Daedalus81 wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
It's almost as if an electronic database of FAQs doesn't need two grand-fanfare releases a year, and instead should be updated little-by-little on a frequent basis as soon as individual fixes become ready.

Fixes are in context of other fixes. You might think IS should be 5 points, but then assassins come out and wreck the gak out of their CCs. Or not. Only time will tell.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
It's almost as if an electronic database of FAQs doesn't need two grand-fanfare releases a year, and instead should be updated little-by-little on a frequent basis as soon as individual fixes become ready.

Fixes are in context of other fixes. You might think IS should be 5 points, but then assassins come out and wreck the gak out of their CCs. Or not. Only time will tell.

Oh come on - assassins 1 shot lots of stuff more valuable than a CC. Tiggy for example. Ahriman....shooting at a CC is a waste of time. In other words the vindi assassin is OP - I've never played it in a game where it hasn't killed twice of it's point value. Granted I roll 2+'s like a boss but that's kind of the idea.

Bharring wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Except it isn't a poor narrative, it's how a balanced system with multiple factions should be.
If Faction A is all strengths with no weakness, why bother playing Factions B or C?

We are not saying that the weakness needs to be glaring and debilitating, but it needs to be there for a good opponent to leverage their unique strengths against.
Guard, for example should be Quantity of shooting over quality and fold in melee most of the time
T'au should be Quality of shooting and even worse at melee
Marines are Jack of all trades, masters on none (which is apparently more weakness than strength)
And Orks are Quantity of bodies, good in melee and rely on weight of dice for shooting rather than quality.

Those are just a few examples (that might not even be accurate anymore). If Guard can take an Allie with decent Melee, or shooting to make melee all but impossible to achieve, then their weakness disappears.
While there isn't anything too terrible about this, armies like T'au, Necrons and Orks do not have the option AT ALL. Disagreeing that this is a problem, even a small one, is part of the problem.

Armies that can take allies should be able to do so, but armies that cannot should be compensated equally (or sliiiiightly penalize the use of allies by doing something like limit how many CP they generate by half).
Personally, though I'd rather not penalize anyone, but rather reward Monofaction lists more. Double CPs for their detachments is ALL detachments share 2+ Factions keywords with the WL.

-

No. There are no sideboards. There is no "leveraging of weakness" against your opponent unless you simply happened to bring the correct list. Your suggestion just exacerbates bad matchups.

And despite the insistence that no weaknesses exist people deploy lists that mute strong parts of the meta to great effect. What does a Castellan shoot when the opponent has no vehicles?

With stratagems this game more emulates a game of magic than a board game. Side boards actually should be a thing.

Just because it's moved in the wrong direction doesn't mean it should move *further* in the wrong direction.

That said, Assassins are now sideboards. Summoning is, too, but it was too costly to "matter".

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What happens to IS when they have no commander?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
It's almost as if an electronic database of FAQs doesn't need two grand-fanfare releases a year, and instead should be updated little-by-little on a frequent basis as soon as individual fixes become ready.

Fixes are in context of other fixes. You might think IS should be 5 points, but then assassins come out and wreck the gak out of their CCs. Or not. Only time will tell.

Oh come on - assassins 1 shot lots of stuff more valuable than a CC. Tiggy for example. Ahriman....shooting at a CC is a waste of time. In other words the vindi assassin is OP - I've never played it in a game where it hasn't killed twice of it's point value. Granted I roll 2+'s like a boss but that's kind of the idea.

Well, considering you'll never find Ahriman next to CCs until R&H gets redone CCs are a prime target and far easier to kill (it would be hard to one shot Ahriman - you'd be better off with the other assassins perhaps). People are all over IS on this board. What happens to IS when they have no commander?

 Galef wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What happens to IS when they have no commander?

Um, the same thing that happens to other chaff when their buff character bites it. Except other chaff pay more, and/or don't get traits

-

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Except it isn't a poor narrative, it's how a balanced system with multiple factions should be.
If Faction A is all strengths with no weakness, why bother playing Factions B or C?

We are not saying that the weakness needs to be glaring and debilitating, but it needs to be there for a good opponent to leverage their unique strengths against.
Guard, for example should be Quantity of shooting over quality and fold in melee most of the time
T'au should be Quality of shooting and even worse at melee
Marines are Jack of all trades, masters on none (which is apparently more weakness than strength)
And Orks are Quantity of bodies, good in melee and rely on weight of dice for shooting rather than quality.

