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.

What are the pt changes for Necrons?
I've heard that Pretorians got cheaper (26 to 20 pts).

 wuestenfux wrote:
What are the pt changes for Necrons?
I've heard that Pretorians got cheaper (26 to 20 pts).

No guarantees these are all 100% correct

Thanks for the prompt answer.
Looks quite promising.
No change for the Deceiver, though.

That some people still haven't figured out that GW wants little to nothing to do with FW specific armies is shocking to me.

How many more signals does GW need to send before you get it?
So long as your DKoK or R&H models are not in the standard GW catalogue they don't give a feth about you.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Thanks for the prompt answer.
Looks quite promising.
No change for the Deceiver, though.

Deceiver dropped by about 40.

 wuestenfux wrote:

Indeed, I was surprised to see the pt drops as they made already some adaptions recently.
Now its possible for a 2000 pt infantry GK army to field 200 pts more when compared with lists before the update.

yes, if you use strikes. Plus other armies seem to be getting comperable point drops, so this is really helping much bottom armies like GK. I mean, unless NDKs or draigo gets cheaper, which is possible, I now have 95 extra points to spend on stuff. that is not enough to get a termintor squads, but enough to get a unit of strikes. I really doubt that a unit of strikes is going to help me much, because I had games where my opponents forgot 300pts of deepstrike and beat my army bad turn 1-2.

But maybe there are going to be rules changes too, the last GW FAQ had no changes to GK, besides them reprinting the +1A rule, which they already had added through a WD, so I don't class that as a rules errata. They massed two CA for GK, there is no way to mess up a third one too.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

LoftyS wrote:

Tau

Ghostkeel unchanged

And back on the shelf Tau go again. Wallet not complaining, still haven't bought a single one and so it will remain.

Didn't its weapons go down?

Yes, the good main hand weapon went down by 12. The only useful secondary weapons (Burst Cannons) did not go down. Wargear did not go down. So in total it goes down by 12, when it needed to go down by 40.

The XV25, Kroot and Vespid points drops are more interesting though. Will allow me to fish out my fluffy stealth-based Tau from cold storage for low points values games once in a blue moon. But I still wish I could justify adding Ghostkeels and Remoras to "finish" the army.

 Drachii wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Thanks for the prompt answer.
Looks quite promising.
No change for the Deceiver, though.

Deceiver dropped by about 40.

This is really neat and makes him ever more playable.

The nightbringer also saw a (smaller) reduction iirc, so you can have a whale of a time with a 4-5 c'tan list

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Karol wrote:
So GW thinks GK strikes should cost more then 1ksons. Interesting, maybe they are really making a huge book with rule for GK to use. Because the point changes look strange. If everyone gets their point costs cut, then the cuts only matter to top and mid tier armies. The bad ones will stay bad.

Strikes have the same problem loyalist Terminators do - they pay for having weapons that are pretty good for both shooting and close combat and therefore end up being pretty bad at both due to cost. If GW insists on sticking to fixed costs for wargear they're going to need to start slashing the base cost of things like GK to compensate but they seem reluctant to do that for some reason. I agree with you about the points cuts. I don't think constantly reducing the cost of almost everything is they way to go as it just leads to a further increase in damage output.

And an increase in sales as people are forced to buy models to fill in gaps...

Considering the broad strokes of the point decreases is , all in all considering , quite significant.
I had a marine based CSM list with 55 CSM in it. The list is allready now 110 pts cheaper, that is literally a whole other CSM squad.
Not to mention that the 30 cultist blob also got cheaper by 30 pts aswell.

And that is just expected model cuts, not to go into detail on some special weapory.

I also doubt that Havocs will remain 14 ppm aswell.

Chosen should come down as well. But then again raptors didn't. My contemptor will be at least 8 points cheaper thanks to the drop on chainfists.

Still hoping for a drop on the fellblade. They dropped the wraithknight so that's one non ik/ck low down. Didn't make the eldar players happy though. Always want more.

Yea, that drop will make seeing WK 0 times on top tables, to seeing it 0 times at top tables. The points were not the problem, it just don`t work.

Well, when all armies get a discount of 10% (such as Harlies and Necrons), what would that change in total?

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, when all armies get a discount of 10% (such as Harlies and Necrons), what would that change in total?

more models on the field, more models sold for filling out the point limits.

I don't know how much a Baneblade went down by, but if it's another 40 we'll say they've gone from the 500-600 point range down to the 300-400 point range in like, 2 years flat. WTF.

Daemonengines aswell dropped rather rapidly.

Considering the firepower getting tossed around by 300-400pt units, there is no logical reason a Baneblade should cost 500-600pts. It's less survivable, easier to kill, less firepower due to it's inherent WS/BS, zero stratagems dedicated to it, and completely useless once in melee. But sure, it should cost more than every Knight, and twice as much as an Executioner.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, when all armies get a discount of 10% (such as Harlies and Necrons), what would that change in total?

more models on the field, more models sold for filling out the point limits.

