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.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
Your list should be your list. It should be made with the meta in mind and at most a rough idea of what faction your opponents might have. I should not be able to look at my opponents list and then a minute before the game starts say hmm took a bunch of xyz, slot in relevant countermeasures.

The assassins are specialized units and when you take a unit that is that specialized you should run the risk of your opponent not taking things that will play to that unit's strengths.


The fact that IOM super friends is the last army that needed another ace option that gives it a one up is also relevant.

It is thematically appropriate that the right Assassin can be selected for the job at any given time. They are deployed in miniature drop pods in the fluff. Calling up and saying "We've got enemy Psykers, send a Culexus" is definitely something I could see happening.

HoundsofDemos wrote:

The fact that IOM super friends is the last army that needed another ace option that gives it a one up is also relevant.

But that's the thing - IOM needs to worry about it, too, which means their lists will possibly skew toward defense.

nevermind

Looks like fun to me! I <3 Vindicare Assassins!

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Sideboarding is actualy a very GOOD addition to the game competitively. The issue is some armies cannot sideboard and some can.

Been to an OLD tournament for 40k 5th. 1600 with 150pt side board, (1750pt tournament) fun tournament, best one i've been too. You got to see the Mission and opponents Faction then got to pick to what you wanted (You have 1600 point core with 2 units being 150pts each, then each game you picked what unit you wanted to play with).

I was Nids at the time, so i had 2 Terivgon HQ's, 6 Hiveguards, 1 Doom+Pod, 50 Genestealers, the optional was lots of Gargoyles and the other was Zoanthropes. Goyles for mission that needed fast objective holders and more screens, ZOans for Rhino rush.

The raw combat capabilities just looking at their stats and weapons aren't all that insane, but the stratagems and individual abilities are quite powerful. These look open to some pretty abuseable shennanigans, but I don't know if they're any worse than anything already out. They certainly don't look to help anything though on that front.

The stuff messing with the opponent's CP's and the condoned list tailoring (at least within the context of matched play) for 1 CP is pretty silly.

I'm curious if the greatest utility will come from what they kill or the other disruption they bring.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
Your list should be your list. It should be made with the meta in mind and at most a rough idea of what faction your opponents might have. I should not be able to look at my opponents list and then a minute before the game starts say hmm took a bunch of xyz, slot in relevant countermeasures.

The assassins are specialized units and when you take a unit that is that specialized you should run the risk of your opponent not taking things that will play to that unit's strengths.


The fact that IOM super friends is the last army that needed another ace option that gives it a one up is also relevant.

It is thematically appropriate that the right Assassin can be selected for the job at any given time. They are deployed in miniature drop pods in the fluff. Calling up and saying "We've got enemy Psykers, send a Culexus" is definitely something I could see happening.

It takes a really long time to get around the galexy, Calling up and getting a Culexus when they have spot a psyker would be a waste of time. It would likely be months before one could even turn up.
Its also another thing the imperium gets that no one else can, Farseers look into the future So why not being able to pick units to better fit your opponent as well or Orks retrofitting units as they go.

So its not particularly extra fluffy to be able to skip what would be planing and deployment of resources.
If this was part of a side board like structure, it would probably be good for the game. But i do not hold very high the design of 40k to pull though with that.

I think a better justification would be having an Inquisitor or Rogue Trader as your Warlord would give you access to that particular Strategem. That's how I would balance it, anyway.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I think a better justification would be having an Inquisitor or Rogue Trader as your Warlord would give you access to that particular Strategem. That's how I would balance it, anyway.

Makes sense, only high level guys like them would have the authority to bring in Assassins anyhow. Gives Inquisitors to have a reason to even be in an army before their own redo.

Apple fox wrote:

It takes a really long time to get around the galexy, Calling up and getting a Culexus when they have spot a psyker would be a waste of time. It would likely be months before one could even turn up.
Its also another thing the imperium gets that no one else can, Farseers look into the future So why not being able to pick units to better fit your opponent as well or Orks retrofitting units as they go.

So its not particularly extra fluffy to be able to skip what would be planing and deployment of resources.
If this was part of a side board like structure, it would probably be good for the game. But i do not hold very high the design of 40k to pull though with that.

