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.

yeah I expect PA2 will be more a cross market with sisters situation. expect to see pictures of sisters fighting alongside black templars etc

Supplement Tier friend. We're all set to board the gravy train of insane free buffs. Don't worry if book two dissappoints. Surely the next book after will steady this ship... (Only BA will get any noticeable bump from it...)

blaktoof wrote:
I agree with OP.

PA really only adds exarch abilities and fluff to matched play.

The make your own craftworld/Kabal/cult/coven are all broken in a bad way and in no way are on par with similar SM rules.

In SM rules you can do the make your own chapter you still can get access to stratagems, relics(cost cp), psychic powers, warlord traits, etc.

If you do the same as asuryani you get none of those. The traits themselves while interesting are not better enough than the codex traits to lose those options. Who is going to make up Kabal traits to lose out on black heart warlord/stratagem/relic. No one that is playing competitively.

Luckily basically every subfaction-specific strat relic and WL trait out of CWE is garbage. I'm losing no sleep over the loss of my Ulthwe Smite Hat.

Other than the consideration of whether I care about losing Vexator mask, there's very little in the Cult or Coven I would otherwise play that really factors in. And even then...I'll just swap Vexator Mask for Helm of Spite or Writ depending on what I need.

There's absolutely nothing in the Kabal list worth considering over Black Heart or Flayed Skull, that's definitely true. But I've played with Technomancers+Experimental and with with Slashing+Test of Skill, and I can tell you we will see competitive lists using both for certain.

the_scotsman wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
I agree with OP.

PA really only adds exarch abilities and fluff to matched play.

The make your own craftworld/Kabal/cult/coven are all broken in a bad way and in no way are on par with similar SM rules.

In SM rules you can do the make your own chapter you still can get access to stratagems, relics(cost cp), psychic powers, warlord traits, etc.

If you do the same as asuryani you get none of those. The traits themselves while interesting are not better enough than the codex traits to lose those options. Who is going to make up Kabal traits to lose out on black heart warlord/stratagem/relic. No one that is playing competitively.

Luckily basically every subfaction-specific strat relic and WL trait out of CWE is garbage. I'm losing no sleep over the loss of my Ulthwe Smite Hat.

Other than the consideration of whether I care about losing Vexator mask, there's very little in the Cult or Coven I would otherwise play that really factors in. And even then...I'll just swap Vexator Mask for Helm of Spite or Writ depending on what I need.

There's absolutely nothing in the Kabal list worth considering over Black Heart or Flayed Skull, that's definitely true. But I've played with Technomancers+Experimental and with with Slashing+Test of Skill, and I can tell you we will see competitive lists using both for certain.

That is the truth. I've often gone into games with my Eldar not even thinking about WL traits and relics until questioned. Then I randomly just pick one of them, they are that bad.

The lack of relics is really gakky.

The new marine book relics are stupendous. I suppose they expect exarch abilities to be like Special Issue Wargear, but they could have easily spared a couple pages to update or add to some of the uninspired relics.

Just wait until I take the prismatic staff on my A3 sorcerer so he can shoot with a pistol and charge in a turn he fell back! (I'm ok with there being some gak relics, but clearly there's a new standard)

 bullyboy wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
I agree with OP.

PA really only adds exarch abilities and fluff to matched play.

The make your own craftworld/Kabal/cult/coven are all broken in a bad way and in no way are on par with similar SM rules.

In SM rules you can do the make your own chapter you still can get access to stratagems, relics(cost cp), psychic powers, warlord traits, etc.

If you do the same as asuryani you get none of those. The traits themselves while interesting are not better enough than the codex traits to lose those options. Who is going to make up Kabal traits to lose out on black heart warlord/stratagem/relic. No one that is playing competitively.

Luckily basically every subfaction-specific strat relic and WL trait out of CWE is garbage. I'm losing no sleep over the loss of my Ulthwe Smite Hat.

Other than the consideration of whether I care about losing Vexator mask, there's very little in the Cult or Coven I would otherwise play that really factors in. And even then...I'll just swap Vexator Mask for Helm of Spite or Writ depending on what I need.

There's absolutely nothing in the Kabal list worth considering over Black Heart or Flayed Skull, that's definitely true. But I've played with Technomancers+Experimental and with with Slashing+Test of Skill, and I can tell you we will see competitive lists using both for certain.

