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.
ccs wrote: After they said that, did they show or tell you how they think you should be playing GK?
At store or here? At store no one did. Here I was first told to use a lot of ally, buy a new army or buy a new GK army as the models I have are bad.
Or do you mean GW articles. I read one, but it was all about doing stuff that are no longer legal, as you can't deep strike turn one, or cast multiple same power in a turn, and baby smite doesn't seem to be powerful enough.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/09/03 09:46:37
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
I agree with everything on Actual Englishman's list. And I never agree with him on anything, ever, which is by itself enough to prove you more than wrong Daedalus81. If you need help handling bone breakers, feel free to shoot me a message. I have fielded them often enoguh to tell you how to counter them with most armies.
Aww that's cute. I get to be your signature!
I don't get the benefit of having haywire, but you guys are right out if you think they're easy to kill. And I'm talking narrowly on the Snakebitez ones - the clan no one takes. As of right now they're represent less than 3% of detatchments taken on 40kstats.
Daedalus81 wrote: Sure they can. Wartrike lets them. Banner gets them hitting on 4s (tellyporta him). It does suck that they don't get Kultur.
So take a really crappy unit (kanz) Add in a slow infantry model (who doesn't benefit from the Wartrike) and add in a wartrike. So you are left with zero ranged weapons that matter, no CC weapons that are that scary and most of your army will die before turn 2 is over. When you find a way to make Killa Kanz competitive you let everyone else in the ork community know, because a lot of us have been trying for years. And your suggestion above, yeah, that doesn't make them competitive, hell it doesn't even make them survive past turn 2.
I would like to add that I did exactly that in a friendly game, even with a morkanaut carrying a KFF behind them and drawing fire, plus using the shoot twice stratagem from vigilus.
Guess what? They killed 3 helblasters and 4 intercessors - totally worth 409 points and 5 CP.
I wouldn't say shoot twice is the best thing to do for kanz. Also, it takes dozens of games to develop a list. Slapping models off the table, because your dice went cold or something didn't work as intended won't ever get you insight on changes that could work.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/09/03 14:43:49
HoundsofDemos wrote:So instead of taking a list to a tournament that I like for fun or fluff reasons, I'll instead do the same with less options.
In the same vein, if all I care about is winning (hang the background) I'll still probably find a broken combo if that's all I care about. Your acting like codex 8th is balanced with options, which it really isn't at this point.
This is probably the one of the most option free in terms of unit choices that 40k has had and it's still a mess unless your playing against someone who has the same idea of what a game should be to you. All they've done is trim choices and units down and the still are no were near a balanced game.
Well, it's one less broken combo; and makes it easier to work with, since they don't have to continue support for and consider how something will affect a unit that was written in 3 years ago.
Also, if the unit was only useful in fluffy lists, then there's no loss for it being stricken from tournament play and this eliminates the chance of something unexpectedly making it good, and if it is currently unexpectedly good, then it probably would be for the best if it was removed since there's not a whole lot they can do about it once it's in the index save a major overhaul to whatever interaction it's benefiting from which might be fine or underpowered otherwise.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
No I don't. That's why I asked you to please continue.
I explained one already: Imagifiers; Index Imperial II. A character that carries the Sisters' Battle Standard. The Battle Standard was changed from granting an additional act of faith on a 4+ under the index faith rules to granting +1 to faith tests under the Beta Codex rules, and changed from being bought on a character to being bought as a squad upgrade. This would be useless, since an Imagifier is basically worthless as a body, but a stratagem exists that makes all ADEPTA SORORITAS units [order agnostic and not checking for the Acts of Faith rule] near a character that passes an Act gain that act's benefit; thus the character can gain a total +2 to acts and for 3CP buff units around her that would ordinarily be unable to or unlikely to ever receive the effect. It's definitely not the strongest thing out there, in part because it's supporting at best a mid-tier faction with limited [but fairly decent options], but it's a very unintended effect that is appreciably stronger than the ability was designed as.
So lemme get this straight. Your go-to example is:
1. Not even that strong
2. For an army that's basically still Index anyway because I know you're not counting the last Chapter Approved as a codex.
3. Because of the latter point, not even for a strong army
I just wanna clarify whether or not this is your go-to example. If it is you've got no ground to stand on whatsoever.
Now let's see what Daed has to say!
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
And that's even though I had to put semper the old grumpy git there with you!
I don't get the benefit of having haywire, but you guys are right out if you think they're easy to kill. And I'm talking narrowly on the Snakebitez ones - the clan no one takes. As of right now they're represent less than 3% of detatchments taken on 40kstats.