But otherwise very little net change in balance or meta, sadly. Don't get me wrong, this many changes to some units and tons more left unchanged will shake things up, but once the dust settles, I don't expect there to be any significant meta shifts.

But I am starting to agree with others that instead of playing 2000pts as standard, we need to drop to 1750-1850 to really feel the differences.
Even my casual 1500pt lists at home with my boys feel pretty different. Although that could be more because they play Marines and I play either Eldar or CSMs against them. Marines got almost no changes (Codex + Supplements just came out after all) and CSM and Eldar got some big drops

-

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Considering the firepower getting tossed around by 300-400pt units, there is no logical reason a Baneblade should cost 500-600pts. It's less survivable, easier to kill, less firepower due to it's inherent WS/BS, zero stratagems dedicated to it, and completely useless once in melee. But sure, it should cost more than every Knight, and twice as much as an Executioner.

Hey man, Baneblades are some of my favorite units in 40k. I agree with you completely (aside from the completely useless part. I drive them into melee with GLEE and shoot the whole damn time too).

What should happen is that 300-400 points of units shouldn't be able to delete it in one round. They should be consummately durable for their cost. That doesn't mean cost should go down - rather, it means that firepower in 40k right now is TOO DAMN HIGH.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Considering the firepower getting tossed around by 300-400pt units, there is no logical reason a Baneblade should cost 500-600pts. It's less survivable, easier to kill, less firepower due to it's inherent WS/BS, zero stratagems dedicated to it, and completely useless once in melee. But sure, it should cost more than every Knight, and twice as much as an Executioner.

It's not 0 stratagems. You can give one +1 to hit multiple ways. Plus their firepower is pretty legit for 540 points. Their Survivability is what is lacking. It just needs a 2+ save or an invune.

I play with a hellhammer often. 3d6 str 10 ap-4 ignore covers at 36" range for flat 3 is fck all. Then you got 30 heavy bolter shots 4 lascannons and a democannon. It is a death machine if you give it +1 to hit. Put in supreme command with 3 demo command russ with 3 HB each. Use the +6 " range army trait which has the +1 to hit for a single unit stratagem. The real question is - is it better than 3 command russ? Well...you can only bring 3 command russ. Plus it is a much better target for +1 armor and -1 to hit ability.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, when all armies get a discount of 10% (such as Harlies and Necrons), what would that change in total?

My first impression is that harlies got the short end of the stick. The point reduction on the troupe is nice, but the good weapons are still to expensive and the included blade is worst than powershord.
Starweaver is still to expensive for his 6 wounds, some can be said about the Voidweaver. Skyweaver point drops will make some soup list cheaper, but mono harlies are still not impressive.


My second through are that frozen stars can be good in SM metta and good harlies players can perform if they get the right terrain and don`t get punished to much about their short range.

Marin wrote:
….but mono harlies are still not impressive.

Which, IMO is how it should be. I like Harlies a lot, but they never should have been made a stand alone force. They almost ALWAYS muster to war with the other Aeldari Factions and on the rare occasions they don't their numbers are incredibly small.

There are quite a few "factions" that really shouldn't have full Codices, but rather be supplements to others. Harlies (and Ynnari) should be a supplement to CWE & DE, requiring at least 1 CWE or DE detachment.
Same goes for Knights & Inquisition

-

 Galef wrote:

Marin wrote:
….but mono harlies are still not impressive.

Which, IMO is how it should be. I like Harlies a lot, but they never should have been made a stand alone force. They almost ALWAYS muster to war with the other Aeldari Factions and on the rare occasions they don't their numbers are incredibly small.

There are quite a few "factions" that really shouldn't have full Codices, but rather be supplements to others. Harlies (and Ynnari) should be a supplement to CWE & DE, requiring at least 1 CWE or DE detachment.
Same goes for Knights & Inquisition

-

the some think can be said about some SM factions that got supplement.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Considering the firepower getting tossed around by 300-400pt units, there is no logical reason a Baneblade should cost 500-600pts. It's less survivable, easier to kill, less firepower due to it's inherent WS/BS, zero stratagems dedicated to it, and completely useless once in melee. But sure, it should cost more than every Knight, and twice as much as an Executioner.

Hey man, Baneblades are some of my favorite units in 40k. I agree with you completely (aside from the completely useless part. I drive them into melee with GLEE and shoot the whole damn time too).

What should happen is that 300-400 points of units shouldn't be able to delete it in one round. They should be consummately durable for their cost. That doesn't mean cost should go down - rather, it means that firepower in 40k right now is TOO DAMN HIGH.

Firepower didn't largely change until Marines and this CA.

Previous CAs did not do massive drops of points across the board. The things deleting "naked" super heavies exist now as they did back then and baneblades still didn't see tables. The problem isn't really firepower, but people banking their whole army on a single model that can get deleted before it gets to shoot on top of people being forced to learn how to deal with Knights and list building around those problems.

A BB with no sponsons is still 384. Add 116 for the full kit, which is 500 points. So, 30 HB shots, 4 LC, 3.5 Demolisher, and 10.5 lascannon-y main gun shots.

