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.

Who knows what is going on in that local "meta". Who knows how that tournament usually reacts to what are considered overpowered models.

If that's what they want to do, that's what they want to do. Competitive WH/40k tournaments have always had to be largely houseruled to be viable as a genuine competitive event anyway.

I think that people are making too much fuss about this model.

The old castellan was much much worse than this. For slightly more than the cost of a leviathan + support it had more than double the firepower, 28W T8 3++, could get out of melee and had huge range.

We are not nearly on the same level. An IH leviathan with full support kills just about a leman russ target (out of cover) at range 24", is shut down by a nurgling pissing on its leg and is easily killed with shock weapons (no 5++ stratagem against those, if i remember correctly the marine one works only again the psy phase) and a huge load of other conventional weapons out there. An havoc squad with 3 CP, a reroll 1 aura and a psy power one rounds it, laughing in the face of -1 damage, half damage and 5++.

I don't see how it is ban worthy when we had so much worse in the past.

I would argue the Leviathan is probably one of the best models in the game. It's expensive but it's effective - it does whatever job it needs to be geared to. It's one of the few models that CSMs or SMs can bring that can take on a Riptide at range and go toe to toe with it and even win.

Unfortunately the game is filled with naff models that can barely justify their points cost, and so a useful model is to be dragged down by their presence. I can promise you, GW will probably just end up completely ruining it.

It’s okay, Repulsors/Executioners will just be the IH leviathan that can fall back and shoot.

It's funny that people basically lose their gak when a FW ban is suggested (triggered anyone?). I get it, you spent a lot of money on your new models and want to play them. The thing is, you can still play them anywhere else, but having a tournament just suggest no FW (therefore narrowing the number of datasheets present) is not a terrible suggestion. It's easier for a TO to referee an event if the number of datasheets are limited. The suggestion of banning new marines or sisters is very childish as these are base armies, not expansions on to existing armies. Exactly how does removing FW hurt anyone's list options?...you have a codex with a plethora of other options to choose from. If you want to expand to allow newer players to enjoy the experience of the tournament scene, maybe not exposing them to a new set of rules and overly expensive models (above and beyond GW) would also be prudent. Sure, the top tournaments may want to keep things more open and I don't think I ran into anything FW at this year's LVO.
TOs can go a step further and modify existing rules (and some do), it is absolutely their prerogative. Don't like it? Don't go. Super simple.

The problem is, I don't think just banning the Levi is going to be enough to balance the IH, but I'm willing to see a lot more games played before that conclusion is reached.

Dudeface wrote:

VladimirHerzog wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Did the TO also ban the 100 pts. T8 W12 eldar psyker ?

Comparing the wraithseer and leviathan is like comparing oranges to apples.

A mildly satisfying easy peeler to a freshly picked pink lady.

We are talking about p5 here, is anyone really surprised? A single guardsman can take on a battalion of primaris marines in this guys opinion if it feeds his agenda at the end of the day. As stated before, ban iron hands for half the year. Shoot, the whole codex. Enough other imperium armies to represent them in the meantime anyway. And chaos is just.. better model wise as is the player base.

 Crazyterran wrote:
It’s okay, Repulsors/Executioners will just be the IH leviathan that can fall back and shoot.

Repulsors can't get the character rule for protection, nor use the half damage stratagem.
I haven't done the math but to me it feels like Repulsors are easier to kill the Leviathans.

 Crazyterran wrote:
It’s okay, Repulsors/Executioners will just be the IH leviathan that can fall back and shoot.

Exactly. What is the point of nerfing a unit that is not the one causing the problem? I expect a lot of black and grey SM army owners to be very upset at the incoming nerf.

 Ordana wrote:

 Crazyterran wrote:
It’s okay, Repulsors/Executioners will just be the IH leviathan that can fall back and shoot.

