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.

Looks like some of the FW and other Marine stuff got an update today.

 chimeara wrote:
Looks like some of the FW and other Marine stuff got an update today.

DA Demolisher cannon went to heavy D6. At least they patched that one up.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Marin wrote:

 Nithaniel wrote:
Bit dissapointed that there was no beta rule on flyers. Was hoping for a 0-3 flyer limit. Guess this means GW are happy with flyer spam lists...???

They will probably get point increase.

Is anyone but eldar spamming flyers?

If no, then eldar are the problem, not flyers.

You dont see CWE flyer spam outside of ITC, maybe ITC is the problem and not CWE Flyers, when killing gives you more points than objectives, players will always take what gets kill more and max out secondaries, then if they have room they will take units for hold more.

Also b.c of units like Knights and now IH crap, why even take normal vehicles? OH and when a Transport gives up 2 points, why take those?

Look at ETC sometime you'll see transport, and yes you still see some flyers, but its not spam, 3-5 WS's, Fire Prisms, Nightspinners, and some flyers is the normal, but even DE will take some flyers and they have 1/2 the rules the CWE ones have.

You guys are super uninformed, there were 105 Crimson Hunters at the ETC (some number of which were Exarchs), it's not just an ITC problem.

Transports are doing fine in ITC, there was exactly 1 guy bringing Chimeras in ETC, so another one that isn't just an issue with ITC. Chimera lists have topped events using the Champions Missions. Nova has less of a focus on killing stuff than ITC, but ETC is way further away from any other format than ITC, ETC is a team event, ITC is not. There are missions in both Maelstrom and Eternal War that heavily reward killing units, not to mention First Strike being quite punishing for an army without enough punch to go through a unit T1.

Can you point me to the Chimera list? I cannot for the life of me find a role for them in the current game, curious to see how someone else made them work, usually it seems the points would just be better spent on more grunts.

That will be pointless, because that list is design for team tournament and probably have serious weakness. ETC had inc readable amount of terrain and that also have huge impact of what is performing.
For instance the Russian captain was running mainly harlequin tropes, that are not viable in most other formats.

bananathug wrote:


Uses the chimeras to move block, deploy guard squads up for board control, protect characters from snipers, charge things that don't want to be bad touched and flame the random tough to shoot things. I.

This part is so crucial these days. Especially for IG.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
Looks like some of the FW and other Marine stuff got an update today.

DA Demolisher cannon went to heavy D6. At least they patched that one up.

I bet the Assault 3 was their original intended change before settling on D6.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

bananathug wrote:


Uses the chimeras to move block, deploy guard squads up for board control, protect characters from snipers, charge things that don't want to be bad touched and flame the random tough to shoot things. I.

This part is so crucial these days. Especially for IG.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
Looks like some of the FW and other Marine stuff got an update today.

DA Demolisher cannon went to heavy D6. At least they patched that one up.

I bet the Assault 3 was their original intended change before settling on D6.

Yes because poor Guard need to be worried about their frickin 30 point characters when everyone invests a LOT more to kill them with a Sniper.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 chimeara wrote:
Looks like some of the FW and other Marine stuff got an update today.

What in particular got an update?

Erm, the stuff in magenta in the relevant documents?

I think the most notable change is the Scorpius got the whirlwind keyword removed. The super heavy tanks for chaos got machine spirit. Demolisher cannons got changed to D6.

 Dysartes wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 BroodSpawn wrote:
No company makes money from 'balance ', every game on the market has some form of imbalance that drives sales. GW are interested in balancing to a degree as not doing so does not drive sales, look at 7th compared to current as an example of the difference in balance and sales as an example

Except game balance is even funkier. 8th ed is good example however how good PR makes people buy worse product gladly.

Maybe.

But GW has it easy with the PR, given all competitors only ever put out far inferior products on the gaming/balance side of things.

Making a car that drives 300 mph might sound great, but 150 mph is fine, if all your competitors only ever manage to get to 50 mph.

You'd need to actually have a non-GW company make a somewhat playable game at some point to test whether or not it's purely PR.

I'm honestly not sure if you're being serious or sarcastic here.

I sure hope he's being sarcastic, I don't know how anyone paying attention could have missed Privateer Press kicking GW into a road-side ditch for a while there. Granted PP eventually found a cliff of their own and GW was able to back out onto the road, but for a good few years it looked like PP was going to be the new king.

A starving camel is still bigger than a horse, and even at it's lowest GW was dominating the market share on minature games. It was less that PP was "dominating" over GW and more that 6th and 7th were so bad people were desperate for anything better.