Those are just a few examples (that might not even be accurate anymore). If Guard can take an Allie with decent Melee, or shooting to make melee all but impossible to achieve, then their weakness disappears.
While there isn't anything too terrible about this, armies like T'au, Necrons and Orks do not have the option AT ALL. Disagreeing that this is a problem, even a small one, is part of the problem.

Armies that can take allies should be able to do so, but armies that cannot should be compensated equally (or sliiiiightly penalize the use of allies by doing something like limit how many CP they generate by half).
Personally, though I'd rather not penalize anyone, but rather reward Monofaction lists more. Double CPs for their detachments is ALL detachments share 2+ Factions keywords with the WL.

-

No. There are no sideboards. There is no "leveraging of weakness" against your opponent unless you simply happened to bring the correct list. Your suggestion just exacerbates bad matchups.

And despite the insistence that no weaknesses exist people deploy lists that mute strong parts of the meta to great effect. What does a Castellan shoot when the opponent has no vehicles?

With stratagems this game more emulates a game of magic than a board game. Side boards actually should be a thing.

Just because it's moved in the wrong direction doesn't mean it should move *further* in the wrong direction.

That said, Assassins are now sideboards. Summoning is, too, but it was too costly to "matter".

I don't think it's necessarily a wrong direction. Stratagems could be cool if they did something about CP generation. Sideboards just seem like a good idea for competitive play. Lots of units in this game would be great in certain situations but are terrible in TAC lists. A lot of units that are OP would be a lot less problematic with side boards. Some armies like marines (who are heavily customizable) might even be playable in this case.

 Daedalus81 wrote:


Fixes are in context of other fixes. You might think IS should be 5 points, but then assassins come out and wreck the gak out of their CCs. Or not. Only time will tell.

 Xenomancers wrote:

It is pretty easy to hide a CC there job isn't that important. You take them because they are cheap and do too much for their points. You'd still take them even if they did nothing though so just hide them and have them do nothing until they have a job to do. It's not that hard to do. I can't hide my ancient banner really. He has to maximize his 6 inch aura to be worth his points.

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


Fixes are in context of other fixes. You might think IS should be 5 points, but then assassins come out and wreck the gak out of their CCs. Or not. Only time will tell.

If you're telling me we shouldn't be so hasty to nerf Imperium Soup because we need to see if Imperium Soup can develop a counter to Imperium Soup, I don't even know anymore.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What happens to IS when they have no commander?

Um, the same thing that happens to other chaff when their buff character bites it. Except other chaff pay more, and/or don't get traits

-

IS have no economy of scale. They're always 10 models. The stratagems are poor and the traits are situational for the popular ones.

30 cultists can still double tap and VotLW with full rerolls to hit, because you're not coming anywhere near being able to snipe Abaddon.

 Galef wrote:
And? 180pts for 5CPs for OTHER armies to use is too cheap. 5ppm IS would make that 210pts, which is a bit more palatable.
Even without taking Soup, that's a cheap way to fill you minimum slots so that you can spend points on other toys to use those CPs on. Even the Command Reroll is worth it in almost every phase, so it doesn't matter if Guard "don't have good Stratagems". Given anyone 30+ CPs and they'll use them

And I'm not even that concerned about IS vs Cultists. I can't stand that Marines cost over 3x what an IS unit does for less than 2x the value

-

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What happens to IS when they have no commander?

Um, the same thing that happens to other chaff when their buff character bites it. Except other chaff pay more, and/or don't get traits

-

IS have no economy of scale. They're always 10 models. The stratagems are poor and the traits are situational for the popular ones.

30 cultists can still double tap and VotLW with full rerolls to hit, because you're not coming anywhere near being able to snipe Abaddon.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I'm not taking a position. I'm offering a thought experiment on the knock-on effect of changes in the context of the entire game.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
And? 180pts for 5CPs for OTHER armies to use is too cheap. 5ppm IS would make that 210pts, which is a bit more palatable.
Even without taking Soup, that's a cheap way to fill you minimum slots so that you can spend points on other toys to use those CPs on. Even the Command Reroll is worth it in almost every phase, so it doesn't matter if Guard "don't have good Stratagems". Given anyone 30+ CPs and they'll use them

And I'm not even that concerned about IS vs Cultists. I can't stand that Marines cost over 3x what an IS unit does for less than 2x the value

-

I'm not saying IS shouldn't necessarily be 5 points.

But take a non-CCd IS vs a marine.