Compare to a Repulsor Executioner -- 18 "HB" shots, 20 bolter-ish shots, 4 better lascannon shots, and a rocket pod for 330ish points. Both move and shoot. Both are T8 3+ and no invuln. And if we're being realistic you're splitting some character support to buff this thing, so closer to 400 points.

The BB produces 15 HB hits, 2 LC hits, 2ish Demolisher hits, and 5ish main gun hits.
The buffed Repulsor gets 16 HB hits, 18 bolter hits, and we'll say 4 main gun hits.

Considering that the Repulsor needs to be 24" to get all those bolter shots in they're fairly discountable. The HB hits are on par and the BB gets more big hits in. The marine tank will have better AP. They're kind of in the ballpark of each other when you account for the extra wounds on the BB and ignore bs like IF.

Now you guys might say that you'd prefer an invulnerable save over a points drop, but that doesn't save you from lots of various other issues like haywire / mortals or IF. Additionally, you can't ask for an invulnerable, then turn around and lament the uselessness of AP in another thread, and then turn around again and complain about all the AP marines have.

I think the problem is firepower. There wasn't much back in the 8th Edition index days that could reliably one-shot a Baneblade. Perhaps a Necron Pylon / the awful Macro rule on some FW units, but I wasn't losing a Baneblade a turn before the codexes started dropping.

---EDIT: wrong thread --

Marin wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Marin wrote:
….but mono harlies are still not impressive.

Which, IMO is how it should be. I like Harlies a lot, but they never should have been made a stand alone force. They almost ALWAYS muster to war with the other Aeldari Factions and on the rare occasions they don't their numbers are incredibly small.

There are quite a few "factions" that really shouldn't have full Codices, but rather be supplements to others. Harlies (and Ynnari) should be a supplement to CWE & DE, requiring at least 1 CWE or DE detachment.
Same goes for Knights & Inquisition

-

the same thing can be said about some SM factions that got supplement.

I agree.

___IMO, the Main factions that should get a full Codex are_________
Space Marines
Ad Mech
Imperial Agents (which would include Inquisitions, Assassins, Custodes & Sisters of Battle)
Guard
Chaos Marines
Daemons
Craftworlds
Dark Eldar
Necrons
Tau
Orks
Nids

___And "factions" that should be SUPPLEMENTS to the above are____________
Various SM Chapters from JUST the 9 First founding (BA, DA, SW and the 6 current supplements). BTs would be included in the Imp Fist supplement like CF
GKs & DW (as either supplement to Marines or Imperial Agents)
Various Chaos marine supplement, again from the 9 first founded Traitor legions
Knights
Harlies & Ynnari

I'm sure I am missing a few, but you get the picture

-

You listed Knights but omitted Guard and Tyranids?

For shame

How would GK work as a supplment to custodes or marines, where besides rhinos, razorbacks and some vehicles they have no units in common with each other?

Yoyoyo wrote:
You listed Knights but omitted Guard and Tyranids?

For shame

Fixed. I did say I missed some. I have to type fast in between calls at work.

Karol wrote:
How would GK work as a supplment to custodes or marines, where besides rhinos, razorbacks and some vehicles they have no units in common with each other?

It would make sense for GKs to be a supplement to Inquisition, which I would include in the Imperial Agents Codex.

But the details aren't important, as the main thesis of my suggestion is that Factions ABC should be full codices while Factions XYZ should only get supplements that require fielding some of ABC first

-

 Galef wrote:

Marin wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Marin wrote:
….but mono harlies are still not impressive.

Which, IMO is how it should be. I like Harlies a lot, but they never should have been made a stand alone force. They almost ALWAYS muster to war with the other Aeldari Factions and on the rare occasions they don't their numbers are incredibly small.

There are quite a few "factions" that really shouldn't have full Codices, but rather be supplements to others. Harlies (and Ynnari) should be a supplement to CWE & DE, requiring at least 1 CWE or DE detachment.
Same goes for Knights & Inquisition

-

the same thing can be said about some SM factions that got supplement.

I agree.

___IMO, the Main factions that should get a full Codex are_________
Space Marines
Ad Mech
Imperial Agents (which would include Inquisitions, Assassins, Custodes & Sisters of Battle)
Guard
Chaos Marines
Daemons
Craftworlds
Dark Eldar
Necrons
Tau
Orks
Nids

___And "factions" that should be SUPPLEMENTS to the above are____________
Various SM Chapters from JUST the 9 First founding (BA, DA, SW and the 6 current supplements). BTs would be included in the Imp Fist supplement like CF
GKs & DW (as either supplement to Marines or Imperial Agents)
Various Chaos marine supplement, again from the 9 first founded Traitor legions
Knights
Harlies & Ynnari

I'm sure I am missing a few, but you get the picture

-

You missed Imperial Guard.

 Galef wrote:
Fixed. I did say I missed some. I have to type fast in between calls at work.

I'd be very sad if I couldn't play out scenes from Aliens!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTMXteZokXs