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.

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
Isn't this type of alpha list going to be heavily impacted by first turn? I would think if you go first against it that's a huge advantage for you.

It is *entirely* dependent on getting the first turn super-infiltrate banzai charge off.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
Hopefully 9th edition will just get rid of weapon range all together.

Infinite Range
Everything Wounds Everything.

Winning.

With any luck we can at least eliminate one problem in 9th. Just give every army access to the 200-300 WL traits army traits and stratagems and relics and say go for it! Everyone has access to everything. Then at least everyone is OP.

Let's go deeper. Theoretical 9th Edition™ stat sheet for a new breed of Primaris Marine Unit.

Super Spesshul UltraPrime Primaris Space Marine Warriors Squadron™

This unit may include any number of Spesshul UltraPrime Primaris Space Marine Warriors™. One warrior can take a Ultratronic-siderial High-Phase Particle Melta Projector Array™ for 1 point.

Weapon: High-Yield Spectatum Bolter Rifle™; Range: Infinite Hit: 2+ Wound:2+

Special Ability: No Fear for the UltraPrime's Chosen™ (Never Take Moral)

1000 points.

This will be 9th Edition™ in a nutshell.

Sterling191 wrote:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
Isn't this type of alpha list going to be heavily impacted by first turn? I would think if you go first against it that's a huge advantage for you.

It is *entirely* dependent on getting the first turn super-infiltrate banzai charge off.

True, but the RG player can decide that he doesn't want to move his units forward if he gets second turn, and then can reactively put the Cents into Deep Strike. Shadowstep/Deep Strike a supporting character on T2 and it could still be a dangerous combo.

On another note, I have seen more and more threads cropping up about one particular troublesome unit or another. What happened to the days of rebuilding your list to account for tactics like this? It seems like there are more people praying for a nerf these days than there are revising their tactics or revising their lists to handle what the meta is throwing at them. If Alpha Strikes are dominating your local meta, take cheap, layered screening units. If hard-to-hit flyer spam is dominating your local meta, take anti-air that is not crippled by facing ground forces. Etc., etc. There are plenty of ways to mitigate troublesome units besides hoping that the opposing army can't effectively use a particular unit anymore.

Because teching for all of the threats you will face in the current meta is impossible outside of a couple builds.

Eldar flyers rocking -2 to -3 (better be able to kill 2 in a turn)
Hordes (nurgle/GSC)
Deepstrike/t1 charging (white scars, ravenguard, nids, GSC)
Parking lots
Knights/TCs (better be able to still kill 1 after absorbing a couple turns of losses)

I guess if you have a casual or small local meta but for those of us around competitive scenes, having tools to deal with all of these threats means only really optimal lists don't have auto-lose matchups. It's is starting to get so easy to get T2 tabled (or at least have the game decided by then) that unless you build/play hyper competitive the game is becoming un-fun (at least for me trying to get SW/DA/BA/DW to work).

GW seemed to have gone out of their way to remove t1 charges from most of the game and have been giving back in chunks (nids -> GSC -> WS -> RG). With the new PA books eldar have pretty reliable out of the webway charges.

While we're at it, what's the strat combo that lets WS cents threaten 24"+?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
The AP arms race is why vehicles without Invulnerable saves are bad.

I feel like that is a conundrum. Centurions stand despite having no invuln, but they also do so, because 2+ W4 is a weird place @ 52 points (for the common load out).

Allarus Custodians are W4 2+/5++, but both their melee and shooting is worse -- at 79 points. They're faster and come with their own deepstrike though. Honestly, Centurions may need to go down 1 attack as with the bonus they're rocking 4 on the first turn of combat. Either that or they may need to go up in points (or Custodians come down).

Honestly their cost is right for a unit that requires a transport to get places and is all short ranged with a 4" move. The problem is - they can be infiltrated or turn 1 DS by WLT and stratagems. Just remove those things...Seriously - a drop pod costs 65 points and people whine and complain about it coming down in price but when a WLT is deep strike turn 1 + your warlord for ANY infantry unit regardless of size....Whats that worth? Oh it's free....that is fine.

