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.
If those are fair in hh why not in 8th? (Actually a fellblade is 525 in hh).
Howabout the obvious. Different game, different rule. Why marines cost 12 pts and not 30 like 2nd ed?
True but hh is more like 7.5. Tac squads are 125 for 10 which works out to 12.5 per model. Pretty close. Fellblade was 540 in 7th. It's rules didn't get twice as good in 8th.
It would also be nice if they brought in some of the list organization rules from hh. Like no low below 2000 points.
not gonna happen pal, knights are there to be sold.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
If those are fair in hh why not in 8th? (Actually a fellblade is 525 in hh).
Howabout the obvious. Different game, different rule. Why marines cost 12 pts and not 30 like 2nd ed?
True but hh is more like 7.5. Tac squads are 125 for 10 which works out to 12.5 per model. Pretty close. Fellblade was 540 in 7th. It's rules didn't get twice as good in 8th.
It would also be nice if they brought in some of the list organization rules from hh. Like no low below 2000 points.
not gonna happen pal, knights are there to be sold.
You keep running at your r&h windmill and I'll keep running at my fw low windmill.
Dogged pursuit of a cause is what makes dakka what it is.
They DID finally make the hellforged versions relentless.
Kurgash wrote: I’m just biding my time waiting to see Necron points go back up now all you see in normal tournament builds is 3 doomsday arks, 3 doomscythes and Imotekh. Not looking forward to that reveal...
Necrons should be fine they have been consistently towards the bottom. I'm kinda worried about Tau since they were doing well a few months back when CA was probably printed. Doesn't help that FLG has their thumb on the scale and they have a well deserved reputation for hating Tau. As much as Reece and ITC are a pillar of the community I really wish they would excuse themselves from balance discussions if they are that heavily biased.
T'au have been a top tier army for a long while now.
They've gotten nothing but buffs and have gotten better over the course of 8th edition.
For your conspiracy theory to actually make sense, T'au would have to have gotten worse over the course of 8th, not better to the point that they regularly win tournaments and are one of the top tier armies in the game.
These kind of posts always make me scratch my head.
Those two statements aren't mutually exclusive. Competitive Tau live and die by Savior Protocols. They are by far the best ablative wounds in the game and can compensate for how overcosted the majority of the codex is. As long as savior protocols is unchanged then Tau lists will just use the most cost effective drone and probably 20-30 of them. Just like when gun drones went up 50% and shield drones were the most cost effective. Riptides are probably fine bordering on a little underpowered once you remove drones from the equation. Levi Dread vs Riptide, Knight Errant vs Y'Vahra, Dissie Ravager vs MissileSide, Smash Captain vs Fusion Coldstar, Ionhead vs Tank Commander, Devilfish vs Raider etc etc. The Tau unit is usually worse by a significant margin UNTIL you take into account savior protocols. Most factions have lists that would be strong bordering on oppressively strong when you can staple on ~30 ablative wounds for 300pts. Doesn't matter if the wounds are shield, marker, or gun drones.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/14 12:52:28
Kurgash wrote: I’m just biding my time waiting to see Necron points go back up now all you see in normal tournament builds is 3 doomsday arks, 3 doomscythes and Imotekh. Not looking forward to that reveal...
Necrons should be fine they have been consistently towards the bottom. I'm kinda worried about Tau since they were doing well a few months back when CA was probably printed. Doesn't help that FLG has their thumb on the scale and they have a well deserved reputation for hating Tau. As much as Reece and ITC are a pillar of the community I really wish they would excuse themselves from balance discussions if they are that heavily biased.
T'au have been a top tier army for a long while now.
They've gotten nothing but buffs and have gotten better over the course of 8th edition.
For your conspiracy theory to actually make sense, T'au would have to have gotten worse over the course of 8th, not better to the point that they regularly win tournaments and are one of the top tier armies in the game.
These kind of posts always make me scratch my head.
Except Tau started the edition as one of the worst armies in the game, with Commander/Drone spam the only viable build, the codex made things better but not by a lot and it was last years Chapter Approved that really jumped them up. I think the FLG bias can be ignored, the real worry is the CA would have gone to the printers months ago, before the Marine codex came out and it wouldn't surprise me if Broadsides and Riptides, along with CHE, get hit with the nerf bat, leaving Marines the only viable competitive army.
I must admit to zoning out and skim reading the last few pages after I came across several posts with bits akin to “but guardsmen/conscripts”.
IMO, I can see GW doing the following –
Grots and Shield Drone points changes. Why? Playing vs 120-200 grots isn’t fun for anyone, likewise, playing against 50-70 shield drones. It is completely irrelevant whether that means they go to the same cost of another unit in another codex that has completely different stats and/or weapons. It all depends on the rest of the codex.
Spamming these 2 units is also likely not in GWs perceived view of what the armies should look like, play like and be like. If you still want a Grot based army there are options with grot tanks, killa kans etc etc etc. To GW, and pretty much every Ork player, the “pictured army” if one of Boyz, crazy contraptions and the odd Grot meatshield. As much as we all hate to admit it, non-competitive play is a big part of the player base. Besides, as someone said, spending an extra 90 points on 90 Grots isn’t exactly the end of the world.