That is the truth. I've often gone into games with my Eldar not even thinking about WL traits and relics until questioned. Then I randomly just pick one of them, they are that bad.

Pheonix Gem and +2" move on the avatar of khaine every time, lol. Basically never changes.

Mark of the Incomparable Hunter is my go to on an Autarch Skyrunner with shimmerplume for -1 to hit. Extra sniping is always nice.

I wouldn't say the relics or the WL traits are bad, some of them are sure, but there are good enough options depending on the build.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

For 1 or 2-loss SM armies (40 total)
48.5% of losses (19) came against other Marines
15% of losses (6) came against Tau
10% of losses (4) came against Knights (Imperial or Chaos)

First, this adds up to less than 75%. What's the other 25%?

How many game did they play versus T'au? If they lost 6 and played 12 that's 50%.

6 loses is a pretty small number. We know #1 beat them 4 times. #6 beat nuMarines once and lost to #3 who was 750 of RG plus DW and BA so that doesn't look to be part of their numbers.

The #24 tau with no drone spam lost once to nuMarines.
#40 tau won his one game.

7 games vs Tau. They lost 6. What does that make Tau with an 86% win rate vs nuMarines?

This is so meta. First of all, you cherry-picked to defend your cherry picking, it's just brilliant.

Second, they didn't post all the losses, they never stated there that they were sharing all the losses, they just shared the top 3, it's pretty safe to assume that the remaining 10 losses were scattered amongst other factions and were omitted for the sake of brevity. But I can understand how that would short-circuit your ability to cherry-pick the data to support your 'everything is great' narrative.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

For 1 or 2-loss SM armies (40 total)
48.5% of losses (19) came against other Marines
15% of losses (6) came against Tau
10% of losses (4) came against Knights (Imperial or Chaos)

First, this adds up to less than 75%. What's the other 25%?

How many game did they play versus T'au? If they lost 6 and played 12 that's 50%.

6 loses is a pretty small number. We know #1 beat them 4 times. #6 beat nuMarines once and lost to #3 who was 750 of RG plus DW and BA so that doesn't look to be part of their numbers.

The #24 tau with no drone spam lost once to nuMarines.
#40 tau won his one game.

7 games vs Tau. They lost 6. What does that make Tau with an 86% win rate vs nuMarines?

This is so meta. First of all, you cherry-picked to defend your cherry picking, it's just brilliant.

Second, they didn't post all the losses, they never stated there that they were sharing all the losses, they just shared the top 3, it's pretty safe to assume that the remaining 10 losses were scattered amongst other factions and were omitted for the sake of brevity. But I can understand how that would short-circuit your ability to cherry-pick the data to support your 'everything is great' narrative.

You are relentlessly incurious, aren't you?

You just deflect deflect deflect. You don't address anything and hand wash it away with bs assertions that I'm saying everything is great.

They shared the loses from all the marines with 2 or fewer losses. That makes those the better players and better lists. If those better players can't scratch T'au, like, at all, what does that make marines? If they can't confidently crack Eldar, then what does that make them? And more importantly what causes them to be more effective against everything else?

If you can't answer questions you don't have any right to be around discussions about what makes marines strong or everything else weak.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

All they need is protect and they will annihilate a cent squad.

Typically they will drop 2 in a shooting phase and even a 4 man cent with 8 flamers on gets about 12 wounds from flames and maybe 4 more from bolters. Even in tactical doctrine (they will be in dev doctrine) it's only 2-3 dead spears. In dev doctrine it 2 or less. Plus it is pretty easy to not take each flamer as well (though to be fair they probably have the 11" flamer trait). There is literally no reason to charge those cents though. Shoot the choppy, choppy the shooty...Cents got a decent boost to survival but they are still very much killable...they don't have an invo.

And when the protect psyker gets sniped?