From what I gather, you play thousand sons. If you are trying to take the default TS route and to smite battlewagons to death, you are obviously having a hard time because you are bringing a knife to a deffrolla fight - especially since your opponent is obviously list-tailoring against you with the snakebites culture.
I suggest bringing some actual anti-tank and a screen, even if you don't want to soup, helbrutes, predators and tzangors do the job just fine. Obviously stuff like havocs, obliterators, FW dreads, chaos knights, horrors and plague bearers work even better. One of our TS players just drops two units of pink horrors in front of his TS and I have no way of getting through those with a battlewagon list.
If you surrender a bit of "board control" and don't deploy right on the your deployment zone's edge, you have at least two turns of shooting and smiting those bonebreakers. Since their degrading table is really punishing (8 hp loses them 2S and d6-1 atttacks) spreading the love works better than finishing one off. Neither the wartrike nor the bonebreakers are particularly good at killing cultists or tzangors and they still take a bit of damage from them due to having 4+ armor. Once they have reached your lines, you can just rip them apart with every gun you have, preferable encircling them to kill off passengers.
16 wounds on a model with a 4+ save are not hard to remove at all if you are bringing the right tools.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
And Dae - please stop trying to push garbage units on Ork players. Kans are one of the worst units in the book, no sane Ork will take them. Look at their cost and their LD.
Everyone couches things in terms of 'what does this kill' and 'is it as good as a knight'. Kanz should rarely be in groups of 6. They're some of the best damn objective holders around. Two of them for 90 points carries 10 T5 2+ wounds in cover, which is better than primaris who pay the same points. Their melee attacks are worrisome enough that they'll cause concern for anyone trying to come in. Losing one out of two makes it extremely unlikely to ever have another one run.
If someone wishes to run big Kan mobs then they need:
1) Trike to give advance and charge
2) Warboss to prevent morale
3) Banner for +1
4) Weirdboy for Warpath
Is that list going to be awesome? Probably not, because overlapping buffs gets complex and snipers are out in force now.
So lemme get this straight. Your go-to example is:
1. Not even that strong
2. For an army that's basically still Index anyway because I know you're not counting the last Chapter Approved as a codex.
3. Because of the latter point, not even for a strong army
I just wanna clarify whether or not this is your go-to example. If it is you've got no ground to stand on whatsoever.
Now let's see what Daed has to say!
We have a set of rules that was written explicitly to serve as a pre-emptive test of faction based mechanics and completely revise the rules initially presented [it doesn't have all the features of a full codex, but does represent revised and updated rules]; and there is an index unit core to the most revised army feature that wasn't in the beta codex because they developed a new implementation of how that feature of our army worked that used squad upgrades instead of a separate character.
This is an exploit. It's not meta breaking, because it's not in a strong faction. But it fits right into the definition of what would be an exploit in a video game.
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
Daedalus81 wrote: I wouldn't say shoot twice is the best thing to do for kanz.
It's the ONLY stratagem kanz can use. But you knew that, right? There is literally no way to make kanz deal more damage, they had everything they could possibly get and they still failed to deliver.
Slapping models off the table, because your dice went cold or something didn't work as intended won't ever get you insight on changes that could work.
1. You have no information on how many games I have played with kanz on the table, and this was neither the first nor the last one.
2. You are making absolute statements on ork strategy despite having zero games with them.
3. Killing that many primaris is above the expected average, so they are quite likely to kill less than that, especially if you advance them down the field.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Daedalus81 wrote: Everyone couches things in terms of 'what does this kill' and 'is it as good as a knight'. Kanz should rarely be in groups of 6. They're some of the best damn objective holders around. Two of them for 90 points carries 10 T5 2+ wounds in cover, which is better than primaris who pay the same points. Their melee attacks are worrisome enough that they'll cause concern for anyone trying to come in. Losing one out of two makes it extremely unlikely to ever have another one run.
1) Kanz can't get cover from most terrain
2) 5 intercessors cost less and are better at shooting, combat and have genade launcher for 30" reach.
3) Guess what can take an objective from two kanz? Ten guardsmen - they can't to jack about them.
If someone wishes to run big Kan mobs then they need:
1) Trike to give advance and charge
2) Warboss to prevent morale
3) Banner for +1
4) Weirdboy for Warpath
Is that list going to be awesome? Probably not, because overlapping buffs gets complex and snipers are out in force now.
You forgot the KFF. And been there, done that. They are still terrible, as they hit on 4s with just S8, which means they are NOT GOOD in combat. They also fold like wet paper, you will lose them from intercessors launching their krak grenades across the board and heavy bolter fire.