CSM God specific units going to 2 wounds, would be pretty interesting, but I doubt that’ll come in CA. It’s also mean that the elite Terminators (SOT and DG ones) would need a bump up to 3 wounds.
FW needs a big points overhaul. If they are finally getting around to it, then, great! Some popular units will increase in cost, without a doubt, but hopefully many reduce. We all expect the Levi to increase in cost, but who knows by how much.
Not expecting any points changes for units in the SM codex.
If Magnus does get a points drop, then he could be interesting – though, regardless of by how much, he’ll still die turn 1 if you aren’t going first.
Kurgash wrote: I’m just biding my time waiting to see Necron points go back up now all you see in normal tournament builds is 3 doomsday arks, 3 doomscythes and Imotekh. Not looking forward to that reveal...
Necrons should be fine they have been consistently towards the bottom. I'm kinda worried about Tau since they were doing well a few months back when CA was probably printed. Doesn't help that FLG has their thumb on the scale and they have a well deserved reputation for hating Tau. As much as Reece and ITC are a pillar of the community I really wish they would excuse themselves from balance discussions if they are that heavily biased.
T'au have been a top tier army for a long while now.
They've gotten nothing but buffs and have gotten better over the course of 8th edition.
For your conspiracy theory to actually make sense, T'au would have to have gotten worse over the course of 8th, not better to the point that they regularly win tournaments and are one of the top tier armies in the game.
These kind of posts always make me scratch my head.
Those two statements aren't mutually exclusive. Competitive Tau live and die by Savior Protocols. They are by far the best ablative wounds in the game and can compensate for how overcosted the majority of the codex is. As long as savior protocols is unchanged then Tau lists will just use the most cost effective drone and probably 20-30 of them. Just like when gun drones went up 50% and shield drones were the most cost effective. Riptides are probably fine bordering on a little underpowered once you remove drones from the equation. Levi Dread vs Riptide, Knight Errant vs Y'Vahra, Dissie Ravager vs MissileSide, Smash Captain vs Fusion Coldstar, Ionhead vs Tank Commander, Devilfish vs Raider etc etc. The Tau unit is usually worse by a significant margin UNTIL you take into account savior protocols. Most factions have lists that would be strong bordering on oppressively strong when you can staple on ~30 ablative wounds for 300pts. Doesn't matter if the wounds are shield, marker, or gun drones.
This is exactly right. The Tau codex is full of pretty unimpressive units. It is saved by the fact that some of them cannot be targeted, at all. Things like Ionside lists with Longstrike have long since disappeared.
If you want to fix the codex you have to change saviour protocols, not the points cost of one of the units that can do it. People will just take something else, because that’s all you can do with Tau.
I personally think 8th is a big improvement over 7th edition, but there are a couple of problems. Getting rid of universal special rules is definitely one of them, in my opinion. Now we have quite a few units with rules that do something similar to saviour protocols (those nurgle terminator guys, ogryn bodyguards and so on) but they all work differently, which is confusing for everyone.
It’s the same with infiltrate. Where once we had a single rule (and scout I guess) we now have all kinds of people sneaking around the battlefield, all using different rules to do so. Some get a pre-game move, some get to deploy forwards, some deep strike, GSC might be blips or might appear out of nowhere, and so on. You can easily have a single army where there are three or more different rules being used to represent people sneaking forward into position.
Nobody brings 70 Drones, usually a competitive list has 30 or so, some lists bring 40 of them.
As a longtime Tau player let me tell you that I hate the Savior Protocols and the kind of lists it forces in order to be competitive. Nerf that and you suddenly have to rewrite half our Codex because it has no internal balance of any sort. But beware: removing/nerfing Drones means lowering the survivability of the army as a whole and in order not to send Tau to the bottom tier you need to boost something else.
Boost shooting (better profiles, lower points, ...)? Then 1st turn alpha strike becomes even a bigger issue and you have melee-centric army players complaining about being shot off the board if they don't go first. That was Tau in 7th ed.
Boost mobility (jump-shoot-jump, higher movement characteristic, new strats)? Then you have people complaining that it sucks to play against an army that hides behind terrain after shooting (same as before, like in 7th ed).
Boost melee or psychic? What melee or psychic?
If you feel bad to play against Tau because of the survivability given by Drones (and I do, as I played many mirror matches and I agree it sucks), be ready to hate Tau because they get even shootier or mobile.
You can also hope for Tau to be nerfed into oblivion but I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Tau are still the best selling faction in 40K after SM.
Nonsense. You could remove Drones from the Tau Codex without substitute and bring up Riptides by 20% in point costs and the army would still be vastly superior to things like Ynnari.
Aenar wrote: Nobody brings 70 Drones, usually a competitive list has 30 or so, some lists bring 40 of them.