#15 Spears, Hawks, 3 Prisms, 1 Spinner, 3 CHE with ignore cover and in cover over 12" narrowly beat Pampreen's successors with 18 Cents and handily beat a marine list with 3 Repulsors, 3 TFCs, 7 Aggressors, and Bobby
#18 Aeldari was CHE & Skyrunner spam, but faced only two vehicle heavy marines and beat them all.
#19 with a Alaitoc list narrowly lost to infantry based RG (1 point)
#22 with Spears / Reapers / Black Heart plus Yvraine / Ynnari Yncarne - tied IH 6 Cents, 3 Hawks, Scorpius, Levi, 6 Eliminators, TFC and soundly beat UM 8 Aggressors, 3 Invictors, Relic Levi, Cassius, Tiggy, and Bobby

The next closest Aeldari is #48 - 3 Razorwing, Yvraine, Kab & Venom spam, 3 Ravs - lost to WS 10 Cents, 2 TFC, 9 Elims, WW

So of the first 5 Aeldari players they fought nu-Marines 7 out of 30 times. Of those 7 games they went 5-1-1. Two games were RPS (CHE & haywire vs vehicles). The games against Cents were won by 1 point or a tie both with less conventional lists. The wins against other non-vehicle and non-cent lists were strong wins.

In the occasions I took note of T'au trounced Aeldari.

So, yea, Twinpole. I'm going to wait for more tournaments.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

The Centurions aren't really going to care much either. You'd be better off with two groups of Spears instead though for the sheer damage. Plus you can get a 3++ on the Exarch with the new rules (and with whatever Psyker powers to go with that to make it a 2++) to tank any Overwatch. After that, charge with another squad.

This isn't even noting that their shooting power is much greater for weakening Centurions.

I kind of enjoy the theory that nu-Marines are simultaneously totally broken, but easily defeated and the PA book for Eldar is useful, but also trash.

Time to pick a lane, guys.

If you know that 25% of the players will bring marines, tailored list controlled by good player will always have a chance.
The question is why are you cherry picking some results and don`t give the full picture ?
Maybe the results are not what you try to convince people ?

Marin wrote:

If you know that 25% of the players will bring marines, tailored list controlled by good player will always have a chance.
The question is why are you cherry picking some results and don`t give the full picture ?
Maybe the results are not what you try to convince people ?

Oh good christ another one.

How do you figure it's cherry picking? Have you reviewed all of the data? Do you have some data that refutes my position?

I'm LITERALLY going top to bottom and collecting results and posting them. I don't have time to go through every single fething game. I have enough data to raise QUESTIONS about the position being posted. If you guys can't understand that I got nothing for you.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
You are relentlessly incurious, aren't you?

No, I'm very curious, just not when the premise of your argument starts from a logical fallacy. You've pretty much failed coming out of the gate at that point.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
They shared the loses from all the marines with 2 or fewer losses. That makes those the better players and better lists. If those better players can't scratch T'au, like, at all, what does that make marines? If they can't confidently crack Eldar, then what does that make them? And more importantly what causes them to be more effective against everything else?

You do understand how that lays a premise based on cherry-picked data right? You're stating, quite clearly, that as long as we have a couple factions are performing well against marines (more specifically, a couple VERY specific builds within those factions), that parity is alive and well.

So, show up with a premise that isn't based on logical fallacy first, how about that? Then you might actually have a debate worth having.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

You're stating, quite clearly, that as long as we have a couple factions are performing well against marines (more specifically, a couple VERY specific builds within those factions), that parity is alive and well.

That's not what I fething said. You're so blinded by your narrative you can't stop and actually read the posts and I'm done holding your hand through it.

Here, I'll help you one last time:

And saying these things is not the same as saying marines aren't strong, but asking questions and understanding the matchups helps us understand WHY they do well in some areas, but not others and derive a path that levels the right things.

For here on I'm done talking to you.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
And saying these things is not the same as saying marines aren't strong, but asking questions and understanding the matchups helps us understand WHY they do well in some areas, but not others and derive a path that levels the right things.

This is some disingenuous crap designed to get to the conclusion you want. I'm not engaging with it because it's a bs debate tactic that has nothing to do with the data. The idea is that it's the player's fault and not a flaw or failure of game design, it's basically victim blaming.

You're all wrong.

PA was obviously OP.

Every rulesset CWE have gotten has been OP. Therefore, since PA gave them rules, PA made CWE OP.

It's like Marines never getting good rules. It's an immutable fact of this hobby.

(So immutable, those times it didn't work don't count. Because of the rules above.)

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Marin wrote:

If you know that 25% of the players will bring marines, tailored list controlled by good player will always have a chance.
The question is why are you cherry picking some results and don`t give the full picture ?
Maybe the results are not what you try to convince people ?

Oh good christ another one.

How do you figure it's cherry picking? Have you reviewed all of the data? Do you have some data that refutes my position?