The Newman wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 BroodSpawn wrote:
No company makes money from 'balance ', every game on the market has some form of imbalance that drives sales. GW are interested in balancing to a degree as not doing so does not drive sales, look at 7th compared to current as an example of the difference in balance and sales as an example

Except game balance is even funkier. 8th ed is good example however how good PR makes people buy worse product gladly.

Maybe.

But GW has it easy with the PR, given all competitors only ever put out far inferior products on the gaming/balance side of things.

Making a car that drives 300 mph might sound great, but 150 mph is fine, if all your competitors only ever manage to get to 50 mph.

You'd need to actually have a non-GW company make a somewhat playable game at some point to test whether or not it's purely PR.

I'm honestly not sure if you're being serious or sarcastic here.

I sure hope he's being sarcastic, I don't know how anyone paying attention could have missed Privateer Press kicking GW into a road-side ditch for a while there. Granted PP eventually found a cliff of their own and GW was able to back out onto the road, but for a good few years it looked like PP was going to be the new king.

Only if you don't know much about the industry would you think that. PP's business model was rotten and their long term problems are now short term ones. The rumor I have heard from retailers is that if their version of AOS bombs they will be in risk of going under.

Is this the first FAQ without an Eldar nerf?

Bharring wrote:
Is this the first FAQ without an Eldar nerf?

There was a Ynnari nerf, does that count?

Drat, I guess we're not there yet.

 chimeara wrote:
I think the most notable change is the Scorpius got the whirlwind keyword removed. The super heavy tanks for chaos got machine spirit. Demolisher cannons got changed to D6.

YES! Finally. Was it just me annoying them about the super heavys? Idc. Going to take my little victory and be happy.
On a salty note I just rewatched the Outer Circles original csm and slaneesh videos from 6th and realized how little has changed since. Csm crap without fw and daemons except for pm and eldar flyers a problem. The more things change......

Can we all take a moment to appreciate the true victory here? Savior Protocols weren’t touched.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Can we all take a moment to appreciate the true victory here? Savior Protocols weren’t touched.

The real problem is how many they can take, DE has the same rules but can only take a max of 3 models. When you can take 40 of them thats the problem.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Yes because poor Guard need to be worried about their frickin 30 point characters when everyone invests a LOT more to kill them with a Sniper.

Err, yea, kinda. If you want any kind of functional guard the characters make them go. Killing a commander 1) is super easy, 2) provides easy access to head hunter, 3) is nearly the same as killing a squad of IS.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Yes because poor Guard need to be worried about their frickin 30 point characters when everyone invests a LOT more to kill them with a Sniper.

Err, yea, kinda. If you want any kind of functional guard the characters make them go. Killing a commander 1) is super easy, 2) provides easy access to head hunter, 3) is nearly the same as killing a squad of IS.

Agreed.

Guard killing 101: rip away all Voice of Command.

PenitentJake wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Yes because poor Guard need to be worried about their frickin 30 point characters when everyone invests a LOT more to kill them with a Sniper.

Err, yea, kinda. If you want any kind of functional guard the characters make them go. Killing a commander 1) is super easy, 2) provides easy access to head hunter, 3) is nearly the same as killing a squad of IS.

Agreed.

Guard killing 101: rip away all Voice of Command.

With how 8th works killing characters is really the ticket to crippling your opponent's army. Auras don't work if you're dead after all.

Basically everyone is playing the same game as Nids now in terms of killing off synergies.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Can we all take a moment to appreciate the true victory here? Savior Protocols weren’t touched.

The real problem is how many they can take, DE has the same rules but can only take a max of 3 models. When you can take 40 of them thats the problem.

I mean if we could only take 3 shield drones that would just be weird in a lot of ways.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's because the Cultists are being used to fuel things that are good or too good, and not being bought on their own merit. So why do you nerf the Cultists? You completely avoided the subject.

That's a good point Slayer-Fan, it's more of a symptom nerf than a core issue nerf. Chaos Stratagems are too effective -> people need CP to fuel their Stratagems -> Cultists are the cheapest fuel for the CP pyre. If VotLW was only worked for non-Cultists and only against Infantry, if Endless Cacophony and Tide of Traits were another CP then I could totally see 4 pt Cultists. GW seems uninterested in balancing Stratagems since everything is perfectly balanced.

 vict0988 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's because the Cultists are being used to fuel things that are good or too good, and not being bought on their own merit. So why do you nerf the Cultists? You completely avoided the subject.

That's a good point Slayer-Fan, it's more of a symptom nerf than a core issue nerf. Chaos Stratagems are too effective -> people need CP to fuel their Stratagems -> Cultists are the cheapest fuel for the CP pyre. If VotLW was only worked for non-Cultists and only against Infantry, if Endless Cacophony and Tide of Traits were another CP then I could totally see 4 pt Cultists. GW seems uninterested in balancing Stratagems since everything is perfectly balanced.