Well if you really want to explain it, the assassins would have been dispatched by their controllers way before the IoM army would have any idea who their opposition was.

 Big Mac wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
While I've always liked the Assassins as concept and a faction, giving IOM another +1 just slot me in option with no real downside is not what the game needs. The fact you don't even need to pick one ahead of time is even more insane.

I really hope that the does not become a trend. Being able to put points aside and just pull a tool from a diverse list depending on my opponent is a bad game play mechanic.

Its like MtG side boards, you have more tools and opponents cannot build lists to specifically to counter yours; its already in play such as daemon summonings.

Daemon summoning however has so hefty penalties that makes daemon summoning rather weak. You lose all your traits etc and have to have character sitting duck to bring them in.

Apple fox wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
Your list should be your list. It should be made with the meta in mind and at most a rough idea of what faction your opponents might have. I should not be able to look at my opponents list and then a minute before the game starts say hmm took a bunch of xyz, slot in relevant countermeasures.

The assassins are specialized units and when you take a unit that is that specialized you should run the risk of your opponent not taking things that will play to that unit's strengths.


The fact that IOM super friends is the last army that needed another ace option that gives it a one up is also relevant.

It is thematically appropriate that the right Assassin can be selected for the job at any given time. They are deployed in miniature drop pods in the fluff. Calling up and saying "We've got enemy Psykers, send a Culexus" is definitely something I could see happening.

It takes a really long time to get around the galexy, Calling up and getting a Culexus when they have spot a psyker would be a waste of time. It would likely be months before one could even turn up.
Its also another thing the imperium gets that no one else can, Farseers look into the future So why not being able to pick units to better fit your opponent as well or Orks retrofitting units as they go.

So its not particularly extra fluffy to be able to skip what would be planing and deployment of resources.
If this was part of a side board like structure, it would probably be good for the game. But i do not hold very high the design of 40k to pull though with that.

I look at it the other way around. This strat doesn't represent you choosing an Assassin at the last minute. It represents the Imperium having done that planning and recon necessary months or even years in advance to know which specific Assassin was required for this engagement.

Sure, fluff-wise its pretty good.

But is it healthy for the game? hell no.

This strat should be a 2CP at the very least. maybe even 3.

 Stux wrote:

Apple fox wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
Your list should be your list. It should be made with the meta in mind and at most a rough idea of what faction your opponents might have. I should not be able to look at my opponents list and then a minute before the game starts say hmm took a bunch of xyz, slot in relevant countermeasures.

The assassins are specialized units and when you take a unit that is that specialized you should run the risk of your opponent not taking things that will play to that unit's strengths.


The fact that IOM super friends is the last army that needed another ace option that gives it a one up is also relevant.

It is thematically appropriate that the right Assassin can be selected for the job at any given time. They are deployed in miniature drop pods in the fluff. Calling up and saying "We've got enemy Psykers, send a Culexus" is definitely something I could see happening.

It takes a really long time to get around the galexy, Calling up and getting a Culexus when they have spot a psyker would be a waste of time. It would likely be months before one could even turn up.
Its also another thing the imperium gets that no one else can, Farseers look into the future So why not being able to pick units to better fit your opponent as well or Orks retrofitting units as they go.

So its not particularly extra fluffy to be able to skip what would be planing and deployment of resources.
If this was part of a side board like structure, it would probably be good for the game. But i do not hold very high the design of 40k to pull though with that.

I look at it the other way around. This strat doesn't represent you choosing an Assassin at the last minute. It represents the Imperium having done that planning and recon necessary months or even years in advance to know which specific Assassin was required for this engagement.

That should be left to narrative games, unless they bring it to other factions. Eldar and other Factions should and would have similar things. its a issue of game design simply being all over the place. It also completely removes The narrative elements of Eldar almost always being a surprise and swift attacks. Tyranids are foreboding creatures that not only come almost without warning, but block of communication.

