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.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Seabass wrote:
I WANT melee to be strong in 9th edition because i want the game to be a bit better balanced between the two prevailing concepts of how to play. But that doesn't mean I want it to be broken. I want my opponents to play a tau army to feel like they have an equal chance against my space wolves or Tyranids as they would against my Ad Mech.

Yes, very much this. I play Thousand Sons. I have a good mix of stuff that really likes melee and stuff that really does not. I couldn't tell you if killing Fallback will balance the game. For all I know it could totally ruin T'au - and let's face it - Auxiliaries aren't coming around any time soon. Would it make melee good? Absolutely? Does melee need it to be successful in 9th? I don't know yet.

If Fallback goes away...people with heavy ranged armies will lose their damned minds.
If it doesn't go away...people with heavy melee armies will lose their damned minds.

It isn’t going away! You can take that to the bank. Fall back is still available, and this stratagem is a super fall back for when you’re wrapped.

There’s just more limitations to what you can do after falling back, and fly units and flyers don’t get a free pass either.

 Eldarain wrote:
Tau having a ridiculous stunted design shouldn't hold back the game's core rules.

Tell that to the game designers, I'd be more than happy to have psychic or melee capabilities (or even decent movement across the board, not 8" on crisis suits).
They managed to write an horrible codex this edition, with a faction that works only thanks to the ridiculous shield drones.

 p5freak wrote:

 Pyroalchi wrote:

Yes it cannot detonate its charge (which would be an autohit with 2D6 shots that have to go through the wounding and save sequence), but it can land within 1'', be destroyed and then roll for explosion causin D3 mortal wounds on a 3+.

Destroyed isnt the same as reduced to 0 wounds. Therefore it doesnt explode.

Yeah, it could work like removing models due to morale in 8th ed, but there they don't say destroyed they say "is removed from play". Didn't an FAQ in 8th say that "destroyed' means the same as killed/reduced to 0 wounds/slain or am I misremembering?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Emperor forbid we discuss the information we have already though...

That's a weird way to type complaining.

Says the person that made the thread. If you didn't want people talking about it then why make it?

 p5freak wrote:

 Stux wrote:

Karol wrote:
I hope that everyone gets a cancel opponents stratagem then. Because this hurts armies with just one melee unit a lot.

sucks for those armies that got a rule or stratagem that stops people from fleeing melee, because it looks like a straight up counter to those.

A counter that kills 1/6 of your own models and costs 2cp?

I think that's fine tbh.

You think its fine that an imperial knight dies on a roll of 1, when he is surrounded by non infantry units, and cant fall back normally ? He dies with the same chance as a T2 gretchin ?

So....Since you claim to know more than rest what's your source on knight's own ability being changed? Because as is nothing in stratagem says knight's own ability in own datasheet is changed.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Brutallica wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Stux wrote:
So I believe Falling Back is more or less same as 8e...

That is soul-crushingly awful.

Yep, GW looooooooves their shooty armies. I knew they wouldnt touch fallback. So i suppose its still just better to use my berserkers and flag carriers and point grappers in the new edition. ffs...

You realize right that if fall back wasn't possible anymore with T1 automatic charges being so common shooty armies would die? You think assault armies are bad now? Compared to no fall back without complete rewrite assault armies now would look cheesy broken compared to shooty armies.

No fallback would be such a swing in pendulum that it would require complete rewrite of game. Ditch all codexes and rules and start from scratch.

@ P5freak:

Destroyed isnt the same as reduced to 0 wounds. Therefore it doesnt explode.

fair enough. As Aash said I assumed "destroyed" means the same as "reduced to 0 wounds", but if that assumption is wrong I can accept that.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Seabass wrote:
I WANT melee to be strong in 9th edition because i want the game to be a bit better balanced between the two prevailing concepts of how to play. But that doesn't mean I want it to be broken. I want my opponents to play a tau army to feel like they have an equal chance against my space wolves or Tyranids as they would against my Ad Mech.

Yes, very much this. I play Thousand Sons. I have a good mix of stuff that really likes melee and stuff that really does not. I couldn't tell you if killing Fallback will balance the game. For all I know it could totally ruin T'au - and let's face it - Auxiliaries aren't coming around any time soon. Would it make melee good? Absolutely? Does melee need it to be successful in 9th? I don't know yet.

If Fallback goes away...people with heavy ranged armies will lose their damned minds.
If it doesn't go away...people with heavy melee armies will lose their damned minds.

Well... Elite Melee have been licking the floor the entire 8th ediition. See that fallback gak removed or ajusted in a BIG way, the ranged people NEEDS to learn how to play, AND grow a god damn spine and not just gunline to win. People could do it in 5-7th ofc they can do it here aswel if it gets removed.

 Brutallica wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Seabass wrote:
I WANT melee to be strong in 9th edition because i want the game to be a bit better balanced between the two prevailing concepts of how to play. But that doesn't mean I want it to be broken. I want my opponents to play a tau army to feel like they have an equal chance against my space wolves or Tyranids as they would against my Ad Mech.