Oh, and you can have a castellan for that amount of points.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/09/03 15:37:22
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
It's the ONLY stratagem kanz can use. But you knew that, right? There is literally no way to make kanz deal more damage, they had everything they could possibly get and they still failed to deliver.
I know, it sucks, but it's forcing the shoe to fit.
1. You have no information on how many games I have played with kanz on the table, and this was neither the first nor the last one.
2. You are making absolute statements on ork strategy despite having zero games with them.
3. Killing that many primaris is above the expected average, so they are quite likely to kill less than that, especially if you advance them down the field.
I play Orks often, so we're both guilty of #1. Orks are my guilty pleasure. I fully intend to use savage orks to build out snakebitez (dirt cheap by comparison and better looking, I think).
On top, 3 bonebreakers are 477pts. Bad example I would say.
I think you guys should play in a meta that has them before you crap on them.
Snakebite Bonebreakas wind up being 4+/5++/6+++. The 3 of them are about the same cost as a regular shooty knight and you can spend all game and not kill all of them.
They will be in your army's face turn 1. Either you're shooting them or the Wazboms, but either way it's really hard to crack them before turn 3 unless you have MW spam. Yes, they require other units to operate this way, but so does everything else.
Dae you don't play Orks often enough/in a competitive setting regularly to really comment on Ork tactics. Here's a few responses to just the above (and why it's a bad idea);
1. Every Ork player with the capabilities has tried to make Bonebreakers work.
2. Where is the 5++ from? The Wazzbomm? There's another ton of points.
3. Bonebreakers and the Trikeboss can't fly. So their ability to deal damage is severely limited on maps with terrain, particularly when most of their damage output is from their melee attacks.
4. They aren't difficult to kill.
5. They can't do anything to flyers.
6. Why would anyone want to lock themselves into the Snakebite clan that has by far the worst sub faction trait in a faction that can easily give said sub faction trait out to infantry anyway?
7. They really aren't difficult to kill.
E - 8. What sort of insane/bad ass person puts their units anywhere near the front of their deployment zone if they are against an Ork with 3 Bonebreakas? Any unit they can have on terrain will be on terrain. The rest will be as far back as possible.
I agree with everything on Actual Englishman's list. And I never agree with him on anything, ever, which is by itself enough to prove you more than wrong Daedalus81. If you need help handling bone breakers, feel free to shoot me a message. I have fielded them often enoguh to tell you how to counter them with most armies.
Oooohhh gak dawg! Did hell just freeze over?! Did I get vindicated by Jidmah?! Maybe I should save this as a quotable moment.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/09/03 16:14:52
Oooohhh gak dawg! Did hell just freeze over?! Did I get vindicated by Jidmah?! Maybe I should save this as a quotable moment.
Don't say I never did anything nice for you.
Top man, your Ork tactica might not be the most efficient but I certainly enjoy your enthusiasm.
Automatically Appended Next Post: To be honest if you converted a few Snakebite Battlewagons out of Squiggoths or something I'd certainly allow you to enjoy them to their full potential, because as I have said before, against Orks I simply can't help but get stuck in as the mission objectives go out the window.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/09/03 16:21:54
So lemme get this straight. Your go-to example is:
1. Not even that strong
2. For an army that's basically still Index anyway because I know you're not counting the last Chapter Approved as a codex.
3. Because of the latter point, not even for a strong army
I just wanna clarify whether or not this is your go-to example. If it is you've got no ground to stand on whatsoever.
Now let's see what Daed has to say!
We have a set of rules that was written explicitly to serve as a pre-emptive test of faction based mechanics and completely revise the rules initially presented [it doesn't have all the features of a full codex, but does represent revised and updated rules]; and there is an index unit core to the most revised army feature that wasn't in the beta codex because they developed a new implementation of how that feature of our army worked that used squad upgrades instead of a separate character.
This is an exploit. It's not meta breaking, because it's not in a strong faction. But it fits right into the definition of what would be an exploit in a video game.
You mean that set of rules which was universally agreed to be bad?
Yeah you're stretching that it can be considered an exploit seeing as you can't say it isn't working as intended.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
So lemme get this straight. Your go-to example is:
1. Not even that strong
2. For an army that's basically still Index anyway because I know you're not counting the last Chapter Approved as a codex.
3. Because of the latter point, not even for a strong army
I just wanna clarify whether or not this is your go-to example. If it is you've got no ground to stand on whatsoever.