As a longtime Tau player let me tell you that I hate the Savior Protocols and the kind of lists it forces in order to be competitive. Nerf that and you suddenly have to rewrite half our Codex because it has no internal balance of any sort. But beware: removing/nerfing Drones means lowering the survivability of the army as a whole and in order not to send Tau to the bottom tier you need to boost something else.
Boost shooting (better profiles, lower points, ...)? Then 1st turn alpha strike becomes even a bigger issue and you have melee-centric army players complaining about being shot off the board if they don't go first. That was Tau in 7th ed.
Boost mobility (jump-shoot-jump, higher movement characteristic, new strats)? Then you have people complaining that it sucks to play against an army that hides behind terrain after shooting (same as before, like in 7th ed).
Boost melee or psychic? What melee or psychic?
If you feel bad to play against Tau because of the survivability given by Drones (and I do, as I played many mirror matches and I agree it sucks), be ready to hate Tau because they get even shootier or mobile.
You can also hope for Tau to be nerfed into oblivion but I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Tau are still the best selling faction in 40K after SM.
Overestimation on average drone count, my bad!
As for a more mobile, shooty T'au, i'd personally welcome it as opposed to the current form T'au have to go towards. If the reduction in some weapon costs does come through, then it might allow for some more varied builds to fill the gaps.
Kdash wrote: Grots and Shield Drone points changes. Why? Playing vs 120-200 grots isn’t fun for anyone, likewise, playing against 50-70 shield drones. It is completely irrelevant whether that means they go to the same cost of another unit in another codex that has completely different stats and/or weapons. It all depends on the rest of the codex.
The vast majority of competitive lists are running 30-60 gretchin in minimal units though. There are only a few lists doing really well with a full flood, and those are usually run by the one guy who so good at playing orks, he can pretty much get away with anything (a battlewagon full of flash gits, for example). In any case, the ork codex just has two troops choices and both of those come in sizes of 30 and have a 20+ model horde bonus, so two battalions have the potential to become 180 models no matter what. You can't punish an army for bringing its troops in the exact way they are supposed to be used.
Spamming these 2 units is also likely not in GWs perceived view of what the armies should look like, play like and be like. If you still want a Grot based army there are options with grot tanks, killa kans etc etc etc. To GW, and pretty much every Ork player, the “pictured army” if one of Boyz, crazy contraptions and the odd Grot meatshield. As much as we all hate to admit it, non-competitive play is a big part of the player base. Besides, as someone said, spending an extra 90 points on 90 Grots isn’t exactly the end of the world.
Spending an extra 90 points just means bringing 90 points less of all those over-costed units you summarized under "crazy contraptions", making the game less fun both for the enemy and the ork player. If you want less gretchin on the board, providing alternatives to mobs of 30 boyz(see my previous post) and reworking the army to rely less on CP (ie. buffing units with little to no stratagem support) is the solution. Right now it's pretty much "pay 90 points for 5CP and you get a bunch of gretchin for free", that any ork player would gladly drop if possible.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/14 14:14:45
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
Aenar wrote: Nobody brings 70 Drones, usually a competitive list has 30 or so, some lists bring 40 of them.
As a longtime Tau player let me tell you that I hate the Savior Protocols and the kind of lists it forces in order to be competitive. Nerf that and you suddenly have to rewrite half our Codex because it has no internal balance of any sort. But beware: removing/nerfing Drones means lowering the survivability of the army as a whole and in order not to send Tau to the bottom tier you need to boost something else.
Boost shooting (better profiles, lower points, ...)? Then 1st turn alpha strike becomes even a bigger issue and you have melee-centric army players complaining about being shot off the board if they don't go first. That was Tau in 7th ed.
Boost mobility (jump-shoot-jump, higher movement characteristic, new strats)? Then you have people complaining that it sucks to play against an army that hides behind terrain after shooting (same as before, like in 7th ed).
Boost melee or psychic? What melee or psychic?
If you feel bad to play against Tau because of the survivability given by Drones (and I do, as I played many mirror matches and I agree it sucks), be ready to hate Tau because they get even shootier or mobile.
You can also hope for Tau to be nerfed into oblivion but I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Tau are still the best selling faction in 40K after SM.
I don't know. Nerf saviour protocolos, make drones only be able to be bought as add-ons to other units in max numbers of 2 for small suits and maybe 4 for big ones. Make things a little cheaper. And from there adjust. Make Hammerheads and Ionsides shot twice, etc...
As a Tau player thats what I would do to make Drones and Saviour protocols a nice little thing that only Tau do instead of the crunch and vital part of the army it is now.
Kurgash wrote: I’m just biding my time waiting to see Necron points go back up now all you see in normal tournament builds is 3 doomsday arks, 3 doomscythes and Imotekh. Not looking forward to that reveal...
Necrons should be fine they have been consistently towards the bottom. I'm kinda worried about Tau since they were doing well a few months back when CA was probably printed. Doesn't help that FLG has their thumb on the scale and they have a well deserved reputation for hating Tau. As much as Reece and ITC are a pillar of the community I really wish they would excuse themselves from balance discussions if they are that heavily biased.