The fact there is an assassin there at all would more likely be, ether a target there in the first place. Or they are part of the force organically. They are supposed to be rare assets, and if i remember some of them are fairly specific to some places. So its a rule of feelsies rather than anything more than that.
Outside of incredibly large battles, or part of a inquisitor retinue. They would likely have the same planing as any space marine chapter being anywhere of worth.
Its why having it as a inquisitor thing would be so cool, since it would be far more likly for one to have greater access.

I don't think most of what you said is a problem, so long as there's no balance issue. Not every aspect of lore can be represented on the tabletop.

That said, I do like the idea of needing an Inquisitor. Whether or not they're the warlord. It's fluffy, solves access leaks through Cypher, and gives a purpose to Inquisitors that they sorely lack right now!

 Stux wrote:
I don't think most of what you said is a problem, so long as there's no balance issue. Not every aspect of lore can be represented on the tabletop.

That said, I do like the idea of needing an Inquisitor. Whether or not they're the warlord. It's fluffy, solves access leaks through Cypher, and gives a purpose to Inquisitors that they sorely lack right now!

That is the problem, its not particularly fluffy in any special way. And its another thing that excludes many players. And it is a balance issue, if some players can take a highly specialized unit against specific foes and others cannot.
Its completely the case of Rule of cool doing something not particularly cool.

Really, it would probably be fine to give every army access, and remove it on specific cases for Necron, tyranids and coming up with something special for those factions. To represent assassins using all resources nececery to complete the mission.

 Stux wrote:
I don't think most of what you said is a problem, so long as there's no balance issue. Not every aspect of lore can be represented on the tabletop.

That said, I do like the idea of needing an Inquisitor. Whether or not they're the warlord. It's fluffy, solves access leaks through Cypher, and gives a purpose to Inquisitors that they sorely lack right now!

Well it IS balance issue. Already most powerful faction gets access to even more tools without any real disadvantage. Compare that to daemon summoning that has much bigger restrictions.

So rich gets richer, poor keeps wondering why they even bother trying to win.

40k has always been play to win but this feels super pay to win... a person can't just buy 1 assassin anymore... they are being told by the rules they're probably going to need all of them to be competitive.

I do think that assasins have gone from not worth while to OP with this change but unfortunately that's kinda textbook GW when people complain cool charictors are trash.

I'm more disappointed that it's yet more doubling down on spam the most efficent CP generation system rewarding with the ability to power the units that are supposed to be epic but limited to 1 turn to sustain 2 or 3 turns of turning it up to 11. Combined with the pick at the table for CP option it's not about who can out play the other player after a blind match up vrs 1 player now being able to change a big chunk of how their list works.

Eh, not a fan that they're so cheap and ofc for Imperium with more options than any other faction.

Personally though the only one which has me slightly worried is the anti psyker assassin for my Tyranids/Eldar as I do rely on psychic powers a fair amount. The vindicare doesn't bother me or my Tyrants/Tervigons as compared to the heavy firepower that normally gets thrown their way the rifle will tickle, and the eversor just can't compete with genestealers/ Cannot actually kill my Carnifexs reliably.

I do love the idea of a narrative game of these new assassins attempting to plant virus bombs in a hive fleet mothership, whilst fighting off defenders, these rules seem perfect for that!

I really think the new datasheets for them all are thematic and pretty balance, each does its job quite well.

The problems start with the stratagems, as usual they just dial the game and more often than not the lethality, up to 11. The pre-game choose your flavour strat is list tailoring with very specific counter play models and also breaks the detachment rules which are one of the main restraints to list design.

I wonder how the game would play with just the three(four) basic brb stratagems but all the datatsheets and everything else from the codexs. Would it be more balanced? I think it would certainly be alot quicker.

The game would be infinitely easier to balance without faction specific stratagems, but it would also get kinda boring. They tend to add a lot of flavor and pop to certain armies.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
The game would be infinitely easier to balance without faction specific stratagems, but it would also get kinda boring. They tend to add a lot of flavor and pop to certain armies.

Game managed just fine before they were added to the game though...Without being as unscalable as strategems by their nature are(along with encouraging deathstar type of units)

 Eihnlazer wrote:
The game would be infinitely easier to balance without faction specific stratagems, but it would also get kinda boring. They tend to add a lot of flavor and pop to certain armies.