Marine
1 * .666 * .666 * .666 = 0.3 GEQ or 1.2 points
1 * .666 * .5 * .333= 0.11 MEQ or 1.4 points

IS
1 * .5 * .5 * .666 = 0.17 GEQ or 0.67 points
1 * .5 * .333 * .333 = 0.06 MEQ or 0.7 points

Now factor in beta bolter. Not so fabulous for the IS, but still out of proportion. But when you add cover to a marine, well...

Reemule wrote:
While the odds are poor on sniping Arhiman or even tiggy with the Vidicare, even if you don't get a kill you generally see him get into duck and cover mode. Neither of those charecters can really take 2 shots well.

I found my will to play a bit dimmed right now. I'm only working on modeling and wondering what is going to be worth anything on the table after the FAQ.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
And? 180pts for 5CPs for OTHER armies to use is too cheap. 5ppm IS would make that 210pts, which is a bit more palatable.
Even without taking Soup, that's a cheap way to fill you minimum slots so that you can spend points on other toys to use those CPs on. Even the Command Reroll is worth it in almost every phase, so it doesn't matter if Guard "don't have good Stratagems". Given anyone 30+ CPs and they'll use them

And I'm not even that concerned about IS vs Cultists. I can't stand that Marines cost over 3x what an IS unit does for less than 2x the value

-

I'm not saying IS shouldn't necessarily be 5 points.

But take a non-CCd IS vs a marine.

Marine
1 * .666 * .666 * .666 = 0.3 GEQ or 1.2 points
1 * .666 * .5 * .333= 0.11 MEQ or 1.4 points

IS
1 * .5 * .5 * .666 = 0.17 GEQ or 0.67 points
1 * .5 * .333 * .333 = 0.06 MEQ or 0.7 points

Now factor in beta bolter. Not so fabulous for the IS, but still out of proportion. But when you add cover to a marine, well...

 Burnage wrote:


Marines: Double the damage for more than triple the points cost! What a bargain.

the_scotsman wrote:


You forgot the last step in the math there dawg.

1.2 points / 13pts per MEQ = .092
1.4 points/13pts per MEQ = .107

.67 points/4 points per guardsman = .1675
.7 points/4 points per guardsman = .175

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I'm not taking a position. I'm offering a thought experiment on the knock-on effect of changes in the context of the entire game.

My point is that with regular mini-updates to the FAQ and utilizing the feckless horde of 40K players (and their endless capacity to complain if you get it wrong), you can work through the knock-on effects way more efficiently than nuking the rule-set with clunky bi-annual updates and hoping you smoke the right target. Although they're not complete successes, the Bolter Disciple beta rule and the Sisters Beta Codex are ideally how i'd want fixes and FAQs to be done from now on.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Reemule wrote:
While the odds are poor on sniping Arhiman or even tiggy with the Vidicare, even if you don't get a kill you generally see him get into duck and cover mode. Neither of those charecters can really take 2 shots well.

I found my will to play a bit dimmed right now. I'm only working on modeling and wondering what is going to be worth anything on the table after the FAQ.

Yes, I agree though Ahriman on a disc isn't infantry and so survives a little more easily. He can heal, but if he perils after getting dropped a few wounds...look out.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What happens to IS when they have no commander?

Um, the same thing that happens to other chaff when their buff character bites it. Except other chaff pay more, and/or don't get traits

-

IS have no economy of scale. They're always 10 models. The stratagems are poor and the traits are situational for the popular ones.

30 cultists can still double tap and VotLW with full rerolls to hit, because you're not coming anywhere near being able to snipe Abaddon.

They can't VOTLW anymore.

Also, MSU IS enconomy of scale in 8th edition....having enough CCs for your IS's is EXACTLY the correct number for them to provide you with 12 cps.

To get the same benefit out of guard infantry that you do with Abbadon+spending 2CPs, you could take regular infantry squads with Yarrick or Harker or Cadian trait and just order them to FRFSRF.

"double tapping with full rerolls to hit" is scary until you realize

-They cost 20% more
-FRFSRF is double tapping for 5pts more per squad of 10 than that squad of cultists cost
-4+ to hit rerolling 1s is better than 5+ to hit rerolling everything
-They also get better defenses.
-They don't burn your army's most important stratagem.

Even then, there's usually not a reason to bother. it's more efficient to just not bring the passive hit roll buff in a lot of instances. Like, who cares? You're getting a bucket of CP for dirt ass cheap and also a highly effective unit.

