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.

Karol wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I actually think there isn't enough -1 in the game, given how lethal it is and how much of an inflation of double-shooting, double-fighting, etc.. we've seen.

I'd probably rather see a flat reduction in BS/WS to all armies, Marines/Eldar going to 4+, Tau/Guard to 5+, Conscripts/Orks going to 6+ and making -X to hit a bit more prolific.

having 20/40pts models hiting on +4 with opponents possibly stacking a -1 to hit, seems like a very punishing thing for elite armies. And considering melee is always better for horde, elite armies may as well not exist.

I have to agree with Karol on this one. The last thing Marines and similar need is a nerf to the damage throughput of their infantry.

 Stux wrote:

Karol wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I actually think there isn't enough -1 in the game, given how lethal it is and how much of an inflation of double-shooting, double-fighting, etc.. we've seen.

I'd probably rather see a flat reduction in BS/WS to all armies, Marines/Eldar going to 4+, Tau/Guard to 5+, Conscripts/Orks going to 6+ and making -X to hit a bit more prolific.

having 20/40pts models hiting on +4 with opponents possibly stacking a -1 to hit, seems like a very punishing thing for elite armies. And considering melee is always better for horde, elite armies may as well not exist.

I have to agree with Karol on this one. The last thing Marines and similar need is a nerf to the damage throughput of their infantry.

It's only a nerf if you play static and don't take advantage of moving into the 12" range.

Because that -1 to hit as an army trait? It's accompanied by only extending to 12" or farther.

I wish for all "VS specific army" rules to have no effect in matched play. They belong in narrative play.

And no more CP sharing between different codexes. Having to keep track of 3pools of CP is not hard. GW can even sell army/codex specific CP tokens for those not being able to keep track.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Stux wrote:

Karol wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I actually think there isn't enough -1 in the game, given how lethal it is and how much of an inflation of double-shooting, double-fighting, etc.. we've seen.

I'd probably rather see a flat reduction in BS/WS to all armies, Marines/Eldar going to 4+, Tau/Guard to 5+, Conscripts/Orks going to 6+ and making -X to hit a bit more prolific.

having 20/40pts models hiting on +4 with opponents possibly stacking a -1 to hit, seems like a very punishing thing for elite armies. And considering melee is always better for horde, elite armies may as well not exist.

I have to agree with Karol on this one. The last thing Marines and similar need is a nerf to the damage throughput of their infantry.

It's only a nerf if you play static and don't take advantage of moving into the 12" range.

Because that -1 to hit as an army trait? It's accompanied by only extending to 12" or farther.

Huh? I'm talking about the idea of worsening all BS scores by 1. It disproportionately hurts elite armies over hordes, and elite armies are already somewhat poor generally.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Jorim wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:
I'd really like to see -1 to hit army-wide to become always on cover or +1 when in cover (whichever is equal to Sa'cea) and to have SM/CSM and flavours to get chapter tactics on ALL units, just like, well... ALL other armies.

A lot of armies don't get their "chapter tactic" on all models...
I mean it would totally be a lot fairer if it was the same way for everyone, but sm/csm aren't the lonely outlier you make them seem to be.

Yep. DE has many units that dont.

Yeah currently we're sitting at:

everything gets trait except a couple exceptions: Tyranids, Orks, Eldar, Guard, Harlequins, Necrons, Tau, custodes

about 1/2 of the codex does not get a trait: All marines, GSC, Sisters

Codex is wildly divided into sections that can have traits, but only if you take whole detachments out of just that small section of the 'dex: Daemons, Drukhari.


There doesn't seem to be a rhyme or reason or standard of power.

Drukhari have a subdivided dex but appear to have good CT's to make up for it.

Daemons have the same thing but with total garbage CTs.

GSC have CT'less vehicles but appear to have good CT's to make up for it.

Marines have CT'less vehicles but have garbage CT's.

I don't get it.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Jorim wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:
I'd really like to see -1 to hit army-wide to become always on cover or +1 when in cover (whichever is equal to Sa'cea) and to have SM/CSM and flavours to get chapter tactics on ALL units, just like, well... ALL other armies.

A lot of armies don't get their "chapter tactic" on all models...
I mean it would totally be a lot fairer if it was the same way for everyone, but sm/csm aren't the lonely outlier you make them seem to be.

Yep. DE has many units that dont.