Custodians do indeed need to come down in points though. Probably should remove their ability to take storm sheilds and drop them to 45 points and make their shooting weapon assault 2. Does that mean terms need to drop too? Yep. They should be 35ish points with power fists and 30ish with power swords.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Honestly their cost is right for a unit that requires a transport to get places and is all short ranged with a 4" move. The problem is - they can be infiltrated or turn 1 DS by WLT and stratagems. Just remove those things...Seriously - a drop pod costs 65 points and people whine and complain about it coming down in price but when a WLT is deep strike turn 1 + your warlord for ANY infantry unit regardless of size....Whats that worth? Oh it's free....that is fine.

Custodians do indeed need to come down in points though. Probably should remove their ability to take storm sheilds and drop them to 45 points and make their shooting weapon assault 2. Does that mean terms need to drop too? Yep. They should be 35ish points with power fists and 30ish with power swords.

Yea, I'm still sorting my feelings out on it. WL Traits aren't "cheap", because losing advance and charge is a hidden cost and it may be better to pay CP. In fact it seems to be why some opt for the Assault Launchers over Hurricanes -- they can run all day long and not suffer any issues with their weapons.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 puma713 wrote:


On another note, I have seen more and more threads cropping up about one particular troublesome unit or another. What happened to the days of rebuilding your list to account for tactics like this? It seems like there are more people praying for a nerf these days than there are revising their tactics or revising their lists to handle what the meta is throwing at them. If Alpha Strikes are dominating your local meta, take cheap, layered screening units. If hard-to-hit flyer spam is dominating your local meta, take anti-air that is not crippled by facing ground forces. Etc., etc. There are plenty of ways to mitigate troublesome units besides hoping that the opposing army can't effectively use a particular unit anymore.

Agree completely. It's why I started the conversation.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

bananathug wrote:

While we're at it, what's the strat combo that lets WS cents threaten 24"+?

Quite a lot of benefits, actually. Swing if someone falls back, big consolidates, 3D6 charges, table edge deepstrike, etc

These are the ones that caught my eye. Not all are crazy good, but applicable in any case:

My personal opinion is a warlord trait should really only affect the warlord. Like stats...M/W/T/save ect. It shouldn't be granting aura abilities. Perhaps a single target ability that can be used on their selves or another unit. I'm really not sure how anyone could think turn 1 deep strike for the Walord + a unit is fair for the cost of a warlord trait or relic. It's probably the same people who thought it was fair to have +1 damage vs vehicles with all your guns. LOL.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
The AP arms race is why vehicles without Invulnerable saves are bad.

I feel like that is a conundrum. Centurions stand despite having no invuln, but they also do so, because 2+ W4 is a weird place @ 52 points (for the common load out).

Allarus Custodians are W4 2+/5++, but both their melee and shooting is worse -- at 79 points. They're faster and come with their own deepstrike though. Honestly, Centurions may need to go down 1 attack as with the bonus they're rocking 4 on the first turn of combat. Either that or they may need to go up in points (or Custodians come down).

The problem IMO is not the system itself, but the way that it was implemented.

Nearly all vehicles share a very common couple of statlines: T7, 3+, no invuln, and nearly all antitank weapons have AP-3 or AP-4 and S8+. This creates kind of the reverse of the Infantry AP problem, where vehicles with invuln saves close to their armor saves suddenly become super powerful because so few people were taking the few low AP mid strength anti-vehicle guns.

The "AP arms race" people are complaining about right now is kind of a separate issue, which is basic anti-infantry weapons getting AP-1 and AP-2 handed out like free candy to them with army-wide rules, which was a spider swallowed to catch the fly of GEQ infantry suddenly getting the full real benefit of their 5+ saves earlier in the edition and making previously AP5 basic weaponry far less effective at mowing them down.

Doctrines are the most blatant example but they've been steadily adding stuff throughout the edition. Wych weapons gained a pip of AP with the codex, there's a new AP-1 on all shuriken weapons craftworld trait, your min dire avenger squads can now lay down 4 S4 AP-3 shots from just the sergeant, etc. Basic anti-infantry weaponry has steadily gotten stronger throughout the horde meta phase of the game when we went through that period of brimstone horrors, then guardsmen, then tzaangors, then guardsmen again, then poxwalker spam...

This has the effect of degrading the value of armor saves that are significantly higher than a target's invulnerable save. A 3+ 4++ model is still pretty OK in that environment but Sv2+ 5++ you're basically paying for an invuln you will almost never use. Whose terminators get shot by meltaguns?