T'au have been a top tier army for a long while now.
They've gotten nothing but buffs and have gotten better over the course of 8th edition.
For your conspiracy theory to actually make sense, T'au would have to have gotten worse over the course of 8th, not better to the point that they regularly win tournaments and are one of the top tier armies in the game.
These kind of posts always make me scratch my head.
Those two statements aren't mutually exclusive. Competitive Tau live and die by Savior Protocols. They are by far the best ablative wounds in the game and can compensate for how overcosted the majority of the codex is. As long as savior protocols is unchanged then Tau lists will just use the most cost effective drone and probably 20-30 of them. Just like when gun drones went up 50% and shield drones were the most cost effective. Riptides are probably fine bordering on a little underpowered once you remove drones from the equation. Levi Dread vs Riptide, Knight Errant vs Y'Vahra, Dissie Ravager vs MissileSide, Smash Captain vs Fusion Coldstar, Ionhead vs Tank Commander, Devilfish vs Raider etc etc. The Tau unit is usually worse by a significant margin UNTIL you take into account savior protocols. Most factions have lists that would be strong bordering on oppressively strong when you can staple on ~30 ablative wounds for 300pts. Doesn't matter if the wounds are shield, marker, or gun drones.
TBH those comparison are of Tau units vs units that are universically to be considered from very good to OP/broken, so is not a bad thing that a Riptide is worse than a Leviathan Dreadnought, the problem is that the Leviathan is soo good.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/11/14 14:36:40
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Kurgash wrote: I’m just biding my time waiting to see Necron points go back up now all you see in normal tournament builds is 3 doomsday arks, 3 doomscythes and Imotekh. Not looking forward to that reveal...
Necrons should be fine they have been consistently towards the bottom. I'm kinda worried about Tau since they were doing well a few months back when CA was probably printed. Doesn't help that FLG has their thumb on the scale and they have a well deserved reputation for hating Tau. As much as Reece and ITC are a pillar of the community I really wish they would excuse themselves from balance discussions if they are that heavily biased.
T'au have been a top tier army for a long while now.
They've gotten nothing but buffs and have gotten better over the course of 8th edition.
For your conspiracy theory to actually make sense, T'au would have to have gotten worse over the course of 8th, not better to the point that they regularly win tournaments and are one of the top tier armies in the game.
These kind of posts always make me scratch my head.
Those two statements aren't mutually exclusive. Competitive Tau live and die by Savior Protocols. They are by far the best ablative wounds in the game and can compensate for how overcosted the majority of the codex is. As long as savior protocols is unchanged then Tau lists will just use the most cost effective drone and probably 20-30 of them. Just like when gun drones went up 50% and shield drones were the most cost effective. Riptides are probably fine bordering on a little underpowered once you remove drones from the equation. Levi Dread vs Riptide, Knight Errant vs Y'Vahra, Dissie Ravager vs MissileSide, Smash Captain vs Fusion Coldstar, Ionhead vs Tank Commander, Devilfish vs Raider etc etc. The Tau unit is usually worse by a significant margin UNTIL you take into account savior protocols. Most factions have lists that would be strong bordering on oppressively strong when you can staple on ~30 ablative wounds for 300pts. Doesn't matter if the wounds are shield, marker, or gun drones.
This is exactly right.
No, it really isn't. He basically cherry picked the number 1 top tier option from 5 other sources to compare to the Tau roster. Any rational, honest person would look at that same list of comparisons and realize Tau have a very strong choice in nearly every slot, sometimes several. Not only that, the army only has to do one thing well, shooting, which just so happens to be the best phase in the game when trying to remove the enemy.
That said there are definitely some stupid things in the Tau codex, like how on earth is a burst canon 8 points? Basically the tau wargear point section needs to die in a fire and be rewritten almost entirely. Along with Savior Protocols.
Kurgash wrote: I’m just biding my time waiting to see Necron points go back up now all you see in normal tournament builds is 3 doomsday arks, 3 doomscythes and Imotekh. Not looking forward to that reveal...
Necrons should be fine they have been consistently towards the bottom. I'm kinda worried about Tau since they were doing well a few months back when CA was probably printed. Doesn't help that FLG has their thumb on the scale and they have a well deserved reputation for hating Tau. As much as Reece and ITC are a pillar of the community I really wish they would excuse themselves from balance discussions if they are that heavily biased.
T'au have been a top tier army for a long while now.
They've gotten nothing but buffs and have gotten better over the course of 8th edition.
For your conspiracy theory to actually make sense, T'au would have to have gotten worse over the course of 8th, not better to the point that they regularly win tournaments and are one of the top tier armies in the game.
These kind of posts always make me scratch my head.