Repulsors can't get the character rule for protection, nor use the half damage stratagem.
I haven't done the math but to me it feels like Repulsors are easier to kill the Leviathans.

making the leviathan a character changes nothing, it has more than 10 wounds. Its the ven dreads in the backfield that become characters

 Ordana wrote:

I haven't done the math but to me it feels like Repulsors are easier to kill the Leviathans.

Because they are. T8 3+/5++ dont mean squat. People already know how to kill that defensive line with ease.

Surprise surprise, GW doesn't consider Forgeworld units at all when making a new Codex.

Who would have thought ?

Redemptor Dreads, Repulsors, Executioners and "Classic Dreads" benefit massively from Feirros and the Ironstone relic. But none of them are on the same level of ******* than a Leviathan Dread.

Keep in mind that Feirros can heal 6 wounds a turn and sniping the supporting characters is far from "easy" because IH have a stratagem that will turn an entire intercessor squad into bodyguards.

I'll just put this here : https://www.goonhammer.com/hammer-of-math-iron-hands-vehicles/

TL;DR :

- A Blood Angel Smash Captain will need 8 rounds of combat to take down, alone, an IH Leviathan Dread protected by the Ironstone and Eternal Duty.
- 19 Fire Prism attempts using focused fire are required to kill an IH Leviathan.
- 57 Lascannon shots are required to kill an IH Leviathan.
- 3 Excutioners firing their Laser Destructor at an IH Leviathan have less than 1% chances of killing it.
- A friggin' Warlord Titan will fail 13% of the time to kill an IH Leviathan in one turn.

What a surprise that some TO consider banning it.

I have an idea instead.

To make the IH Levi more balanced, we less need to look at the Levi itself, but instead need to look at the strategem that reduces the damage by half for a whole phase....for 1 CP.

I'd propose...that this remains 1 CP, but is changed to reduces incoming damage from 1 enemy unit for the phase by half.

It requires minimal rework, no points changes, and probably fixes the issue entirely.

Selfcontrol wrote:
Surprise surprise, GW doesn't consider Forgeworld units at all when making a new Codex.

Who would have thought ?

GW couldn't even balance GW itself, the combined teams output ofcourse is going to get worse over time. Also gw can't balance it's way out of a wet paper bag with holes in it.

Redemptor Dreads, Repulsors, Executioners and "Classic Dreads" benefit massively from Feirros and the Ironstone relic. But none of them are on the same level of ******* than a Leviathan Dread.

Keep in mind that Feirros can heal 6 wounds a turn and sniping the supporting characters is far from "easy" because IH have a stratagem that will turn an entire intercessor squad into bodyguards.

I'll just put this here : https://www.goonhammer.com/hammer-of-math-iron-hands-vehicles/

TL;DR :

- A Blood Angel Smash Captain will need 8 rounds of combat to take down, alone, an IH Leviathan Dread protected by the Ironstone and Eternal Duty.
- 19 Fire Prism attempts using focused fire are required to kill an IH Leviathan.
- 57 Lascannon shots are required to kill an IH Leviathan.
- 3 Excutioners firing their Laser Destructor at an IH Leviathan have less than 1% chances of killing it.
- A friggin' Warlord Titan will fail 13% of the time to kill an IH Leviathan in one turn.

What a surprise that some TO consider banning it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 iGuy91 wrote:
I have an idea instead.

To make the IH Levi more balanced, we less need to look at the Levi itself, but instead need to look at the strategem that reduces the damage by half for a whole phase....for 1 CP.

I'd propose...that this remains 1 CP, but is changed to reduces incoming damage from 1 enemy unit for the phase by half.

It requires minimal rework, no points changes, and probably fixes the issue entirely.

Or just go back to the drawing board on the supplements and actually delivering something that is not a hackjob.

@Not Online

I'm presenting a reasonable approach that isn't just screaming at GW, who isn't gonna listen to you anyway.