Yeah currently we're sitting at:

everything gets trait except a couple exceptions: Tyranids, Orks, Eldar, Guard, Harlequins, Necrons, Tau, custodes

about 1/2 of the codex does not get a trait: All marines, GSC, Sisters

Codex is wildly divided into sections that can have traits, but only if you take whole detachments out of just that small section of the 'dex: Daemons, Drukhari.


There doesn't seem to be a rhyme or reason or standard of power.

Drukhari have a subdivided dex but appear to have good CT's to make up for it.

Daemons have the same thing but with total garbage CTs.

GSC have CT'less vehicles but appear to have good CT's to make up for it.

Marines have CT'less vehicles but have garbage CT's.

I don't get it.

Guard has a lot that doesn't, and even have a Drulhari esque section with Scions -- they can get a very specific trait ,but only if their detachemnt is all Scions

Commisars, L. commisars, Bullgryns, Ogryns, Bgryn Bodyguard, Astropath, Primaris Psykers, Weirdvane Psykers, Ratlings, Masters of the Fleet, Master of Ordinance, Valkyries, Vendetta's, Ministorum Priest, Crusaders and I think a few more don't get any Regimental Traits regardless

This could be super unpopular but in the case of speeding up the game, and balancing it in some instance, I'd change how FNP works and its equivalents.

Firstly all across the board become the same, no more 5+ for some and 6+ for others etc.

Then, for every 3 wounds/damage caused, flat ignore 1 of them, rounding down.

Get 10 bolter shots through the armour save, 3 are immediately ignored.

Get 2 through, none are ignored.

Get a damage 3 weapon through on to a vehicle, you take 2. Score a 6 for damage on a lascannon? You actually cause 4.

In the case of damage 2 weapons from multi shot weapons, or from a squad (overcharged hell blasters) combine all the damage caused and remove damage as necessary before allocating.

I know FNP spam is not a huge issue at the tournament level, but christ alive certain armies make the game slow (deathguard and shielf drone spam), or super frustrating for opponents when the dice are rolling above average hot.

 Kanluwen wrote:

It's only a nerf if you play static and don't take advantage of moving into the 12" range.

Because that -1 to hit as an army trait? It's accompanied by only extending to 12" or farther.

To elite armies, this is like saying we know your bad at shoting, but here try to do melee, something you are even worse at, as in w40k numbers>everything else.
Plus there is the problem of shoty armies with very powerful melee units. trying to get in to 12" range for an elite army means they will just get shot and charged on their opponent turn. that is double punishment for factions that are already weaker.
It also helps certain eldar units like reaper,s as they hit on +3 no matter what or anything that gets all round hit re-rolls like armies with gulliman.

the_scotsman wrote:

Drukhari have a subdivided dex but appear to have good CT's to make up for it.

Which is itself countered by their godawful HQs.

I would like to see a rule for fast rolling lots of dice, or reducing the number to roll with a bonus somehow. When playing against horde armies 1000 dice rolls per game arent unusual. This takes A LOT of time.

 Stux wrote:
Huh? I'm talking about the idea of worsening all BS scores by 1. It disproportionately hurts elite armies over hordes, and elite armies are already somewhat poor generally.

I don't get it, how does it disproportionately hurt elite armies? If anything, it affects elite armies less, since 4+ -> 5+ is a 33% reduction while 3+ -> 4+ is a 25% reduction.

catbarf wrote:

 Stux wrote:
Huh? I'm talking about the idea of worsening all BS scores by 1. It disproportionately hurts elite armies over hordes, and elite armies are already somewhat poor generally.

I don't get it, how does it disproportionately hurt elite armies? If anything, it affects elite armies less, since 4+ -> 5+ is a 33% reduction while 3+ -> 4+ is a 25% reduction.

Because elite armies rely on good BS to do anything, while hordes can just swamp you in weight of numbers. Remember you're shooting with 3 to 4 Guardsmen for every Marine too. It's more about the distribution and swingy it will be than just looking at the mean.

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's only a nerf if you play static and don't take advantage of moving into the 12" range.

Because that -1 to hit as an army trait? It's accompanied by only extending to 12" or farther.

Except you cant have your whole army in 12" of their whole army, so you are either strategically limited or just have to take it.
Its a stupidly powerful ability when compared to other chapter tactics.