 Xenomancers wrote:
My personal opinion is a warlord trait should really only affect the warlord. Like stats...M/W/T/save ect. It shouldn't be granting aura abilities. Perhaps a single target ability that can be used on their selves or another unit. I'm really not sure how anyone could think turn 1 deep strike for the Walord + a unit is fair for the cost of a warlord trait or relic. It's probably the same people who thought it was fair to have +1 damage vs vehicles with all your guns. LOL.

I won't take a hard stance on this, but the cat is out of the bag now. Ultimately that particular trait is no different than +2CP for RG. is 2 CP that much of an upset to the system? Would you rather have 2CP or advance and charge?

Yeah, I've seen this. Also, Aggressors used in the same capacity.

I think the plan is "Suppression Fire" from my least valuable artillery unit, and something with a lot of multiple-damage attacks with good AP in melee, and having nothing else important to do in melee that turn. Defending against it should be accomplished with a line of expendable and standing back, and potentially guys situated to Stooping Dive them if I have Custodes bikers in my list.

S isn't really important, as long as it equals their toughness, but AP and a damage score of at least 2 is a must.

Meltagunning them, or a Leman Russ Demolisher, might be a valid scheme to knock them out "at range", but I don't want to bank on D1d6 weapons. Shadowsword might also be a valid plan, though it really wants to be shooting other things.

 puma713 wrote:
On another note, I have seen more and more threads cropping up about one particular troublesome unit or another. What happened to the days of rebuilding your list to account for tactics like this? It seems like there are more people praying for a nerf these days than there are revising their tactics or revising their lists to handle what the meta is throwing at them. If Alpha Strikes are dominating your local meta, take cheap, layered screening units. If hard-to-hit flyer spam is dominating your local meta, take anti-air that is not crippled by facing ground forces. Etc., etc. There are plenty of ways to mitigate troublesome units besides hoping that the opposing army can't effectively use a particular unit anymore.

Strangely this doesn't work well in tournaments unless you build in a sidebar, which is problematic all on its own. Also, there's no such thing as a 'screening unit' anymore. Unless it's a character, you can shoot it. If everything is utterly lethal it only exacerbates the go first problems that already exist in the game.

To some extent you can screen - and due to the FAQ, Master of Ambushers can't come within 9" of your deployment zone, so if you go deep enough in, they can't turn one 11" flame you. Or charge.

But you are potentially running out of table and this is an obvious problem if your army is fairly slow as the Marine player can just grab the whole board while you are hiding in a corner.

It makes things like Eldar Flyer Lists and stuff which can cover the table in two turns even more essential.

Tyel wrote:
To some extent you can screen - and due to the FAQ, Master of Ambushers can't come within 9" of your deployment zone, so if you go deep enough in, they can't turn one 11" flame you. Or charge.

Yes, melee/deep strike screening is still viable to a certain extent.

the_scotsman wrote:

The problem IMO is not the system itself, but the way that it was implemented.

Nearly all vehicles share a very common couple of statlines: T7, 3+, no invuln, and nearly all antitank weapons have AP-3 or AP-4 and S8+. This creates kind of the reverse of the Infantry AP problem, where vehicles with invuln saves close to their armor saves suddenly become super powerful because so few people were taking the few low AP mid strength anti-vehicle guns.

The "AP arms race" people are complaining about right now is kind of a separate issue, which is basic anti-infantry weapons getting AP-1 and AP-2 handed out like free candy to them with army-wide rules, which was a spider swallowed to catch the fly of GEQ infantry suddenly getting the full real benefit of their 5+ saves earlier in the edition and making previously AP5 basic weaponry far less effective at mowing them down.

Doctrines are the most blatant example but they've been steadily adding stuff throughout the edition. Wych weapons gained a pip of AP with the codex, there's a new AP-1 on all shuriken weapons craftworld trait, your min dire avenger squads can now lay down 4 S4 AP-3 shots from just the sergeant, etc. Basic anti-infantry weaponry has steadily gotten stronger throughout the horde meta phase of the game when we went through that period of brimstone horrors, then guardsmen, then tzaangors, then guardsmen again, then poxwalker spam...