I think my approach is the easiest, and most surefire fix. Just change a sentence. *poof* problem fixed

I’ve mentioned on Bolter and Chainsword that I think the Levi needs adjustment. It’s always been powerful. Until now it’s been balanced IMO due to being one of the few points efficient units in an absolutely garbage codex.

I think they should reduce the Stormcannons profile to 8 shots, or change the ranged invuln to only 5++ if two ranged weapons are equipped. Basically either nerf the damage or durability. They already are short ranged.

Let’s not forget that Leviathans are trash in combat when equipped with dual ranged weapons, and they aren’t titanic so tagging them shuts them down. And snipers are a real thing that can shut down the iron stone relic character. I’ve yet to actually play any games with the new supplements, but Raven Guard look like they could maybe dumpster Iron Hands IMO.

It is a little early for extreme nerfs, as people are still mentally in the “firepower to 1 round a Castellan “ mentality, and that simply doesn’t work vs IH leviathans. Have to see the meta react a little to get a feel I think.

 iGuy91 wrote:
I have an idea instead.

To make the IH Levi more balanced, we less need to look at the Levi itself, but instead need to look at the strategem that reduces the damage by half for a whole phase....for 1 CP.

I'd propose...that this remains 1 CP, but is changed to reduces incoming damage from 1 enemy unit for the phase by half.

It requires minimal rework, no points changes, and probably fixes the issue entirely.

i think the stratagem can be fine on weaker dreads, but your fix seems pretty simple and would remediate anti-tank weapons being the worse choice against levis. Another option is to remove the <Dreadnought> keyword from forgeworld models, much like vindicator, predators, helbrute and now whirlwind stratagems only affect the "vanilla" models.

Selfcontrol wrote:
Surprise surprise, GW doesn't consider Forgeworld units at all when making a new Codex.

Who would have thought ?

Redemptor Dreads, Repulsors, Executioners and "Classic Dreads" benefit massively from Feirros and the Ironstone relic. But none of them are on the same level of ******* than a Leviathan Dread.

Keep in mind that Feirros can heal 6 wounds a turn and sniping the supporting characters is far from "easy" because IH have a stratagem that will turn an entire intercessor squad into bodyguards.

I'll just put this here : https://www.goonhammer.com/hammer-of-math-iron-hands-vehicles/

TL;DR :

- A Blood Angel Smash Captain will need 8 rounds of combat to take down, alone, an IH Leviathan Dread protected by the Ironstone and Eternal Duty.
- 19 Fire Prism attempts using focused fire are required to kill an IH Leviathan.
- 57 Lascannon shots are required to kill an IH Leviathan.
- 3 Excutioners firing their Laser Destructor at an IH Leviathan have less than 1% chances of killing it.
- A friggin' Warlord Titan will fail 13% of the time to kill an IH Leviathan in one turn.

What a surprise that some TO consider banning it.

Except you forget all the Codex Dreads suck as basically anyone, even as Iron Hands. Only the Gun Platform Ven Dreads are even worth anything.

Also maybe when so much is invested in one model, surprise surprise, it is hard to kill. Everything you talk about is an investment of both CP and points.

And snipers are a real thing that can shut down the iron stone relic character.

IH have a stratagem that turns an entire friendly squad into bodyguards. Sniping characters when you have 10 intercessors acting as bodyguards is not something easy to do. If you are unlucky enough to not have access to anything except psychic powers to "snipe" (looking at you CSM), you have to manifest the power, then your opponent can try to deny that and if he fails he can still use an IH stratagem that let you deny the power on 4+.

So let's deepstrike then ? Auspex scan. Also Infiltrator with their 12" deep-strike denying bubble.

Executioners and Repulsors cannot be tied up in combat. This is true. But getting into melee against SM V2 is not easy at all and you will have to deal with Overwatch on 4++ which is almost equal to a 2+ BS if you have acess to full rerolls thanks to a Chapter Master nearby.