Those two statements aren't mutually exclusive. Competitive Tau live and die by Savior Protocols. They are by far the best ablative wounds in the game and can compensate for how overcosted the majority of the codex is. As long as savior protocols is unchanged then Tau lists will just use the most cost effective drone and probably 20-30 of them. Just like when gun drones went up 50% and shield drones were the most cost effective. Riptides are probably fine bordering on a little underpowered once you remove drones from the equation. Levi Dread vs Riptide, Knight Errant vs Y'Vahra, Dissie Ravager vs MissileSide, Smash Captain vs Fusion Coldstar, Ionhead vs Tank Commander, Devilfish vs Raider etc etc. The Tau unit is usually worse by a significant margin UNTIL you take into account savior protocols. Most factions have lists that would be strong bordering on oppressively strong when you can staple on ~30 ablative wounds for 300pts. Doesn't matter if the wounds are shield, marker, or gun drones.
This is exactly right.
No, it really isn't. He basically cherry picked the number 1 top tier option from 5 other sources to compare to the Tau roster. Any rational, honest person would look at that same list of comparisons and realize Tau have a very strong choice in nearly every slot, sometimes several. Not only that, the army only has to do one thing well, shooting, which just so happens to be the best phase in the game when trying to remove the enemy.
That said there are definitely some stupid things in the Tau codex, like how on earth is a burst canon 8 points? Basically the tau wargear point section needs to die in a fire and be rewritten almost entirely. Along with Savior Protocols.
Its a variety of both. I don't think Raiders and Knight Errants are "top tier competitive units" and they aren't being compared to top tier Tau units. Meanwhile the other top tier units are being compared to the Tau top tier units. Cherry picking would involve using bad tau units like anything with the word "rail" in it, trying to compare sniper drones to eliminators, or breachers vs IG Squads.
Kurgash wrote: I’m just biding my time waiting to see Necron points go back up now all you see in normal tournament builds is 3 doomsday arks, 3 doomscythes and Imotekh. Not looking forward to that reveal...
Necrons should be fine they have been consistently towards the bottom. I'm kinda worried about Tau since they were doing well a few months back when CA was probably printed. Doesn't help that FLG has their thumb on the scale and they have a well deserved reputation for hating Tau. As much as Reece and ITC are a pillar of the community I really wish they would excuse themselves from balance discussions if they are that heavily biased.
T'au have been a top tier army for a long while now.
They've gotten nothing but buffs and have gotten better over the course of 8th edition.
For your conspiracy theory to actually make sense, T'au would have to have gotten worse over the course of 8th, not better to the point that they regularly win tournaments and are one of the top tier armies in the game.
These kind of posts always make me scratch my head.
Those two statements aren't mutually exclusive. Competitive Tau live and die by Savior Protocols. They are by far the best ablative wounds in the game and can compensate for how overcosted the majority of the codex is. As long as savior protocols is unchanged then Tau lists will just use the most cost effective drone and probably 20-30 of them. Just like when gun drones went up 50% and shield drones were the most cost effective. Riptides are probably fine bordering on a little underpowered once you remove drones from the equation. Levi Dread vs Riptide, Knight Errant vs Y'Vahra, Dissie Ravager vs MissileSide, Smash Captain vs Fusion Coldstar, Ionhead vs Tank Commander, Devilfish vs Raider etc etc. The Tau unit is usually worse by a significant margin UNTIL you take into account savior protocols. Most factions have lists that would be strong bordering on oppressively strong when you can staple on ~30 ablative wounds for 300pts. Doesn't matter if the wounds are shield, marker, or gun drones.
This is exactly right.
No, it really isn't. He basically cherry picked the number 1 top tier option from 5 other sources to compare to the Tau roster. Any rational, honest person would look at that same list of comparisons and realize Tau have a very strong choice in nearly every slot, sometimes several. Not only that, the army only has to do one thing well, shooting, which just so happens to be the best phase in the game when trying to remove the enemy.
That said there are definitely some stupid things in the Tau codex, like how on earth is a burst canon 8 points? Basically the tau wargear point section needs to die in a fire and be rewritten almost entirely. Along with Savior Protocols.
Its a variety of both. I don't think Raiders and Knight Errants are "top tier competitive units" and they aren't being compared to top tier Tau units. Meanwhile the other top tier units are being compared to the Tau top tier units. Cherry picking would involve using bad tau units like anything with the word "rail" in it, trying to compare sniper drones to eliminators, or breachers vs IG Squads.
Thing is, Tau do not have the best shooting in 40k at the moment, in terms of damage output. Marines do. Tau can win those fights because the marines’ shooting only hits drones.
Ultimately the meta has shifted a lot since the codex came out. When Castellans emerged they pretty much removed vehicles that didn’t have either an invulnerable save or penalties to hit (or both) from competitive play. Things like hammerheads have neither, so they don’t work at all, and they’ve only got worse now Imperial Fists are a thing.
And yes, the wargear section of the book is nonsense. Crisis suits – supposedly a mainstay unit - are a dreadful mixture of an overpriced body with ineffective weapons attached. There are tons of other examples.
But the issues with Tau and others aren’t going to be fixed by tinkering with points. A more fundamental rewrite is needed. It would be good, for example, if the once-feared plasma rifle was less of a complete joke.
