratagems.

2 per turn for turns 2 and 3 for 3" deploy
3 per turn for turns 2 and 3 for D6" deploy
2 per turn for 4+++ aberrants for turns 2 and 3
3 for vect
1 for return D6 models to a Troops units - probably 2 times
1 for 2 additional WL traits (one of which will be +D3 CP)
CP rerolls if you're using biophagus or critical charges - 4 for this


The army makes more sense with a restricted CP system. As it stands 20 CP is what you might expect to start with and get to 24 by turn 4 with the Nexos.

 Marmatag wrote:
The question is really, are the GSC genestealers better than the Tyranids Kraken Genestealers. This will essentially determine my faction in 2019.

No way, though I think I'll probably be running a unit of both.

PuppetSoul wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Having watched the very long video about GSC, my biggest take away isn't that they will be OP, it's that they will shake up the meta in tournaments, to what extent remains to be seen, but I like that a new codex drops and the meta changes, this isn't something that has happened to every codex, grey knights were a drop in the pond, dark angels too, more variety is always a good thing.

The important takeaway here is that GSC doesn't just effect GSC. It's entirely possible to take a patrol of GSC that gives access to Vect with a Tyranids primary.

And Tyranids aren't in a bad place right now, as someone just won CANCON with a 150 gaunt brick. Now imagine that brick with Vect and the ability to drop up to five impenetrable 9" denial bubbles: which deny Upon Wings of Fire and other end-of-movement phase turn1 charge enablers, as well as lower tier strategies like Sisters' Repressors or Deathwatch Corvus suicide-bombing (can't move flyers over them, because they're not units so flyers don't ignore them), if your opponent goes first.

Yes. This is a big thing for me too. Tyranids are now kinda gonna be punished for not bringing GSC when before it was just a bit more flavorful probably slightly more powerful. If you're leaving a Nexos and Vect at home, you're probably making a mistake. That doesn't mean Vect on a mid tier army like Tyranids is going to be enough to break the game (Drukhari would still be aces even without Vect, the game manages to progress even with it), but combined with the gakky soup rules, its once again pushing us to take a detachment purely for the strongest stuff, similar to how Drukhari is now used, which is my least favorite thing about this goddamn edition, and I'd been happy so far that Nids had managed to avoid it, and without C4E and Nexos that would probably still be the case with this new dex. It annoys me.

Assuming your numbers are accurate, Daedalus, even with triple Battalions, you're probably out by the end of three.

And when you mix in Hive Guard and Kraken Stealers, that CP will all but vanish

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, for 154 points, you get 11 Nobz with Double Choppas.
For 150, you get 6 Pick-equipped Aberrants.

We'll assume the Aberrants charge the Nobz, and get to swing first.

12 attacks with each weapon
8 hits
4 wounds at AP-2 Dd3, call it 2 at AP-1 D1 and 2 at AP-4 D1.

That's about four dead Nobz.

Nobz swing back, with the remaining 7...

35 attacks
~24 hit
12 wound
8 failed saves
~5 or 6 failed FNP
That's nearly half the Aberrants dead. And the Nobz DIDN'T get the charge.

You can't just ignore mandatory equipment.

You're off a bit.

Hypermorph
6 * .666 * .833 * .666 * 2 = 4.4
1 * .666 * .666 * .666 = 0.3 //tail

Other 5 Aberrants
10 * .666 * .666 * .833 * 2 = 7.4
5 * .666 * .666 * .5 = 1.1 //rending claws, but didn't bother with math on rending
5 * .666 * .666 * .666 = 1.5 //tail

That's 14.7 wounds or at least 7 to 8 nobs from unbuffed aberrants.

1 Nob does 1 wound to an aberrant. So, 11 of them could ace a unit of aberrants *if* they were all choppas and got the drop on the, but you've employed the one weakness that they should be protected from, which is mass 1 damage attacks. Try anything above 1 damage and it quickly becomes absolutely absurd (moreso when you account for real world buffs).






Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Assuming your numbers are accurate, Daedalus, even with triple Battalions, you're probably out by the end of three.

Yes - I expect that to be the case. As is usually the case in most games. If Vect isn't required that's 3 available. There's some flex in there.

Where do you get 10 Attacks from 4 Abberants?

I did forget that Nobs are only T4, though.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Where do you get 10 Attacks from 4 Abberants?

I did forget that Nobs are only T4, though.

Sorry - 5 aberrants plus hypermorph. Edited it since you used 6 initially.

Because the stratagems are fantastic. That's the point.

Shooting twice? Fantastic.
Guaranteed ambush charge? Fantastic.
Cheaper Vect? Fantastic.

These are S tier stratagems.

EDIT - and before someone loses their mind and says shooting twice isn't GSC, i know, it's Nids. To repeat: I KNOW. thanks

I guess I mostly don't care.

Competitive 40k is always a flavor of the month situation, or close enough to it.

I roll dice casually and play like-minded people. No one I know can afford to buy all these new models, so it's unlikely I'll see them. Even still, I'd try playing against them.

This isn't a good game to play competitively, if one is expecting balance. By all means don't support GW if you're unhappy, but maybe be a bit more realistic with what you expect and what GW is offering.

Not trying to be condescending, just my two cents.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:


Aberrants are twice the cost of Nobz, they HAVE to be better.
Acolytes only have 2 attacks that are rending, the third is a normal Strenght user AP - D1 attack

Before writing this you should have looked at rules first

Not twice - 2 points more. Sure, you need to drag a power pick along for 25, but they can get S8 without blinking on that.

I did look at the rules and I've stated exactly that on rending attacks in previous posts that you should read before attacking me.

False since you can't even equip Aberrants with nothing and they are FORCED to get power picks as the cheapest choice there, otherwise I would be comparing Space Marines (13 PPM with free weapons) with Necron Immortals (who clock at 8 PPM without weapons) and say that necron immortals are OP.

When people say that these whines come from low skilled players they do not lie

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

drbored wrote:
They're thinking from the perspective of professional rules writers that have been writing rules for this game and others for decades, combining a mixture of playtesting from groups in the US and England as well as feedback from every other department in the company to create new mechanics and try to price things accordingly. They look at it from a scientific perspective and a fun perspective.

As much as I respect the tonal change you're trying to bring to this pity party, that's a very generous interpretation of the skills associated with the GW game design interns.

Their mistakes are almost always slanted towards selling new models, almost to the point of discouraging the use of old models. If this had happened once or twice, I'd chalk it up to an honest mistake, but the pattern is pretty indisputable at this point.

Luckily they manage to 'correct' their mistakes once they've hit their sales goals, which, given the rabid nature of the fanbase, usually happens within the first few months. Clearly Knights have not hit their sales goals yet.

Yeah, why, in this release alone, let's see....

ONE

of the models is considered to be actually problematic by people who aren't just blanket condemning the whole codex.

That's definitely...something.