Which is also not true, there are two effective stratagems in the book, the rest either got nerfed to gak or never worked in the first place.

If anything the whole stratagem cp system is just badly implemented overall and would require imo to be kicked out entirely.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's because the Cultists are being used to fuel things that are good or too good, and not being bought on their own merit. So why do you nerf the Cultists? You completely avoided the subject.

That's a good point Slayer-Fan, it's more of a symptom nerf than a core issue nerf. Chaos Stratagems are too effective -> people need CP to fuel their Stratagems -> Cultists are the cheapest fuel for the CP pyre. If VotLW was only worked for non-Cultists and only against Infantry, if Endless Cacophony and Tide of Traits were another CP then I could totally see 4 pt Cultists. GW seems uninterested in balancing Stratagems since everything is perfectly balanced.

Which is also not true, there are two effective stratagems in the book, the rest either got nerfed to gak or never worked in the first place.

If anything the whole stratagem cp system is just badly implemented overall and would require imo to be kicked out entirely.

I'm not sure where you think my logic failed? Everything is relative, when three Stratagems are leagues better than the rest then, of course, the rest will look like trash. IMO Stratagems shouldn't be way better than the three basic book ones. If Cultists were 4 pts again I think Tide of Traitors would need another nerf, Cacophony and Vets definitely both need nerfs. But you'd also need to nerf the TS, DG and Daemon Stratagems, so nerfing the symptom and leaving the core issues to fester is easier, hence 5 pt Cultists and max 1 Commander/Tau Empire Detachment.

 vict0988 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's because the Cultists are being used to fuel things that are good or too good, and not being bought on their own merit. So why do you nerf the Cultists? You completely avoided the subject.

That's a good point Slayer-Fan, it's more of a symptom nerf than a core issue nerf. Chaos Stratagems are too effective -> people need CP to fuel their Stratagems -> Cultists are the cheapest fuel for the CP pyre. If VotLW was only worked for non-Cultists and only against Infantry, if Endless Cacophony and Tide of Traits were another CP then I could totally see 4 pt Cultists. GW seems uninterested in balancing Stratagems since everything is perfectly balanced.

Which is also not true, there are two effective stratagems in the book, the rest either got nerfed to gak or never worked in the first place.

If anything the whole stratagem cp system is just badly implemented overall and would require imo to be kicked out entirely.

I'm not sure where you think my logic failed? Everything is relative, when three Stratagems are leagues better than the rest then, of course, the rest will look like trash. IMO Stratagems shouldn't be way better than the three basic book ones. If Cultists were 4 pts again I think Tide of Traitors would need another nerf, Cacophony and Vets definitely both need nerfs. But you'd also need to nerf the TS, DG and Daemon Stratagems, so nerfing the symptom and leaving the core issues to fester is easier, hence 5 pt Cultists and max 1 Commander/Tau Empire Detachment.

Your logic fails not, your idea about csm stratagems beeing overall generalisticly over effective does however.(also balancing torwards the BRB traits and stratagems is imo not the way to go)
the issue(regardless if Cultists get nerfed or buffed) is that the issue ( broken stratagems dictating all csm armies) remains due to the completly gak internal balance that the csm dex has. Aswell as the cp system in the first place. You could nerf cultists to 6 pts, all you would do is either getting R&h back into the meta or red corsair marines. GW for some reason balanced stratagems around the internal cp Generation ability completely ignoring soupability and or hoping to promote soup, because two armies means twice the rules to sell!
You can see that if you have a mass army dex, like IG, which generally lack good stratagems with an elite army dex like csm. (altough Codex cultists, dp, Oblits and combiplastermites as it is also known, is in the first place an issue of GW 's own creation.)

Overall though it is a systemic flaw, because their baseline meassurement for strength of stratagem is tied to an unrealistic mono dex cp Generation ability rate.
Which brought us overeffective and cp supercharged knights, smaschcaptains and other "nice " tournament standard units. Whith their respective cp battery of choice.
Btw that is why i like the doctrine boosts for SM beeing tied to mono, because it lowers their own issues, however what i am not agreeing on is certain new traits which are frankly absurd.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Your logic fails not, your idea about csm stratagems beeing overall generalisticly over effective does however.(also balancing torwards the BRB traits and stratagems is imo not the way to go)
the issue(regardless if Cultists get nerfed or buffed) is that the issue ( broken stratagems dictating all csm armies) remains due to the completly gak internal balance that the csm dex has. Aswell as the cp system in the first place. You could nerf cultists to 6 pts, all you would do is either getting R&h back into the meta or red corsair marines. GW for some reason balanced stratagems around the internal cp Generation ability completely ignoring soupability and or hoping to promote soup, because two armies means twice the rules to sell!
You can see that if you have a mass army dex, like IG, which generally lack good stratagems with an elite army dex like csm. (altough Codex cultists, dp, Oblits and combiplastermites as it is also known, is in the first place an issue of GW 's own creation.)