I'm LITERALLY going top to bottom and collecting results and posting them. I don't have time to go through every single fething game. I have enough data to raise QUESTIONS about the position being posted. If you guys can't understand that I got nothing for you.

Well we will wait and see when they update the stats center, but i can give you some numbers if you insist:

Mix aeldar vs SM:
Mix SM - 1 lose
UM - 3W, 6L, 1D
RG - 1W, 3L
WS - 2L
If - 2L

I found 18 games.
4 Wins, 14 loses, 1 D

That is 22% WR, amassing.

Pure CWE only 3 players:
RG - 1 W, 1 L
UM - 1 L

I don`t wanna waist my time checking Drukhari, when the best players is 51 with 4 -2 record.
So no your numbers are just cherry picked and simple wrong.
Look at the results of Blood and Glory, that is the future of 40k when SM players get practice and better lists.

Bharring wrote:
You're all wrong.

PA was obviously OP.

Every rulesset CWE have gotten has been OP. Therefore, since PA gave them rules, PA made CWE OP.

It's like Marines never getting good rules. It's an immutable fact of this hobby.

(So immutable, those times it didn't work don't count. Because of the rules above.)

Can't you stop playing martyr for Eldar once in your life?

Jeez guys take it to pm....

On topic I got my PR book through the post.

They have managed to cram surprisingly a lot into the book it is very thin hardback.. i believe its less pages than your bog standard WD? I see why they made it hard back to justify the price tag.

The exarch rules are a nice step in the right direction. However, as with all GW rules. You have one which is just better than the other 5 9/10 times.. i realy dont understand this philosphy. Why make filler content for rules? But i can see people experimenting with various builds

The trouble is nothing has been done to adress the aspect issues. The unit sizes are essentialy 5 or 10... why cant I have just 3 fire dragons? Why cant I have 20 DA? Why cant I have 15 howling banshees? Why cant I cave msu 3 man teams of howling banshees? Its clear their exarch is the true beatstick.

Anyway, its a very fancy reference guide. But if id paid GW asking price or a collectors edition id be seriously evaluating my life choices. Im glad its not OP and there is certain build possible to mix things up. Certainly most of it is not top tier competitive but a lot of fun thing can be tried for sure...I'm not however glad theres not a single strategem, warlord trait or relic to make the list building even more fun..

I've never once found the 5 - 10 limit weird. Why would you have as many as 20 at once?

Marin wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Marin wrote:

If you know that 25% of the players will bring marines, tailored list controlled by good player will always have a chance.
The question is why are you cherry picking some results and don`t give the full picture ?
Maybe the results are not what you try to convince people ?

Oh good christ another one.

How do you figure it's cherry picking? Have you reviewed all of the data? Do you have some data that refutes my position?

I'm LITERALLY going top to bottom and collecting results and posting them. I don't have time to go through every single fething game. I have enough data to raise QUESTIONS about the position being posted. If you guys can't understand that I got nothing for you.

Well we will wait and see when they update the stats center, but i can give you some numbers if you insist:

Mix aeldar vs SM:
Mix SM - 1 lose
UM - 3W, 6L, 1D
RG - 1W, 3L
WS - 2L
If - 2L

I found 18 games.
4 Wins, 14 loses, 1 D

That is 22% WR, amassing.

Pure CWE only 3 players:
RG - 1 W, 1 L
UM - 1 L

I don`t wanna waist my time checking Drukhari, when the best players is 51 with 4 -2 record.
So no your numbers are just cherry picked and simple wrong.
Look at the results of Blood and Glory, that is the future of 40k when SM players get practice and better lists.

Thank you. I actually really appreciate this. Those are B&G stats?

Edit: Argrive's right. Why'd I engage with trolling.

pm713 wrote:
I've never once found the 5 - 10 limit weird. Why would you have as many as 20 at once?

Because then you could justify taking AOK/Asurmen.. And justify casting powers on larger units.

Are you ever going to cast protect on 10 DAs or 10 banshees or 10 scorpions where you can cast protect on 20 guardians with celestial shield, a unit of wraiths or big unit of shinig spears (or MSU shinign spears now...for that matter)?

Maybe I want to have a bunch of 3 man squad fire dragons with flamer and CC exarch to charge into combat with my 15-20 banshees? Am I going to take the CC trait on FD exarch to throw him away into CC if he's with a unit of 4 of his dragon dragon friends? The new Exarch powers lend themselves more to the MSU style of play in my mind but end up having to take the tax of taking 4 guys just to have an exarch do cool stuff is very meh.