Wayniac wrote:


Cultists can still VOTLW. It's Legion Traits (e.g. -1 to hit from being <ALPHA LEGION&gt that they lost.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Burnage wrote:


Marines: Double the damage for more than triple the points cost! What a bargain.

And then consider beta bolter which doubles the marine and cover which halves the damage.
Cover takes IS from 0.7 to 0.3, which is 3 to 4 times worse depending on if the GEQ are in cover.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:


You forgot the last step in the math there dawg.

1.2 points / 13pts per MEQ = .092
1.4 points/13pts per MEQ = .107

.67 points/4 points per guardsman = .1675
.7 points/4 points per guardsman = .175

You've created a very bizarre ratio there.

3 * . 666 * .666 * .666 = 0.9
10 * .5 * .333 * .333 = 0.6

Same points - MEQ are "more" effective.


Automatically Appended Next Post:


In any case we're kind of descending down the IS rabbit hole again. I'm just quite curious about how all the pieces are going to come together.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I'm not taking a position. I'm offering a thought experiment on the knock-on effect of changes in the context of the entire game.

My point is that with regular mini-updates to the FAQ and utilizing the feckless horde of 40K players (and their endless capacity to complain if you get it wrong), you can work through the knock-on effects way more efficiently than nuking the rule-set with clunky bi-annual updates and hoping you smoke the right target. Although they're not complete successes, the Bolter Disciple beta rule and the Sisters Beta Codex are ideally how i'd want fixes and FAQs to be done from now on.

I'll agree that beta bolter was a good kind of update, but also perhaps safer in terms of what it could effect. I would like to see play testing become more open like Sisters as well.

Ice_can wrote:


Not really sure what maths your trying to show with that as you've changed the targets so the maths isn't consistent.
Killing .9 of a guardsmen is only 4 points removed .6 of a 13 point marine killed is 7 points. The guard players winning the war of attrition.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Not really sure what maths your trying to show with that as you've changed the targets so the maths isn't consistent.
Killing .9 of a guardsmen is only 4 points removed .6 of a 13 point marine killed is 7 points. The guard players winning the war of attrition.

Yes, fair enough, but this is sans beta bolter and cover. Of course it's also sans CC and not everyone has snipers to take them out, so we can't necessarily cost them low because of that potential, but if Ogryn BGs become required then it's somewhat of the same effect as a 1 point increase on 60 models (with the benefit of a beat stick).

I won't be broken hearted if IS go to 5 points.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What happens to IS when they have no commander?

Um, the same thing that happens to other chaff when their buff character bites it. Except other chaff pay more, and/or don't get traits

-

IS have no economy of scale. They're always 10 models. The stratagems are poor and the traits are situational for the popular ones.

30 cultists can still double tap and VotLW with full rerolls to hit, because you're not coming anywhere near being able to snipe Abaddon.

Darsath wrote:
I, too, am curious as to what makes the FAQ take so long to release. If I were to speculate (and a little optimistic), I would say they spend time testing any changes they make before they release it. The pessimist in me, though, thinks that the Games Workshop development team are hesitant to make any sizeable changes to the game with so many moving parts (and more releases in the future they have to make sure not to break like the GSC with the FAQ 2 last year). I know it can't just be to plan and write the FAQ, as they already had most of the FAQ completed before Adepticon, and have admitted they don't plan on making any big changes. Maybe the formatting takes longer than the actual planning itself, but my experience seriously doubts this is true.

Darsath wrote:
I, too, am curious as to what makes the FAQ take so long to release. If I were to speculate (and a little optimistic), I would say they spend time testing any changes they make before they release it. The pessimist in me, though, thinks that the Games Workshop development team are hesitant to make any sizeable changes to the game with so many moving parts (and more releases in the future they have to make sure not to break like the GSC with the FAQ 2 last year). I know it can't just be to plan and write the FAQ, as they already had most of the FAQ completed before Adepticon, and have admitted they don't plan on making any big changes. Maybe the formatting takes longer than the actual planning itself, but my experience seriously doubts this is true.

Reemule wrote:
While the odds are poor on sniping Arhiman or even tiggy with the Vidicare, even if you don't get a kill you generally see him get into duck and cover mode. Neither of those charecters can really take 2 shots well.

I found my will to play a bit dimmed right now. I'm only working on modeling and wondering what is going to be worth anything on the table after the FAQ.

Bharring wrote:
Care to run the numbers on a Vindicare oneshotting Tiggy or Ahriman?