Deep down I'd like all CTs for all factions to be redesigned together so they are all at the same power level and interest as say the GSC abilities. Rather than say "Alaitoc"->"Ulthwe"->"Sorry didn't realise this was a narrative game".

Also giving a significant buff automatically makes the units who miss out feel gimped. Mandrakes occasionally attract experiments but Scourge and Incubi just look sad. GSC genestealers are the latest non-unit. Triarch Praetorians are equally stupid. Points could fix these but it still feels bad.

Triarch Praetorians aren't supposed to get Dynasty bonuses because that doesn't make sense. As is they're already better than Lychguard so...

Tyel wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's only a nerf if you play static and don't take advantage of moving into the 12" range.

Because that -1 to hit as an army trait? It's accompanied by only extending to 12" or farther.

Except you cant have your whole army in 12" of their whole army, so you are either strategically limited or just have to take it.
Its a stupidly powerful ability when compared to other chapter tactics.

Deep down I'd like all CTs for all factions to be redesigned together so they are all at the same power level and interest as say the GSC abilities. Rather than say "Alaitoc"->"Ulthwe"->"Sorry didn't realise this was a narrative game".

Also giving a significant buff automatically makes the units who miss out feel gimped. Mandrakes occasionally attract experiments but Scourge and Incubi just look sad. GSC genestealers are the latest non-unit. Triarch Praetorians are equally stupid. Points could fix these but it still feels bad.

I love hearing things like this. Makes me happy to be building Militarum Tempestus. The army’s effective range is entirely in 12,” and it has the ability to get most models into range.

I had other things on my list but after noticing the rubric entry I just want my options back for them. Arbitrary nefs to already weak units are lame. If it's causing that much friction with 1k sons give theirs something more (besides troops and extra power).

 Apple Peel wrote:


I love hearing things like this. Makes me happy to be building Militarum Tempestus. The army’s effective range is entirely in 12,” and it has the ability to get most models into range.

Nice. Do they also cost 20/40pts per model?

I had other things on my list but after noticing the rubric entry I just want my options back for them. Arbitrary nefs to already weak units are lame. If it's causing that much friction with 1k sons give theirs something more (besides troops and extra power).

that is true. For example for a short time in the game we had a few units that had the old fly rule, by virtue of GW giving them worse fly before the fly nerf. Not a single of those units was breaking the game, and in case of units like primaris scouts, they still kind of a didn't get taken. GW hit them with the errata later on, only God knows why. the units didn't have fly, how they worked was plain writen in the unit rule descriptions. But I guess bad units have to stay bad no matter what.

Wrong thread!

Karol wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:


I love hearing things like this. Makes me happy to be building Militarum Tempestus. The army’s effective range is entirely in 12,” and it has the ability to get most models into range.

Nice. Do they also cost 20/40pts per model?

I had other things on my list but after noticing the rubric entry I just want my options back for them. Arbitrary nefs to already weak units are lame. If it's causing that much friction with 1k sons give theirs something more (besides troops and extra power).

that is true. For example for a short time in the game we had a few units that had the old fly rule, by virtue of GW giving them worse fly before the fly nerf. Not a single of those units was breaking the game, and in case of units like primaris scouts, they still kind of a didn't get taken. GW hit them with the errata later on, only God knows why. the units didn't have fly, how they worked was plain writen in the unit rule descriptions. But I guess bad units have to stay bad no matter what.

With the good special weapons, yes.

dominuschao wrote:
I had other things on my list but after noticing the rubric entry I just want my options back for them. Arbitrary nefs to already weak units are lame. If it's causing that much friction with 1k sons give theirs something more (besides troops and extra power).

What options are Rubrics missing that they used to have? At least as long as I've been playing, Rubric Marines have always:

-Had no weapon options
-Been lead by a psyker with a force weapon/pistol
-had inferno bolts+some kind of invuln save.
-Had an icon of Tzeentch (now Icon of Flame)

The 8th edition incarnation of rubric marines has the most weapon options of any iteration of Rubrics I've ever seen, as few as those are. The ability to swap the whole squad to warpflamers and add a soulreaper cannon is as option-heavy as they've ever been.