Now let's see what Daed has to say!
We have a set of rules that was written explicitly to serve as a pre-emptive test of faction based mechanics and completely revise the rules initially presented [it doesn't have all the features of a full codex, but does represent revised and updated rules]; and there is an index unit core to the most revised army feature that wasn't in the beta codex because they developed a new implementation of how that feature of our army worked that used squad upgrades instead of a separate character.
This is an exploit. It's not meta breaking, because it's not in a strong faction. But it fits right into the definition of what would be an exploit in a video game.
You mean that set of rules which was universally agreed to be bad?
Yeah you're stretching that it can be considered an exploit seeing as you can't say it isn't working as intended.
It absolutely isn't working as intended! How do you come to a conclusion that this was an intended effect: they would have included Imagifier in the beta codex if this was an intended effect. They changed how the stick was taken, from being a single character to being a model in the infantry squad.
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
So lemme get this straight. Your go-to example is:
1. Not even that strong
2. For an army that's basically still Index anyway because I know you're not counting the last Chapter Approved as a codex.
3. Because of the latter point, not even for a strong army
I just wanna clarify whether or not this is your go-to example. If it is you've got no ground to stand on whatsoever.
Now let's see what Daed has to say!
We have a set of rules that was written explicitly to serve as a pre-emptive test of faction based mechanics and completely revise the rules initially presented [it doesn't have all the features of a full codex, but does represent revised and updated rules]; and there is an index unit core to the most revised army feature that wasn't in the beta codex because they developed a new implementation of how that feature of our army worked that used squad upgrades instead of a separate character.
This is an exploit. It's not meta breaking, because it's not in a strong faction. But it fits right into the definition of what would be an exploit in a video game.
You mean that set of rules which was universally agreed to be bad?
Yeah you're stretching that it can be considered an exploit seeing as you can't say it isn't working as intended.
It absolutely isn't working as intended! How do you come to a conclusion that this was an intended effect: they would have included Imagifier in the beta codex if this was an intended effect. They changed how the stick was taken, from being a single character to being a model in the infantry squad.
I may be misremembering this here.
But didn't they specifically FAQ the way the widget works in the Index? So they saw what it did. They then released and update that said 'Play with it this way.' They didn't ban it. They didn't remove it. They didn't re-write the entry. They said, 'Play with it like this.'
They are also asking us to provide Beta feedback. This sounds to me like they've gone, 'Hm, this wasn't intended. But lets leave it in as it's not game changing, ask for feedback and then maybe consider if this is something we can use [Maybe for example on a special character] in the new Sister's Dex we're designing.
They've definately not gone 'WOAH THERE. BAN THAT STUFF. WE DID NOT MEAN FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.'
They totally could have.
Breton wrote: Notice in the NEW SMFAQ's - Index Chaplains not only didnt get the full Litanies, their current litany was reworded to not be automatic - you now have to roll for it.
The Forgeworld Chaplain models got the full Litanies.
They're letting us kill off the Index like they're letting us kill off the 1.0 Marines.
Erm, Breton, I'm reading the update for Chaplain on Bike (which is the only Chaplain left in the Index, I think) and for armies which are based out of the new Codex: Space Marines, at least, the entry is updated to allow access to the new Litanies. OK, they don't spell them all out in the PDF, but that's probably why the change only affects people using the new book, not the BA or DA.
And I quote...
Spoiler:
Chaplain on Bike (excluding models from the Dark Angels and Blood Angels, as well as their successor Chapters)
Remove the Litanies of Hate ability on this datasheet. Add to this datasheet the Priest keyword, and add to this datasheet the row:
PRIEST: This model knows the Litany of Hate (see below) and one litany from the Litanies of Battle (see Codex: Space Marines). At the start of the battle round, this model can recite one litany it knows that has not already been recited by a friendly model that battle round. Roll one D6; on a 3+ the recited litany is inspiring and takes effect until the end of that battle round.
Litany of Hate: If this litany is inspiring, you can re-roll hit rolls for attacks made with melee weapons by models in friendly <Chapter> units whilst their unit is within 6" of this model.
Emphasis mine.
I imagine this errata may get tweaked when we see new versions of books that it interacts with.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
as someone who doesn't have a current place to game, this kind of stuff bugs me.
Rule of 3 bugged me because while it was indeed excessive to do so, it limited My Dominions and especially my Seraphim (i actually have to many under such a rule).
This one bothers me because of the Ork situation, specifically the HQ's. didn't this just hit nearly every Ork character on a bike?
So much for Biker Orks, as noncompetitive as im hearing they are, and as long running as they have been. then there's the KFF...