Also, even with Feirros and an Ironstone, Executioners, Redemtors and Repulsors can still be cleanly shot off the board with enough concentrated firepower. It's not easy, but doable. Leviathans are friggin' monsters compared to them.

Also maybe when so much is invested in one model, surprise surprise, it is hard to kill. Everything you talk about is an investment of both CP and points.

300 points for the Leviathan, 110 for the vastly undercosted Feirros, around 80 for a Captain equiped with an Ironstone, 2 CP for Chapter Master (for these sweet 4+ Overwatch with full rerolls) and 1 CP a turn for Eternal Duty.

"Huge" investment indeed for an overpowered model.

But I guess you could make a case that regular Dreads are garbage when compared to an overpowered one.

I would like to see the IH strat raised to 3CP, and only affect that model once per game. So you can make that Levi unkillable for a turn, but then it's game on.

 bullyboy wrote:
It's funny that people basically lose their gak when a FW ban is suggested (triggered anyone?). I get it, you spent a lot of money on your new models and want to play them. The thing is, you can still play them anywhere else, but having a tournament just suggest no FW (therefore narrowing the number of datasheets present) is not a terrible suggestion. It's easier for a TO to referee an event if the number of datasheets are limited. The suggestion of banning new marines or sisters is very childish as these are base armies, not expansions on to existing armies. Exactly how does removing FW hurt anyone's list options?...you have a codex with a plethora of other options to choose from. If you want to expand to allow newer players to enjoy the experience of the tournament scene, maybe not exposing them to a new set of rules and overly expensive models (above and beyond GW) would also be prudent. Sure, the top tournaments may want to keep things more open and I don't think I ran into anything FW at this year's LVO.
TOs can go a step further and modify existing rules (and some do), it is absolutely their prerogative. Don't like it? Don't go. Super simple.

The problem is, I don't think just banning the Levi is going to be enough to balance the IH, but I'm willing to see a lot more games played before that conclusion is reached.

You know what else TOs should ban? Genestealer Cult and AdMech when they were first released because that's more datasheets to memorize!

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Can we all agree that the Levi by itself is slightly OP, but the IH crap with a Levi is broken as all hell?

Because the IH here is the problem. While the Levi is bad, it's not the problem. The godmode cheat code you get with IH is the problem.

The IH codex proves that GW has no clue what they are doing with rules. Who wrote the rules? Someone who had NEVER heard of FW before?

Well apparently they've never heard of repulsor executioners, venerable dreadnoughts, contemptor mortis, or space marine flyers. And I'm sure there's more we've not noticed yet. This codex makes units that are good in other armies horrific in their's. And if you think fw dreadnoughts are bad wait till you see what an ih fw super heavy looks like.

Selfcontrol wrote:
Redemptor Dreads, Repulsors, Executioners and "Classic Dreads" benefit massively from Feirros and the Ironstone relic

So why not ban Feirros until they give him proper price and the relic?

VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 Crazyterran wrote:
It’s okay, Repulsors/Executioners will just be the IH leviathan that can fall back and shoot.

Repulsors can't get the character rule for protection, nor use the half damage stratagem.
I haven't done the math but to me it feels like Repulsors are easier to kill the Leviathans.

making the leviathan a character changes nothing, it has more than 10 wounds. Its the ven dreads in the backfield that become characters

You can give it the student of history warlord trait and it can consolidate 6" out from combat so that you struggle to pin it down. Thats if you somehow survived the overwatch

The IH Levi is a problem because it simply can't be shot to death. It negates a huge amount of army builds.
The one counter available is to boop it in combat, which a significant number of armies aren't and can't be build to do.

On the other hand... IH Levi Dreads are just the tip of the iceberg honestly when it comes to the new marine dex. There are a ton of absolutely insane other units that walk all over other army builds. There are at least 2 other IH armies that are being discussed (repulsor executioners and character dread blobs), let alone an actually tuned and well practiced list that doesn't just pick the most blatantly obvious combos, or looking in to any of the other marine chapters or build-your-own-successors.

 iGuy91 wrote:
I have an idea instead.