This has the effect of degrading the value of armor saves that are significantly higher than a target's invulnerable save. A 3+ 4++ model is still pretty OK in that environment but Sv2+ 5++ you're basically paying for an invuln you will almost never use. Whose terminators get shot by meltaguns?

Yea I'm not fond of the extra AP on guns. Melee AP doesn't stress me as much. How do Dire Avengers get AP3 outside 6s? Isn't it only +1 to AP1?

I'm switching my War Dogs to Moirax with Graviton Pulsars. D6 24" S6 AP3 D2 -- if they have a save of 3+ (or better) it goes to D4. It is about the perfect gun to kill them and other marine bs. In fact I think Pampreen's list would almost auto-lose to 3 Moirax with those guns.

I do hope for doctrines to move to once per doctrine instead of all game long. They still get docs for the first 3 turns, but they won't be hyper optimized for their army. Do you foresee this being too little or too much of a nerf? If not, I'd like to start email blasting GW on it. To me it seems like a tweak that wouldn't break the strength of marines.

I've thought about going to Grav with my Moirax as well. In my area agressors and cents are the order of the day. But the dual lightning locks do so much work for me. Against any non primaris Marines they shred. Against Tau they're excellent for taking out drones.

Technically Allarus will always have a 4++ cause of Custodes rules (battle forged). But yeah, assault cents are too cheap and I wouldn’t be surprised if they got a points bump.
As far as killing them, the problem is they can shoot you when they deepstrike in with a lot of guns that are now AP-1 thanks to tactical doctrine. So you have to push them back somehow, so you can shoot them and they only get chaff when they come in. Then you need a bunch of D2 shooting to kill them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also @Daedalus there has been more than one commentator on podcasts advocating for the removal of AP on doctrines...ie that it’s just good enough as a keyword so stuff like the re-roll ones for certain weapons can exist.

Centurions could probably be 60 points a piece and still be good. That'd be my starting point.

Tyel wrote:
To some extent you can screen - and due to the FAQ, Master of Ambushers can't come within 9" of your deployment zone, so if you go deep enough in, they can't turn one 11" flame you. Or charge.

But you are potentially running out of table and this is an obvious problem if your army is fairly slow as the Marine player can just grab the whole board while you are hiding in a corner.
.

That doesn't always work that well either as the RG player can Master of Ambush to outside 9" of deployment area, and then infiltrate that same unit further up the board to be outside of 9" of your troops.

 greyknight12 wrote:
Technically Allarus will always have a 4++ cause of Custodes rules (battle forged). But yeah, assault cents are too cheap and I wouldn’t be surprised if they got a points bump.
As far as killing them, the problem is they can shoot you when they deepstrike in with a lot of guns that are now AP-1 thanks to tactical doctrine. So you have to push them back somehow, so you can shoot them and they only get chaff when they come in. Then you need a bunch of D2 shooting to kill them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also @Daedalus there has been more than one commentator on podcasts advocating for the removal of AP on doctrines...ie that it’s just good enough as a keyword so stuff like the re-roll ones for certain weapons can exist.

the removal of the -1 ap is absolutely stupid, the doctrine abilities being removed is more sensable then that. people look at it and forget that the doctrine abilities only come into play when in the proper doctrine stance.

BrianDavion wrote:

 greyknight12 wrote:
Technically Allarus will always have a 4++ cause of Custodes rules (battle forged). But yeah, assault cents are too cheap and I wouldn’t be surprised if they got a points bump.
As far as killing them, the problem is they can shoot you when they deepstrike in with a lot of guns that are now AP-1 thanks to tactical doctrine. So you have to push them back somehow, so you can shoot them and they only get chaff when they come in. Then you need a bunch of D2 shooting to kill them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also @Daedalus there has been more than one commentator on podcasts advocating for the removal of AP on doctrines...ie that it’s just good enough as a keyword so stuff like the re-roll ones for certain weapons can exist.

the removal of the -1 ap is absolutely stupid, the doctrine abilities being removed is more sensable then that. people look at it and forget that the doctrine abilities only come into play when in the proper doctrine stance.