Personally I'm fine with saviour protocals and Drones coming in units. The problem here is shield drones specifically, having a 4++ and 5+++ makes them stupidly resiliant as an ablative wound to Riptides for 10pts each, I would very much like to see their numbers limited, say to a max of 4 in a Tac unit and 1 for the add on's to infantry units and 1 per battle suit for those that can take them.
Beyond that there needs to be points changes for many of the weapons, Riptides could do with their main guns having the points swapped around so the Ion Accelerator becomes a more attractive option that the jack of all trades HBC, though a few need an outright rewright (no one is ever taking a Railgun for the Hammerhead whilst it remaines 1 shot and D6 damage).
Jidmah wrote: Unless I really suck at counting, Tau have been about as often in top placings as armies like GSC or Orks. They have simply been one of many armies that have a tournament-viable build.
1st place SoCal open, 1st place Nova, 3rd place Bay Area Open.
There are top placings, and then there are big tournament top placings - and the tau are still taking 1st in major tournaments against the nuMarines, even if their best list is the opposite of fun.
See, this is what confuses me about competitive players. If it isn't fun why would you play it?
Why on earth would you want to play something that isnt fun? I mean if playing lame lists is fun, I dont want to know what fun is then.
Spoiler:
On the topic: if they do bring down the points on the fw super heavys what would they cost them? Would they bring them back to where they were in 7th and are currently in hh at about 550 for a fellblade? 395 for a Cerberus/typhon?
If those are fair in hh why not in 8th? (Actually a fellblade is 525 in hh).
If those are fair in hh why not in 8th? (Actually a fellblade is 525 in hh).
Howabout the obvious. Different game, different rule. Why marines cost 12 pts and not 30 like 2nd ed?
True but hh is more like 7.5. Tac squads are 125 for 10 which works out to 12.5 per model. Pretty close. Fellblade was 540 in 7th. It's rules didn't get twice as good in 8th.
It would also be nice if they brought in some of the list organization rules from hh. Like no low below 2000 points.
not gonna happen pal, knights are there to be sold.
You keep running at your r&h windmill and I'll keep running at my fw low windmill.
Dogged pursuit of a cause is what makes dakka what it is.
They DID finally make the hellforged versions relentless.
Jidmah wrote: Unless I really suck at counting, Tau have been about as often in top placings as armies like GSC or Orks. They have simply been one of many armies that have a tournament-viable build.
1st place SoCal open, 1st place Nova, 3rd place Bay Area Open.
There are top placings, and then there are big tournament top placings - and the tau are still taking 1st in major tournaments against the nuMarines, even if their best list is the opposite of fun.
See, this is what confuses me about competitive players. If it isn't fun why would you play it?
Why on earth would you want to play something that isnt fun? I mean if playing lame lists is fun, I dont want to know what fun is then.
Spoiler:
On the topic: if they do bring down the points on the fw super heavys what would they cost them? Would they bring them back to where they were in 7th and are currently in hh at about 550 for a fellblade? 395 for a Cerberus/typhon?
If those are fair in hh why not in 8th? (Actually a fellblade is 525 in hh).
If those are fair in hh why not in 8th? (Actually a fellblade is 525 in hh).
Howabout the obvious. Different game, different rule. Why marines cost 12 pts and not 30 like 2nd ed?
True but hh is more like 7.5. Tac squads are 125 for 10 which works out to 12.5 per model. Pretty close. Fellblade was 540 in 7th. It's rules didn't get twice as good in 8th.
It would also be nice if they brought in some of the list organization rules from hh. Like no low below 2000 points.
not gonna happen pal, knights are there to be sold.
You keep running at your r&h windmill and I'll keep running at my fw low windmill.
Dogged pursuit of a cause is what makes dakka what it is.
They DID finally make the hellforged versions relentless.
That was my point. If you find min/maxing fun do it. But if someone actually says their list isn't fun why play it?
And I'm not sure if I'm more Don Quixote or Sisyphis.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/14 16:46:38
The vast majority of competitive lists are running 30-60 gretchin in minimal units though. There are only a few lists doing really well with a full flood, and those are usually run by the one guy who so good at playing orks, he can pretty much get away with anything (a battlewagon full of flash gits, for example).
In any case, the ork codex just has two troops choices and both of those come in sizes of 30 and have a 20+ model horde bonus, so two battalions have the potential to become 180 models no matter what. You can't punish an army for bringing its troops in the exact way they are supposed to be used.
Spending an extra 90 points just means bringing 90 points less of all those over-costed units you summarized under "crazy contraptions", making the game less fun both for the enemy and the ork player.
If you want less gretchin on the board, providing alternatives to mobs of 30 boyz(see my previous post) and reworking the army to rely less on CP (ie. buffing units with little to no stratagem support) is the solution. Right now it's pretty much "pay 90 points for 5CP and you get a bunch of gretchin for free", that any ork player would gladly drop if possible.
This is correct.
As I said before, if the current Ork list is still effective, paying 90 more points for grots won't kill it. All that'll do is make other lists *worse*. Orks already struggle with competitive builds, like other armies. They basically have one.