Yes, very much this. I play Thousand Sons. I have a good mix of stuff that really likes melee and stuff that really does not. I couldn't tell you if killing Fallback will balance the game. For all I know it could totally ruin T'au - and let's face it - Auxiliaries aren't coming around any time soon. Would it make melee good? Absolutely? Does melee need it to be successful in 9th? I don't know yet.

If Fallback goes away...people with heavy ranged armies will lose their damned minds.
If it doesn't go away...people with heavy melee armies will lose their damned minds.

Well... Elite Melee have been licking the floor the entire 8th ediition. See that fallback gak removed or ajusted in a BIG way, the ranged people NEEDS to learn how to play, AND grow a god damn spine and not just gunline to win. People could do it in 5-7th ofc they can do it here aswel if it gets removed.

I don't remember much of 5th and 6th, but in 7th you had enough firepower to table the opponent in a single turn, deepstrikers could not assault, casualties were taken from the front and charging turn 1 was almost impossible.

You can't compare these 2 editions. In 8th making it into the enemy lines is the norm, without a fallback mechanic of sort CC would be utterly OP.

Spoletta wrote:

 Brutallica wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Seabass wrote:
I WANT melee to be strong in 9th edition because i want the game to be a bit better balanced between the two prevailing concepts of how to play. But that doesn't mean I want it to be broken. I want my opponents to play a tau army to feel like they have an equal chance against my space wolves or Tyranids as they would against my Ad Mech.

Yes, very much this. I play Thousand Sons. I have a good mix of stuff that really likes melee and stuff that really does not. I couldn't tell you if killing Fallback will balance the game. For all I know it could totally ruin T'au - and let's face it - Auxiliaries aren't coming around any time soon. Would it make melee good? Absolutely? Does melee need it to be successful in 9th? I don't know yet.

If Fallback goes away...people with heavy ranged armies will lose their damned minds.
If it doesn't go away...people with heavy melee armies will lose their damned minds.

Well... Elite Melee have been licking the floor the entire 8th ediition. See that fallback gak removed or ajusted in a BIG way, the ranged people NEEDS to learn how to play, AND grow a god damn spine and not just gunline to win. People could do it in 5-7th ofc they can do it here aswel if it gets removed.

I don't remember much of 5th and 6th, but in 7th you had enough firepower to table the opponent in a single turn, deepstrikers could not assault, casualties were taken from the front and charging turn 1 was almost impossible.

You can't compare these 2 editions. In 8th making it into the enemy lines is the norm, without a fallback mechanic of sort CC would be utterly OP.

Nope, without fallback you would be utterly close to balance. But yeah, poor little corner camper gunline would get run down hard, and thats fine, because that boring game stratagy is making the game stale and predictable in turn 2/3.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
What would those be?

Point differentials of
- infantry vs vehicles.
- man-portable and vehicle weapons now that the latter can move, shoot, and shoot into combat without much hindrance.
- melee & CQC vs long range weapons

and

- Modes of scoring for primary and secondary missions
- Actions and their prevalence
- Changes to list building dynamics (this can go either way)
- a reset of Forgeworld
- Day 0 FAQ & Errata
- Changes to morale

and for unlikely items...

- Changes to auras
- Interactions in the command phase

Kind of like...waiting for all the info and then making a judgement.

We have 20+ years of info. What more do you want?

 Brutallica wrote:

Well... Elite Melee have been licking the floor the entire 8th ediition. See that fallback gak removed or ajusted in a BIG way, the ranged people NEEDS to learn how to play, AND grow a god damn spine and not just gunline to win. People could do it in 5-7th ofc they can do it here aswel if it gets removed.

Exactly, I 100% agree. And all pure shooting armies like AM and Tau have plenty of options to play mobile shooting armies, not just boring gunlines. SM even have melee specialists. Castles are so annoying that I'd rather go back to assaulted units that could be tied in combat forever than having a meta based on gunline armies.

No one likes castles, but I would prefer them going away because castling in a corner becomes a dumb move and loses you the objective game... which is actually what happens in real 40K, castles are grossly overrated on this board.

We are seeing that the new maps and objectives push you even more to the center, so I wouldn't be worried about castles in 9th.

 Blackie wrote:

 Brutallica wrote:

Well... Elite Melee have been licking the floor the entire 8th ediition. See that fallback gak removed or ajusted in a BIG way, the ranged people NEEDS to learn how to play, AND grow a god damn spine and not just gunline to win. People could do it in 5-7th ofc they can do it here aswel if it gets removed.

Exactly, I 100% agree. And all pure shooting armies like AM and Tau have plenty of options to play mobile shooting armies, not just boring gunlines. SM even have melee specialists. Castles are so annoying that I'd rather go back to assaulted units that could be tied in combat forever than having a meta based on gunline armies.