At least a squad of 20 banshees would kill things/survive shooting. 10 banshees just don't have enough attacks. 20 banshees with disdain Strat and enervate/enhance? That's a much cheaper wraith blade bomb alternative.

Reapers can already be deployed in a 3 man unit. Why not dragons? I cant see why DA couldn't squad up to 15-20 dudes. Id take them over guardians. Having to manage multiple 5-10 man squads is very diminishing returns as they tend to get deleted when anything with a STr4 gun looks at them. At least they'd survive. You can still have a 10 man squad if you want them in a serpent..

Obviously its juts my opinion. With the new traits it seems the exarchs could really be a force to be reckoned with. Having 3 fire dragon exarchs jump out of a WS and wade into CC with their flamers & burning fists sounds epic. Or whatever. It just feels to me that's how aspects should be played and leave players the building tools to wither spam blobs and buffs or go MSU elite units and do sneak attacks where it hurts.. The Eldar way

Marin wrote:

I don`t wanna waist my time checking Drukhari, when the best players is 51 with 4 -2 record.
So no your numbers are just cherry picked and simple wrong.
Look at the results of Blood and Glory, that is the future of 40k when SM players get practice and better lists.

Ok, so, apparently you were trying to quote SoCal numbers here, because the DE player there is #51.

That makes your assertion of a 22% win rate off? Unless you were quoting B&G?

Top to bottom --
Ahumada - beat RG, UM, BA
Stefansson - beat IH, UM
Achey - lost to RG
Olivas - beat UM, tied IH
Baugh - beat IH, lost to RG, UM
Becker - beat UM, lost to WS
Winn - lost to IH, IH
Blake - beat IH, lost to WS, IF, RG
Haack - beat RG, lost to UM,
Hamor - lost to RG
Hernandez - beat UM
Myers - none vs marines
Jollimore - lost vs UM

That's 24 games: 11-11-1 out to 150th or so in placings and that's all I have time for.

So no your numbers are just cherry picked and simple wrong.

No, they aren't. It's top to bottom. I didn't exclude anyone as I went through the list.

Look at the results of Blood and Glory, that is the future of 40k when SM players get practice and better lists.

I have some questions.

1) What information do you have to assert that one week of additional practice is enough to create those varied results?
2) In what way were the lists better? The first player has 17 Centurions.
3) B&G is in Europe where they typically play ETC. This appears to be the first time these organizers ran ITC.
a) Do you think that a tournament run by a fluffier organization might attract more fluffy players?
i) Does the inclusion of paint scores affect this? Contrast with SoCal that does not.
ii) Does the inclusion of sports scores affect this? Contrast with SoCal that does not.
b) Do you think the lack of experience with ITC would be a detriment to armies that aren't as easy to play as marines?
c) Given the 2018 tournament used the original Eternal War missions at 1750 points what other large tournaments can you point to that these players attended with ITC rules?

In any case I'm sure people are tired of reading my gak. I'm ok letting things shake out, because that's what is going to happen anyway - no sense pissing myself over marines. I'm pretty sure I could table the all centurion lists with just 3 gravitron moirax so I'm not sure what it would take to settle the lists into whatever the meta will be.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Marin wrote:

I don`t wanna waist my time checking Drukhari, when the best players is 51 with 4 -2 record.
So no your numbers are just cherry picked and simple wrong.
Look at the results of Blood and Glory, that is the future of 40k when SM players get practice and better lists.

Ok, so, apparently you were trying to quote SoCal numbers here, because the DE player there is #51.

That makes your assertion of a 22% win rate off? Unless you were quoting B&G?

Top to bottom --
Ahumada - beat RG, UM, BA
Stefansson - beat IH, UM
Achey - lost to RG
Olivas - beat UM, tied IH
Baugh - beat IH, lost to RG, UM
Becker - beat UM, lost to WS
Winn - lost to IH, IH
Blake - beat IH, lost to WS, IF, RG
Haack - beat RG, lost to UM,
Hamor - lost to RG
Hernandez - beat UM
Myers - none vs marines
Jollimore - lost vs UM

That's 24 games: 11-11-1 out to 150th or so in placings and that's all I have time for.

So no your numbers are just cherry picked and simple wrong.

No, they aren't. It's top to bottom. I didn't exclude anyone as I went through the list.