It's also odd to penalize Orks for buying MSU of troops just like every other army, when they aren't even oppressive. Orks occasionally make Top 4 finishes like other high-top tier armies and don't seem to be warping the meta.
If the arguments here are for casual play, I assure you, casual players are fielding tons of Boyz and *not* worrying about CP farming nearly as much.
It's just a bad change all around. You want diversity of lists? Make Trukks cheap as chips. Same with Battlewagons and Bonebreakers. Consider making Nobs troops, so we can also do a more elite focused army. Drop all the buggies 20-30 points.
The codex has plenty of potential, its just hamstrung by overcosted units and a power creep meta.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/14 17:52:56
1. You lose.
2. You alter your army to make it more effective.
3. Profit! Or not.
Non-fun armies are the fault of the rules writers, not the players. If fun stuff doesn’t work, or if non-fun stuff is much more effective, then people will use non-fun stuff.
If those are fair in hh why not in 8th? (Actually a fellblade is 525 in hh).
Howabout the obvious. Different game, different rule. Why marines cost 12 pts and not 30 like 2nd ed?
True but hh is more like 7.5. Tac squads are 125 for 10 which works out to 12.5 per model. Pretty close. Fellblade was 540 in 7th. It's rules didn't get twice as good in 8th.
It would also be nice if they brought in some of the list organization rules from hh. Like no low below 2000 points.
not gonna happen pal, knights are there to be sold.
You keep running at your r&h windmill and I'll keep running at my fw low windmill.
Dogged pursuit of a cause is what makes dakka what it is.
They DID finally make the hellforged versions relentless.
He , i mean that is absolutely valid, and considering the fact that a minotraur f.e. pays for 3 basilisks and is strictly worse then 2 i totally agree. I just feel like, running at windmills and running at concrete reinforced windmills is a slight difference, altough not sure which off us got the one that is reinforced.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
If those are fair in hh why not in 8th? (Actually a fellblade is 525 in hh).
Howabout the obvious. Different game, different rule. Why marines cost 12 pts and not 30 like 2nd ed?
True but hh is more like 7.5. Tac squads are 125 for 10 which works out to 12.5 per model. Pretty close. Fellblade was 540 in 7th. It's rules didn't get twice as good in 8th.
It would also be nice if they brought in some of the list organization rules from hh. Like no low below 2000 points.
not gonna happen pal, knights are there to be sold.
You keep running at your r&h windmill and I'll keep running at my fw low windmill.
Dogged pursuit of a cause is what makes dakka what it is.
They DID finally make the hellforged versions relentless.
He , i mean that is absolutely valid, and considering the fact that a minotraur f.e. pays for 3 basilisks and is strictly worse then 2 i totally agree. I just feel like, running at windmills and running at concrete reinforced windmills is a slight difference, altough not sure which off us got the one that is reinforced.
You don't always have to win the fight. Just make sure they know you were there.
And they remembered fw low existed for one faq at least.
Imagine if R&H got a brief rule update blurb like the one-page precodex updates in CA2017. Tweak a bit of the wording of the way that the army functions, give a strat or two, a warlord trait, a relic...
I wonder what the minimum amount of changes it would take to save R&H from the FW rule-writing dungeons. I'm certainly not expecting a full beta codex like with Sisters in CA2018, but I bet a page or two of quality of life improvements would go a long way.
All of which is kinda a moot point, because I doubt CA2019 will touch the subject, but in terms of the non-points content of the book it'd be nice. I know a lot of the discussion/rumors has been about rumored points changes--have we heard about the other content?
We can probably expect another set of 12 missions for Matched Play, but I wonder what else GW will include in CA this year.
Fan of lore, stealthy black-armored marines, life-alert black-armored marines, and lunatic necrons.
Kdash wrote: I must admit to zoning out and skim reading the last few pages after I came across several posts with bits akin to “but guardsmen/conscripts”.
IMO, I can see GW doing the following –
Grots and Shield Drone points changes. Why? Playing vs 120-200 grots isn’t fun for anyone, likewise, playing against 50-70 shield drones. It is completely irrelevant whether that means they go to the same cost of another unit in another codex that has completely different stats and/or weapons. It all depends on the rest of the codex.
Spamming these 2 units is also likely not in GWs perceived view of what the armies should look like, play like and be like. If you still want a Grot based army there are options with grot tanks, killa kans etc etc etc. To GW, and pretty much every Ork player, the “pictured army” if one of Boyz, crazy contraptions and the odd Grot meatshield. As much as we all hate to admit it, non-competitive play is a big part of the player base. Besides, as someone said, spending an extra 90 points on 90 Grots isn’t exactly the end of the world.
CSM God specific units going to 2 wounds, would be pretty interesting, but I doubt that’ll come in CA. It’s also mean that the elite Terminators (SOT and DG ones) would need a bump up to 3 wounds.
FW needs a big points overhaul. If they are finally getting around to it, then, great! Some popular units will increase in cost, without a doubt, but hopefully many reduce. We all expect the Levi to increase in cost, but who knows by how much.