Right I don't think removing the AP is the best approach. Clearly some doctrines being on turn 1 and never getting turned off could be a little too much.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 greyknight12 wrote:
Technically Allarus will always have a 4++ cause of Custodes rules (battle forged). But yeah, assault cents are too cheap and I wouldn’t be surprised if they got a points bump.
As far as killing them, the problem is they can shoot you when they deepstrike in with a lot of guns that are now AP-1 thanks to tactical doctrine. So you have to push them back somehow, so you can shoot them and they only get chaff when they come in. Then you need a bunch of D2 shooting to kill them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also @Daedalus there has been more than one commentator on podcasts advocating for the removal of AP on doctrines...ie that it’s just good enough as a keyword so stuff like the re-roll ones for certain weapons can exist.

the removal of the -1 ap is absolutely stupid, the doctrine abilities being removed is more sensable then that. people look at it and forget that the doctrine abilities only come into play when in the proper doctrine stance.

Right I don't think removing the AP is the best approach. Clearly some doctrines being on turn 1 and never getting turned off could be a little too much.

I suppose you could with canny play and a little bit of luck force a switch. rush into melee with a space marine army so much that he's forced to switch to assault doctrine.

BrianDavion wrote:


I suppose you could with canny play and a little bit of luck force a switch. rush into melee with a space marine army so much that he's forced to switch to assault doctrine.

By the time I get to melee the primary damage is done and I can't see me engaging enough units to make it worth it to them to switch.

I think gw have really written themselves into a corner with these new supplements.
The different marine books offer such wildly different, powerful bonuses that points tweaks to rein in overperforming units in one book makes them overpriced for other books.

kingheff wrote:
I think gw have really written themselves into a corner with these new supplements.
The different marine books offer such wildly different, powerful bonuses that points tweaks to rein in overperforming units in one book makes them overpriced for other books.

I agree, but I don't think it's terribly difficult to handle. In regards to the Raven guard example you can go back and just specify that the infiltration does not work on centurions. Boom problem fixed that in no way effects centurions from other chapters. Iron hand doctrine on flyers too good? Their bonus does not apply to flyers, or perhaps only one aspect of it does, but not both. The hard part would be keeping track of how each chapter's rule interact with the same units and as such should only be done on the most outrageous cases.

Ok, so because one single unit which is dangerous when used in a specific (not ubiquitously used) faction requires high AP, and some SM players theorised one-dimensional high ROF low AP lists are the only way to play IF, you think Imperial Fists will struggle?
That's either misleading, a poorly chosen title or just outright clickbait in the worst case.

The argument of Assault Centurions bordering OP with RG deployment shenanigans was interesting by itself. There was no need for the out-of-place jab at IF.

 Xenomancers wrote:
My personal opinion is a warlord trait should really only affect the warlord. Like stats...M/W/T/save ect. It shouldn't be granting aura abilities. Perhaps a single target ability that can be used on their selves or another unit. I'm really not sure how anyone could think turn 1 deep strike for the Walord + a unit is fair for the cost of a warlord trait or relic. It's probably the same people who thought it was fair to have +1 damage vs vehicles with all your guns. LOL.

Have to disagree with this. The bubble traits represent the "inspiring" aura of the leader. I also like it (I play more casually) for my Speed Freeks. It lets my Ork Warboss on trike or bike give evil sunz around him the chance to fall back and charge again, which is thematic.

I think the issue with this discussion is two-fold. 1) Dakka and competitive players seem to like to cry a lot. Just being honest about that. The arguments of "It wouldn't be Warhammer if Marines weren't winning everything" is not only hyperbolic but laughable. Marines have been in a mediocre spot for awhile and 2) I think given some time this will all balance out. It's essentially what happened when the Space Marine codex was released back when 8th came out. They were the first to have all the shiny new toys so they seemed awesome/better... then everyone else got their new stuff and they were put in their place.

As per usual, I expect this flavor of the month to yet again have an answer arrive... like it usually does. For now, I'll continue to read and be amused by all the chicken littles of the Dakka perpetual crying motion machine.

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:

kingheff wrote:
I think gw have really written themselves into a corner with these new supplements.
The different marine books offer such wildly different, powerful bonuses that points tweaks to rein in overperforming units in one book makes them overpriced for other books.