Overall though it is a systemic flaw, because their baseline meassurement for strength of stratagem is tied to an unrealistic mono dex cp Generation ability rate.
Which brought us overeffective and cp supercharged knights, smaschcaptains and other "nice " tournament standard units. Whith their respective cp battery of choice.
Btw that is why i like the doctrine boosts for SM beeing tied to mono, because it lowers their own issues, however what i am not agreeing on is certain new traits which are frankly absurd.

I did not mean to imply that all CSM Stratagems are good, you only need a few bad apples to spoil the system though. X-faction might be entirely externally balanced, save one choice and that one choice might let the faction dominate in tournaments, so you'd say x-faction is OP. I am not sure if you can really say GW balanced CP costs around anything or balanced relics and WL traits around anything, I think that's part of the why there are so many problems. GW only seems willing to go in and change rules when the faction is entirely broken, instead of just trying to create an overall better game by re-balancing all the Stratagems in the game. I think part of why BA and Knights ran Astra Militarum was for more than just CP generation, Astra Militarum are just really cheap bodies that are quite good at holding objectives for not many pts. Try to hold an objective with 180 pts of Knights? You get a single model, so any two models get close to the objective and it's lost, with AM you get to hold 3 objectives unless your opponent diverts resources from killing your Knights to killing the objective holders.

I think the Doctrine boosts were a terrible idea, instead of having the option of implementing a few buffs over the course of a game in thematic ways with Stratagems, you instead get forced into a straight jacket of staying inside a single doctrine for the entire game (or 4/5 turns of the game if you're playing Tactical/Assault Doctrine Chapters). IH could have had a Stratagem that let them move and fire without penalty and re-roll hit rolls of 1 with heavy weapons, instead, it's something everyone gets all the time while in the Devastator Doctrine. Now if you take a unit that does not benefit it'll be a disadvantage, taking Iron Hands Terminators is a joke, taking Iron Hands Assault Marines is a joke, taking flamers with Iron Hands is a joke. You are forcing people who have made these choices for their collection to permanently shelve these units, rip them apart or sell them off to someone who plays a chapter that can make better use of your models. This is the biggest crime a miniature games designer can make, card gamers might be willing to accept this kind of design but I don't think miniature gamers should. Giving a flat CP reward based on the purity level of the list and letting people invest the CP how they prefer would be much better. Maybe the Iron Hands Predator has more Stratagems going for it and they might be of a higher calibre than those available for Terminators, but it still requires CP to activate those Stratagems and if I just want to re-roll one failed wound roll with a thunder hammer and spend all my CP on that then that would be an option.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
A starving camel is still bigger than a horse, and even at it's lowest GW was dominating the market share on minature games. It was less that PP was "dominating" over GW and more that 6th and 7th were so bad people were desperate for anything better.

I only know what I actually saw, which was multiple venues in different cities go from almost exclusively GW to almost exclusively PP. In my defense I didn't say PP was dominating GW overall, I said they looked like they were going to replace GW as the big player. That's not the same thing at all.

The footer on the Assassins errata sure looks interesting.

Does GW even try anymore? Did they even try to begin with?

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Can we all take a moment to appreciate the true victory here? Savior Protocols weren’t touched.

The real problem is how many they can take, DE has the same rules but can only take a max of 3 models. When you can take 40 of them thats the problem.

I mean if we could only take 3 shield drones that would just be weird in a lot of ways.

Never said they need to take 3, i gave an example of other armies having the same rules and you dont see a problem.

I would much prefer if you can only take them with the other units and not as fast attack, you can take up to 36 in fast attack slots.

The Newman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
A starving camel is still bigger than a horse, and even at it's lowest GW was dominating the market share on minature games. It was less that PP was "dominating" over GW and more that 6th and 7th were so bad people were desperate for anything better.

I only know what I actually saw, which was multiple venues in different cities go from almost exclusively GW to almost exclusively PP. In my defense I didn't say PP was dominating GW overall, I said they looked like they were going to replace GW as the big player. That's not the same thing at all.

To be fair I saw the same thing. I even went to a regional convention and the PP events had similar turn out to the 40k events. There are local groups that play less popular games or games that aren't even supported anymore. I have seen large RPG groups that exclusively play 2nd Ed DND for instance. All this doesn't change the fact that GW outsells PP by quite a lot.

GW is selling better than ever thanks to how much the game has improved over 7th edition as well as AoS becoming a decent ruleset in its own right.