I found the game much more fun before them, and games without such things tend to be far more fun as well. So i would see it as zero loss to gain much more. And nothing says you cannot put similar rules onto units as well.

Stratagems could easily be rolled into points. Pay a certain amount of points to be able to fire twice once a battle. Keep points in reserve to be flexible in terms of what stratagems you employ and/or may want to duplicate again in a later round.

Basically paying for special rules in points, rather than spending points to earn a form of points (command points) to then spend them in the game to enact special rules.

Apple fox wrote:

 Eihnlazer wrote:
The game would be infinitely easier to balance without faction specific stratagems, but it would also get kinda boring. They tend to add a lot of flavor and pop to certain armies.

I found the game much more fun before them, and games without such things tend to be far more fun as well. So i would see it as zero loss to gain much more. And nothing says you cannot put similar rules onto units as well.

See heres the thing though, a lot of the stratagems we have were already things we could do in previous editions. A lot of USR's that units had were turned into stratagems this edition.

 Eihnlazer wrote:

Apple fox wrote:

 Eihnlazer wrote:
The game would be infinitely easier to balance without faction specific stratagems, but it would also get kinda boring. They tend to add a lot of flavor and pop to certain armies.

I found the game much more fun before them, and games without such things tend to be far more fun as well. So i would see it as zero loss to gain much more. And nothing says you cannot put similar rules onto units as well.

See heres the thing though, a lot of the stratagems we have were already things we could do in previous editions. A lot of USR's that units had were turned into stratagems this edition.

Yes. And as such before they were lot more scalable and less deathstar encouraging as you could shock horror do it with more than 1 unit in the game whether you are playing 500 pts or 3000 pts game. Not to mention didn't force you to get your loyal 32's and are more easily to balance in points.

tneva82 wrote:

 Eihnlazer wrote:

Apple fox wrote:

 Eihnlazer wrote:
The game would be infinitely easier to balance without faction specific stratagems, but it would also get kinda boring. They tend to add a lot of flavor and pop to certain armies.

I found the game much more fun before them, and games without such things tend to be far more fun as well. So i would see it as zero loss to gain much more. And nothing says you cannot put similar rules onto units as well.

See heres the thing though, a lot of the stratagems we have were already things we could do in previous editions. A lot of USR's that units had were turned into stratagems this edition.

Yes. And as such before they were lot more scalable and less deathstar encouraging as you could shock horror do it with more than 1 unit in the game whether you are playing 500 pts or 3000 pts game. Not to mention didn't force you to get your loyal 32's and are more easily to balance in points.

So in a word the previous system rewarded spamming the most efficient unit with the most broken rules. Yeah you are right.

At least the current stratagem system leads to lists with contained spam and many troops.

Will be interesting to see how tournaments handle them. Leave as is, or disallow if 3 detachments are already taken? I suspect the former. Most of the issues go away if CPs were just allowed for the detachment that generated them (outside of the 3CP for being Battleforged that any detachment could use). An assassin would only have 3CP to work with, using 1 to be taken as an individual before battle began. You'd maybe then just get 1, possibly 2 of the strategems off for the assassin in an entire game.
I feel that this is what the strategems should have been, occasional boons to your army that maybe you get to use once or twice a game. Instead it's turned into a standard that is used practically every turn and might as well just been added to the datasheet.

Apple fox 771623 10351022 wrote:

It takes a really long time to get around the galexy, Calling up and getting a Culexus when they have spot a psyker would be a waste of time. It would likely be months before one could even turn up.
Its also another thing the imperium gets that no one else can, Farseers look into the future So why not being able to pick units to better fit your opponent as well or Orks retrofitting units as they go.

So its not particularly extra fluffy to be able to skip what would be planing and deployment of resources.
If this was part of a side board like structure, it would probably be good for the game. But i do not hold very high the design of 40k to pull though with that.

Maybe the assasin temples have almost as good precogs as GK have. GK now in advance when an attack is going to happen so they have send a brother hood sometimes years in advcance to intercept the right target. Same could be happening here.