Talking about what I d love to see:

- CP farming addressed
- Balance offending and too stronKKK factions nerfed ( looking at you IG)
- Certain abuse, like - to hit stacking addressed
- Certain datasheets updated ( vanilla SM, if you make it cheaper it will be auto take, if you leave it like that its just NYEH, neeeds overhaul)
- Giving factions, ESPECIALLY early factions more ways to play ( SM, Admech) to make them more in depth
- Overperforming units and stratgems addressed ( Castellan is very hard to balance because of what it brings to the table if fed cp, but in a pure knight list its just OK)

Realistically speaking, I dont have too high hopes (no major point changes in big faq for sure, so maybe slight mechanics changes)


Thoughts?

 Apple Peel wrote:
I love hearing things like this. Makes me happy to be building Militarum Tempestus. The army’s effective range is entirely in 12,” and it has the ability to get most models into range.

Uh... how?

Tyel wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
I love hearing things like this. Makes me happy to be building Militarum Tempestus. The army’s effective range is entirely in 12,” and it has the ability to get most models into range.

Uh... how?

Grav chutes?

 fraser1191 wrote:

Tyel wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
I love hearing things like this. Makes me happy to be building Militarum Tempestus. The army’s effective range is entirely in 12,” and it has the ability to get most models into range.

Uh... how?

Grav chutes?

You can't use them for most of your army though, 50% at best.

 Stux wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Tyel wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
I love hearing things like this. Makes me happy to be building Militarum Tempestus. The army’s effective range is entirely in 12,” and it has the ability to get most models into range.

Uh... how?

Grav chutes?

You can't use them for most of your army though, 50% at best.

The other half could be in valkyries, theoretically.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Stux wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Tyel wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
I love hearing things like this. Makes me happy to be building Militarum Tempestus. The army’s effective range is entirely in 12,” and it has the ability to get most models into range.

Uh... how?

Grav chutes?

You can't use them for most of your army though, 50% at best.

The other half could be in valkyries, theoretically.

Sure, but if you don't get the first turn they won't be staying there long! Especially with nothing else to shoot at.

To break from the wishlisting a bit, here's something that's been discussed over on TheDarkCity.

A unit embarked within a transport with the Open-Topped rule shoot at an AdMech Kastelan Robot.

The Kastelan rolls a 6 for its invuln save, so the shot bounces back. Who takes the wound?

As written, the rule is pretty clear that the firing unit would, so the embarked unit would take a mortal wound. But, as this is, to my knowledge, the only rules interaction where a unit can take a casualty while they aren't on the table, I don't think this is intended.

Some clarification would be nice from the FAQ

onlyroad wrote:
To break from the wishlisting a bit, here's something that's been discussed over on TheDarkCity.

A unit embarked within a transport with the Open-Topped rule shoot at an AdMech Kastelan Robot.

The Kastelan rolls a 6 for its invuln save, so the shot bounces back. Who takes the wound?

As written, the rule is pretty clear that the firing unit would, so the embarked unit would take a mortal wound. But, as this is, to my knowledge, the only rules interaction where a unit can take a casualty while they aren't on the table, I don't think this is intended.

Some clarification would be nice from the FAQ

I would say that just because it may be the only time it can happen doesn't mean it's unintended. In fact I would say this is probably the most intuitive result too.

Sure, anything like this where there is potential for confusion would still benefit from an FAQ though.

Can't use Valks in a Tempestus Army and retain their doctrine. The most you can get is a turn 2 9" deployment.

And before you say Volley guns, those are heavy. So make that hitting on 4s.

The only effective way to go Scions is to get three Tempestor Primes, and 3x Plasma Command Squads, DS them all, and watch your opponent gak their pants. Of course your opponent will then brush them aside if they aren't an idiot, so you are maybe getting 1 turn with them.

*****Might also add, this is total THAT GUY territory. Don't pull this unless you hate your opponent.

onlyroad wrote:
To break from the wishlisting a bit, here's something that's been discussed over on TheDarkCity.

A unit embarked within a transport with the Open-Topped rule shoot at an AdMech Kastelan Robot.

The Kastelan rolls a 6 for its invuln save, so the shot bounces back. Who takes the wound?

As written, the rule is pretty clear that the firing unit would, so the embarked unit would take a mortal wound. But, as this is, to my knowledge, the only rules interaction where a unit can take a casualty while they aren't on the table, I don't think this is intended.

Some clarification would be nice from the FAQ

Its not the only situation where this can happen. Necron lychguard can do the same with a stratagem.