Look at the results of Blood and Glory, that is the future of 40k when SM players get practice and better lists.

I have some questions.

1) What information do you have to assert that one week of additional practice is enough to create those varied results?
2) In what way were the lists better? The first player has 17 Centurions.
3) B&G is in Europe where they typically play ETC. This appears to be the first time these organizers ran ITC.
a) Do you think that a tournament run by a fluffier organization might attract more fluffy players?
i) Does the inclusion of paint scores affect this? Contrast with SoCal that does not.
ii) Does the inclusion of sports scores affect this? Contrast with SoCal that does not.
b) Do you think the lack of experience with ITC would be a detriment to armies that aren't as easy to play as marines?
c) Given the 2018 tournament used the original Eternal War missions at 1750 points what other large tournaments can you point to that these players attended with ITC rules?

In any case I'm sure people are tired of reading my gak. I'm ok letting things shake out, because that's what is going to happen anyway - no sense pissing myself over marines. I'm pretty sure I could table the all centurion lists with just 3 gravitron moirax so I'm not sure what it would take to settle the lists into whatever the meta will be.

Well, if you exclude the under performers and include over performer the numbers will get better. Also the random BA Win is nice way to pump numbers in the right direction.
Good catch i did not include Winn, since he is listed as Drukhari, although he is using mix aeldar.
I don`t wanna waist more time to check the the numbers, the Falcon promised he will update them on Friday.

If you follow Mani Cheema, who is in top 10 in ITC, he is building centurions from 2-4 weeks. He is ofcourse talking about his list and show some of his practice games, where he refine his strategy.
With more practice and refinement we can expect even higher win rate. BTW this is one of the guys who was undefeated at LGT with aeldar flyer lists.
You can also heard his thoughts about PA and sadly his opinion matched with mine.

You can read the pack in here: https://bloodandglory.baddice.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/bloodandglory2019_40k_v1.pdf
I`ll be very supprised if the painting scores matered and having in mind Mani`s army is new and fast build, i`ll doubt he got decent scores.

I`m starting to think the UK people catch faster and i really ahead of the Americans in list building design.

Why is it that people assume SM lists will improve over time, as opposed to weakening over time when people think up ways to counter them? What makes an increase in wins more likely than a decrease?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Why is it that people assume SM lists will improve over time, as opposed to weakening over time when people think up ways to counter them? What makes an increase in wins more likely than a decrease?

More time means list refinement occurs, weeding out the less efficient units and increasing the understanding of the army's win cons. At the same time the meta will shift to combat older lists but won't be fully tooled to combat a newer list unless opposing armies are proactive instead of reactive.

Another week of tournaments where 75% of the top four placements were taken by marines. Any minute now that meta's gonna adjust and everyone's gonna figure out the trick to beating 'em!

the_scotsman wrote:
Another week of tournaments where 75% of the top four placements were taken by marines. Any minute now that meta's gonna adjust and everyone's gonna figure out the trick to beating 'em!

I can almost guarantee a few gravitron moirax can table assault cent spam with speedbumps in between. People were so absolutely focused on IH until the nerf on 10/17. That's basically two weeks for people to see and play upcoming lists. No, I don't think that is a relevant amount of time for people to adjust to a unit that basically has not been seen for over 3 years and certainly not in the quantities taken.

I'm not proclaiming everything is "ok", but a lot of the current lists are super one dimensional. There are certainly stronger lists out there and there are potentially counters. Personally, snipers are a bigger problem for me.

And, not to mention, CA coming up, which can take some of the bite out. Especially if cult marines go to W2.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
And, not to mention, CA coming up, which can take some of the bite out. Especially if cult marines go to W2.

You know CA will have gone to print before the SM codex came out right? So it is not likely to reflect anything that's happened in the past month or two, but hey, keep hope alive Daed.

Being a harlequin player, things are just depressing. Our army needs DOUBLE the number of units to be on part with the other tiny codexes of the game. And I have no doubt whatever psychic awakening book we get will be anemic as hell. They might give us one new character, dust their hands off, and call it a day. The problem with quins was never lack of rules or bad rules, it's the colossal lack of variety. It's truly amazing the harlequin codex was released the way it was.

"i know marines got 20 new books and 20 new units and have like 150 unit choices, but hey! This is basically your new updated codex! 8 units total! Enjoy your scraps and feth off so we can release more power armor."