I agree, but I don't think it's terribly difficult to handle. In regards to the Raven guard example you can go back and just specify that the infiltration does not work on centurions. Boom problem fixed that in no way effects centurions from other chapters. Iron hand doctrine on flyers too good? Their bonus does not apply to flyers, or perhaps only one aspect of it does, but not both. The hard part would be keeping track of how each chapter's rule interact with the same units and as such should only be done on the most outrageous cases.

You have to take into account consistency though. Wouldn't it seem just a bit dumb that the Iron Hand bonus not work on fliers for whatever reason? It goes back hand in hand with "why don't vehicles get Chapter Tactics?"

Just eliminate Super Doctrines. Period. They shouldn't exist and then let Marines start in whatever Doctrine they want. Seems more reasonable than rerolls everywhere or Knights dying quicker to Raven Guard doesn't it or vehicles taking more damage from a Heavy Bolter compared to an Inceptor...despite the guns having the same bloody stats.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:

kingheff wrote:
I think gw have really written themselves into a corner with these new supplements.
The different marine books offer such wildly different, powerful bonuses that points tweaks to rein in overperforming units in one book makes them overpriced for other books.

I agree, but I don't think it's terribly difficult to handle. In regards to the Raven guard example you can go back and just specify that the infiltration does not work on centurions. Boom problem fixed that in no way effects centurions from other chapters. Iron hand doctrine on flyers too good? Their bonus does not apply to flyers, or perhaps only one aspect of it does, but not both. The hard part would be keeping track of how each chapter's rule interact with the same units and as such should only be done on the most outrageous cases.

You have to take into account consistency though. Wouldn't it seem just a bit dumb that the Iron Hand bonus not work on fliers for whatever reason? It goes back hand in hand with "why don't vehicles get Chapter Tactics?"

Just eliminate Super Doctrines. Period. They shouldn't exist and then let Marines start in whatever Doctrine they want. Seems more reasonable than rerolls everywhere or Knights dying quicker to Raven Guard doesn't it or vehicles taking more damage from a Heavy Bolter compared to an Inceptor...despite the guns having the same bloody stats.

I like the super doctrines because they really make your army feel like your army and it's an additional reward for staying committed to an army rather than souping in other elements. I understand your point about consistency, but I don't think we need to stay contained within a self imposed box like way of thinking. Why can't rules apply differently to different units for the sake of balance? I mean we already have it in the game with primaris vehicles not carrying mini marines and vice versa. Lias Issodan the FW Raptor chapter master has a infiltrate ability that specifies it doesn't work with centurions or primaris. Why can't that same line of thinking apply to units that only become a problem once they get bonuses from a super doctrine or equivalent?

If Raven guard centurions are over performing because of a raven guard stratagem then don't make that stratagem work on centurions. Are Iron Hand flyers benefiting too much from their super doctrine? Lessen the effect of the doctrine on the flyers. This way you still have the wildly different armies from wildly different chapters playing wildly differently, but now you minimize the balance issues caused by this. There's no need for a blanket nerf to units if it's just one chapter. Change the way the chapter bonuses interact with that specific unit and bam problem solved or at least minimized. Why use a hammer when a scalpel will suffice?

Because you're taking a scalpel to what isn't the issue in the first place. Super Doctrines are a broken concept period. Hell, Iron Hands not getting a benefit on their fliers just relegated them back to the Executioner and Asscans.

You don't fix gangrene and necrosis of the foot by just antibiotics and hope for the best. You need proper wound care, sometimes wound vacs, and honestly as someone in healthcare I can tell you that the best solution is to usually just amputate.

We need to amputate Super Doctrines instead of pretending they're fine by not letting certain units benefit.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Also, there's no such thing as a 'screening unit' anymore. Unless it's a character, you can shoot it. If everything is utterly lethal it only exacerbates the go first problems that already exist in the game.

My post was referring to area denial. If we're talking about being concerned with alpha-striking centurions, you can protect yourself by building screens back into your deployment. If they have Master of Ambush in their list, and they plan to move within 9" of your deployment, and then infiltrate within 9" of your screens, you can effectively deny their infiltrate or deny them good target priority with the use of screens. Then, if they get turn 1, they'll move forward, probably mow down your screen and then may or may not have anything to charge, depending on how well you positioned yourself. It takes some planning during deployment, but it can be mitigated. It is one way people defeat GSC.

I'm not saying that it is a foolproof defense, but it is a better defense than asking for/waiting on a nerf.