To make the IH Levi more balanced, we less need to look at the Levi itself, but instead need to look at the strategem that reduces the damage by half for a whole phase....for 1 CP.

I'd propose...that this remains 1 CP, but is changed to reduces incoming damage from 1 enemy unit for the phase by half.

It requires minimal rework, no points changes, and probably fixes the issue entirely.

GW needs to go revisit a lot of stratagems and change their CP cost depending on how powerful a unit they are affecting.

Knights obviously do this, having different cost for the different classes of knights.
Daemons have their Deep Strike stratagem cost more for larger units.
So it shouldn't be that unreasonable to see an almost blanket rule - if the target of a stratagem is 12PL or more, add 1 (or double?) the cost of the stratagem.
BOOM. tonnes of problem units fixed in a heartbeat.


The other thing they could and probably should target is the Ironstone relic - the thing that gives -1 DMG in a bubble. Its so amazing, I don't think it can be balanced in its current iteration at all. Re-write it from the ground up - Iron stone gives +1 to FNP rolls within 6".

 Shadenuat wrote:

Selfcontrol wrote:
Redemptor Dreads, Repulsors, Executioners and "Classic Dreads" benefit massively from Feirros and the Ironstone relic

So why not ban Feirros until they give him proper price and the relic?

I don't think that Feirros is an issue.

It's a 5++. I don't remember Demon Engines being broken. If you raise its cost is because he is a bit too good in melee for the cost.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
It's funny that people basically lose their gak when a FW ban is suggested (triggered anyone?). I get it, you spent a lot of money on your new models and want to play them. The thing is, you can still play them anywhere else, but having a tournament just suggest no FW (therefore narrowing the number of datasheets present) is not a terrible suggestion. It's easier for a TO to referee an event if the number of datasheets are limited. The suggestion of banning new marines or sisters is very childish as these are base armies, not expansions on to existing armies. Exactly how does removing FW hurt anyone's list options?...you have a codex with a plethora of other options to choose from. If you want to expand to allow newer players to enjoy the experience of the tournament scene, maybe not exposing them to a new set of rules and overly expensive models (above and beyond GW) would also be prudent. Sure, the top tournaments may want to keep things more open and I don't think I ran into anything FW at this year's LVO.
TOs can go a step further and modify existing rules (and some do), it is absolutely their prerogative. Don't like it? Don't go. Super simple.

The problem is, I don't think just banning the Levi is going to be enough to balance the IH, but I'm willing to see a lot more games played before that conclusion is reached.

You know what else TOs should ban? Genestealer Cult and AdMech when they were first released because that's more datasheets to memorize!

Again, another dumb response. You have a great record. Those are base armies, not expansions to armies. I wouldn't also be bothered if Vigilus or PA books were banned for an event, less book keeping. have you ever TO'd a decent sized event?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
It's funny that people basically lose their gak when a FW ban is suggested (triggered anyone?). I get it, you spent a lot of money on your new models and want to play them. The thing is, you can still play them anywhere else, but having a tournament just suggest no FW (therefore narrowing the number of datasheets present) is not a terrible suggestion. It's easier for a TO to referee an event if the number of datasheets are limited. The suggestion of banning new marines or sisters is very childish as these are base armies, not expansions on to existing armies. Exactly how does removing FW hurt anyone's list options?...you have a codex with a plethora of other options to choose from. If you want to expand to allow newer players to enjoy the experience of the tournament scene, maybe not exposing them to a new set of rules and overly expensive models (above and beyond GW) would also be prudent. Sure, the top tournaments may want to keep things more open and I don't think I ran into anything FW at this year's LVO.
TOs can go a step further and modify existing rules (and some do), it is absolutely their prerogative. Don't like it? Don't go. Super simple.

The problem is, I don't think just banning the Levi is going to be enough to balance the IH, but I'm willing to see a lot more games played before that conclusion is reached.