Not expecting any points changes for units in the SM codex.
If Magnus does get a points drop, then he could be interesting – though, regardless of by how much, he’ll still die turn 1 if you aren’t going first.
I'm not sure GW perceived view of the game is the loyal 32 but no one is expecting a 1-2ppm increase for guardsmen and a 10-20pt increase for units that can issue orders to prevent cp batteries.
People talk about Tau being competitive, but Knights/AM was fighting tau last game of socal on the top table because it is still highly "competitive"
If those are fair in hh why not in 8th? (Actually a fellblade is 525 in hh).
Howabout the obvious. Different game, different rule. Why marines cost 12 pts and not 30 like 2nd ed?
True but hh is more like 7.5. Tac squads are 125 for 10 which works out to 12.5 per model. Pretty close. Fellblade was 540 in 7th. It's rules didn't get twice as good in 8th.
It would also be nice if they brought in some of the list organization rules from hh. Like no low below 2000 points.
not gonna happen pal, knights are there to be sold.
You keep running at your r&h windmill and I'll keep running at my fw low windmill.
Dogged pursuit of a cause is what makes dakka what it is.
They DID finally make the hellforged versions relentless.
He , i mean that is absolutely valid, and considering the fact that a minotraur f.e. pays for 3 basilisks and is strictly worse then 2 i totally agree. I just feel like, running at windmills and running at concrete reinforced windmills is a slight difference, altough not sure which off us got the one that is reinforced.
You don't always have to win the fight. Just make sure they know you were there.
And they remembered fw low existed for one faq at least.
I have given them multiple times Feedback, at the start of 8th, after 50 and then last time at 74 matches.
I got ignored, until i out of a joke demanded a refund, which got faster an answer then i thought possible.
...
...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Benionin wrote: Imagine if R&H got a brief rule update blurb like the one-page precodex updates in CA2017. Tweak a bit of the wording of the way that the army functions, give a strat or two, a warlord trait, a relic...
I wonder what the minimum amount of changes it would take to save R&H from the FW rule-writing dungeons. I'm certainly not expecting a full beta codex like with Sisters in CA2018, but I bet a page or two of quality of life improvements would go a long way.
All of which is kinda a moot point, because I doubt CA2019 will touch the subject, but in terms of the non-points content of the book it'd be nice. I know a lot of the discussion/rumors has been about rumored points changes--have we heard about the other content?
We can probably expect another set of 12 missions for Matched Play, but I wonder what else GW will include in CA this year.
How about, i dunno, reimplement all the lost units?
Or maybee, ya know reimplement the prototraits we had, aka demagogue devotions.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/14 21:17:54
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Honestly 8th isnt that fun to me anymore, AOS is just so much more fun. The only thing that will bring me back to 8th at this point is a huge point decrease for my Harlequins, or Corsairs are back. Seeing GW doesnt like to support either of the 2, this CA wont bring me back most likely.
For Harlequins, Troupes are trash, they need -2,-3pts each, shadwoseers are way to costly as well (they seem to think -1 to be wound aura is good on T3 infantry... its not), Void and star weavers needs to go down 10pts at least. If troupes, shadowseer, and star/voidweavers all goes down i'll play more 8th other than the 1-3 games a month i do (thats very little for me, i play 2-4x a week, sometimes 2-3 games a day).
Seeing as i havent heard a single rumor about harlequins even for PA, i'm not hopeful for this CA.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/14 22:23:34
Remember everyone last year they said they finish writing CA around June. So CA 2019 is not gonna address any of the problems we have right now. It will fix the problems we had since the beginning of this year. So if the issue you have was there around Jan-May its very like CA 2019 will address it. If it wasn't well than you will have to wait until CA 2020.
There is a slim chance that they learned from last year and wrote the marines codex with the CA changes in mind, thus rolling out a marine army that is fits in with the power-level of post CA/PA armies.
Yes, you can stop laughing now
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
Jidmah wrote: There is a slim chance that they learned from last year and wrote the marines codex with the CA changes in mind, thus rolling out a marine army that is fits in with the power-level of post CA/PA armies.
Yes, you can stop laughing now
If that happens i'll eat a broom with handle.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Jidmah wrote: There is a slim chance that they learned from last year and wrote the marines codex with the CA changes in mind, thus rolling out a marine army that is fits in with the power-level of post CA/PA armies.
Yes, you can stop laughing now
Chapter Tactics have already confirmed this not to be the case.
Chapter Approved is written way before Marines were released. Its why I don't buy it, its literally paying for rules that are instantly out of date.
superbit415 wrote: Remember everyone last year they said they finish writing CA around June. So CA 2019 is not gonna address any of the problems we have right now. It will fix the problems we had since the beginning of this year. So if the issue you have was there around Jan-May its very like CA 2019 will address it. If it wasn't well than you will have to wait until CA 2020.
If the follow the same thing they've introduced to AoS this year, then there will be a seperate pdf with point changes for the newer factions, so it migth still happen
Emperor's Spears 2500
Beastmen 10k