I was considering looking into orks but between the more recent price raises and this? Nova wound up being a bigger dissapointment then anything else.
So lemme get this straight. Your go-to example is:
1. Not even that strong
2. For an army that's basically still Index anyway because I know you're not counting the last Chapter Approved as a codex.
3. Because of the latter point, not even for a strong army
I just wanna clarify whether or not this is your go-to example. If it is you've got no ground to stand on whatsoever.
Now let's see what Daed has to say!
We have a set of rules that was written explicitly to serve as a pre-emptive test of faction based mechanics and completely revise the rules initially presented [it doesn't have all the features of a full codex, but does represent revised and updated rules]; and there is an index unit core to the most revised army feature that wasn't in the beta codex because they developed a new implementation of how that feature of our army worked that used squad upgrades instead of a separate character.
This is an exploit. It's not meta breaking, because it's not in a strong faction. But it fits right into the definition of what would be an exploit in a video game.
You mean that set of rules which was universally agreed to be bad?
Yeah you're stretching that it can be considered an exploit seeing as you can't say it isn't working as intended.
It absolutely isn't working as intended! How do you come to a conclusion that this was an intended effect: they would have included Imagifier in the beta codex if this was an intended effect. They changed how the stick was taken, from being a single character to being a model in the infantry squad.
I may be misremembering this here.
But didn't they specifically FAQ the way the widget works in the Index? So they saw what it did. They then released and update that said 'Play with it this way.' They didn't ban it. They didn't remove it. They didn't re-write the entry. They said, 'Play with it like this.'
They are also asking us to provide Beta feedback. This sounds to me like they've gone, 'Hm, this wasn't intended. But lets leave it in as it's not game changing, ask for feedback and then maybe consider if this is something we can use [Maybe for example on a special character] in the new Sister's Dex we're designing.
They've definately not gone 'WOAH THERE. BAN THAT STUFF. WE DID NOT MEAN FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.'
They totally could have.
It does risk the single imagifier becoming a mandatory 3 of take in any tournament list should AoFs and Vessels actually become good. Let's say Vessels is changed to 2 CP and Divine Guidance goes from +1 to hit to shoot twice. You now have a character that can be used as a vessels target that is almost 20% more reliable than the codex intends. It'd be like if you added 20% to every Tsons casting roll.
I mean the issue with legends is the whole 'no model=no rules why spend design time on stuff that won't make money?' Deal but cases like the imagifier can also maybe, kinda sorta eventually cause some balance issues.
But didn't they specifically FAQ the way the widget works in the Index? So they saw what it did. They then released and update that said 'Play with it this way.' They didn't ban it. They didn't remove it. They didn't re-write the entry. They said, 'Play with it like this.'
They are also asking us to provide Beta feedback. This sounds to me like they've gone, 'Hm, this wasn't intended. But lets leave it in as it's not game changing, ask for feedback and then maybe consider if this is something we can use [Maybe for example on a special character] in the new Sister's Dex we're designing.
They've definately not gone 'WOAH THERE. BAN THAT STUFF. WE DID NOT MEAN FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.'
They totally could have.
Specifically, they were asked "If I take an Index Imperial II Imagifier, which set of rules for the Simulacrum Imperalis do I use?" and the answer was "Use the new rules."
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
But didn't they specifically FAQ the way the widget works in the Index? So they saw what it did. They then released and update that said 'Play with it this way.' They didn't ban it. They didn't remove it. They didn't re-write the entry. They said, 'Play with it like this.'
They are also asking us to provide Beta feedback. This sounds to me like they've gone, 'Hm, this wasn't intended. But lets leave it in as it's not game changing, ask for feedback and then maybe consider if this is something we can use [Maybe for example on a special character] in the new Sister's Dex we're designing.
They've definately not gone 'WOAH THERE. BAN THAT STUFF. WE DID NOT MEAN FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.'
They totally could have.
Specifically, they were asked "If I take an Index Imperial II Imagifier, which set of rules for the Simulacrum Imperalis do I use?" and the answer was "Use the new rules."
Right. So this is Beta Testing, and we are using the new rules to Beta Test. Reporting anything weird we find to GW.
They didn't say 'Don't use this model' or 'Errata this to have no rules' which they easily could of done. They're not getting rid of a model after all, you can still use them in squads.
Therefore it can only be 100% intentional, that in the testing phase you use them with the new rules and Beta test for GW what happens with a model that performs so.
It's hardly a compelling arguement to toss the whole index for everyone in the bin.