You know what else TOs should ban? Genestealer Cult and AdMech when they were first released because that's more datasheets to memorize!

Ah, you’re the kind of player that I make activtate their chest clock and ensure I ask as many questions as possible during your turn to make sure you may make mistakes, waste time answering my questions, and I win because you run out of time and I just get multiple turns.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Except you forget all the Codex Dreads suck as basically anyone, even as Iron Hands. Only the Gun Platform Ven Dreads are even worth anything.

Maybe before the codex was released, but they've got a new lease on life now.

Also maybe when so much is invested in one model, surprise surprise, it is hard to kill. Everything you talk about is an investment of both CP and points.

Its not really a huge investment in one model though? Everything that you would take with the levi dread, are good units in their own right.
And even then, even if you consider every single point spent supporting the Levi as not existing without the Levi... its still harder to kill than equal points of nearly any other unit in the game.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:

 Shadenuat wrote:

Selfcontrol wrote:
Redemptor Dreads, Repulsors, Executioners and "Classic Dreads" benefit massively from Feirros and the Ironstone relic

So why not ban Feirros until they give him proper price and the relic?

I don't think that Feirros is an issue.

It's a 5++. I don't remember Demon Engines being broken. If you raise its cost is because he is a bit too good in melee for the cost.

Daemon engines aren't broken because
a) even at full HP their damage output is pretty terrible
b) their 5++ is already factored in to their cost.

This is kind of an issue with ALL aura abilities in the game and how intentional synergy can rapidly devolve in to OP cheese.
If Feirros sits next to a 300pt vehicle that was correctly costed without an invulnerable save, and improves its survivability by lets say 20% on average, then if he does literally nothing else all game he's still covered 3/4 of his points cost.
If he sits next to 2 vehicles, he's covered is points and then some.
Oh, but he ALSO has hit rerolls. and bonuses to hit. and healing. Not to mention his own respectable combat abilities...

 bullyboy wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
It's funny that people basically lose their gak when a FW ban is suggested (triggered anyone?). I get it, you spent a lot of money on your new models and want to play them. The thing is, you can still play them anywhere else, but having a tournament just suggest no FW (therefore narrowing the number of datasheets present) is not a terrible suggestion. It's easier for a TO to referee an event if the number of datasheets are limited. The suggestion of banning new marines or sisters is very childish as these are base armies, not expansions on to existing armies. Exactly how does removing FW hurt anyone's list options?...you have a codex with a plethora of other options to choose from. If you want to expand to allow newer players to enjoy the experience of the tournament scene, maybe not exposing them to a new set of rules and overly expensive models (above and beyond GW) would also be prudent. Sure, the top tournaments may want to keep things more open and I don't think I ran into anything FW at this year's LVO.
TOs can go a step further and modify existing rules (and some do), it is absolutely their prerogative. Don't like it? Don't go. Super simple.

The problem is, I don't think just banning the Levi is going to be enough to balance the IH, but I'm willing to see a lot more games played before that conclusion is reached.

You know what else TOs should ban? Genestealer Cult and AdMech when they were first released because that's more datasheets to memorize!

Again, another dumb response. You have a great record. Those are base armies, not expansions to armies. I wouldn't also be bothered if Vigilus or PA books were banned for an event, less book keeping. have you ever TO'd a decent sized event?

What if I play Renegades and Heretics? What if I play a faction reliant on FW units to have any hope of competing on the same level as Eldar, new Marines, Guard, etc? What if I simply dont have enough non FW units for an army to make a coherent list otherwise (been there myself).

The distinctions you are drawing (e.g. "base army") exist nowhere in the rules, it is one you are projecting onto the game, differentiation by sales channel at best.

I've TO'd events myself. FW was never a problem from that perspective, and should be less so today than at any other point in the past with Battlescribe and digital downloads and FW books that don't cost $90.

Well said Vaktathi.