AM actually have decent melee tools though.
Now, is their focus still mainly on shooting, yes but i feel like a attrition style list is very much possible, and imo in a guard army there should be one or the other ogryn / squad for countercharge to tie an assult army up.

however, 8th was so favourable to shooting that even the decent AM guard units for melee, (which btw some got nerfed) there was no point for guard to ever really change up, not to mention that the lack of good transport rules and the future smaller boardsize will make transports even less desireable, made the aggressive movement style armies that Tau and AM used to field also a waste of time.

The answer is rarely as one sided.
Same btw for world eaters, which should've a bonus to autocannon use, aswell units that fit more with the brutally strategically cold side of khorne, which however got massively neglected since a long time, sadly, making them basically the equivalent of an angry REEEEEEEing bunch of murderhobos due to that neglect.
As for Tau, considering how their normal vehicles got reduced for the sake of MECHASUITS, aswell as the auxilia the army lost a lot of it's potential.

 Blackie wrote:

 Brutallica wrote:

Well... Elite Melee have been licking the floor the entire 8th ediition. See that fallback gak removed or ajusted in a BIG way, the ranged people NEEDS to learn how to play, AND grow a god damn spine and not just gunline to win. People could do it in 5-7th ofc they can do it here aswel if it gets removed.

Exactly, I 100% agree. And all pure shooting armies like AM and Tau have plenty of options to play mobile shooting armies, not just boring gunlines. SM even have melee specialists. Castles are so annoying that I'd rather go back to assaulted units that could be tied in combat forever than having a meta based on gunline armies.

Tau actually dont have great mobility in 8th never have, when you have assualt ranges of 24+ inches reliably having 18 inch shooting and no JSJ their isnt a counter play, it's nuke it off the board or you die when you get charged.
Its a large part of the mess with Crisis suits in 8th.
Also with primaris they have lost the advange they used to have of having the longest ranged infantry shooting marine's now do that with free AP.

Also it really does seem like some people just have a built-in passionate hatred for certain codex's.
Plenty of people made Melee armies work in 8th across the edition.

Ice_can 789387 10838708 wrote:

Also it really does seem like some people just have a built-in passionate hatred for certain codex's.
Plenty of people made Melee armies work in 8th across the edition.

that is great, but how does that help if the melee army was something like Inari double dipping on stratagems and traits , with the most broken mechanic for a table top game supporting it. And your option to do melee were dudes moving at the speed of basic infantry across the ground costing more then those eldar shining spears.

The explanation seems like those arguments that DA or SW players should have been happy, because from time to time IH and Ultramarines were doing real good in 8th.

Also if GW decides to leave whole armies underpowered for whole editions, why shouldn't people think that this time it should be their time in to sun, and that those other armies, which they do not play and don't care about, should now be bad for 2-3 years?

Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).
We had succesful melee armies based on slow footslogging protected models (Possessed bomb).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

Spoletta wrote:
Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

Yet, alot of the true melee armies like Space Wolves and World Eaters (chaos space marines in general), Blood Angels, Demons, Chaos Knights, Tyranids. Have been sucking hard. So codex creep and nitpicking a select few combos is not something ill attribute to 8th being good melee rules.
Many of those you list here also a good portion have faded away. And green tide (the ONLY way to run orcs melee if you wanted a chance against a gunline), again further telling that 8th is pile of gunline garbage.

Most competitive armies are short range shooting, movility, and meele based.

The assault phase is the most powerfull one in the game, but not to kill your opponent. A player that knows how to use properly the assault and charge phases will wreck any gunline player out there.

Karol wrote:

Ice_can 789387 10838708 wrote:

Also it really does seem like some people just have a built-in passionate hatred for certain codex's.
Plenty of people made Melee armies work in 8th across the edition.

that is great, but how does that help if the melee army was something like Inari double dipping on stratagems and traits , with the most broken mechanic for a table top game supporting it. And your option to do melee were dudes moving at the speed of basic infantry across the ground costing more then those eldar shining spears.

The explanation seems like those arguments that DA or SW players should have been happy, because from time to time IH and Ultramarines were doing real good in 8th.

Also if GW decides to leave whole armies underpowered for whole editions, why shouldn't people think that this time it should be their time in to sun, and that those other armies, which they do not play and don't care about, should now be bad for 2-3 years?

Plent of them weren't Yannari dude they were fast but not everything can be dismissed as Yannari so point not valid.

As your going to bring up grey knights here is the issue they aren't melee specialist, they are generalists with psychic powers they are all armed with stormbolters dude use them.
They were collected by other nerfs for other factions but thats the GW way and why having a second or thrid army is a much safer way to play if your going to make 40k a big hobby.

Have you not seen DA flyer spam wining at two separate occasions in 8th, they have.




Saying that someone's army sucked so they should be free to wish that on others is just a downright dangerous and atrocious attitude to have.

Using justification like that juat leads to dangerous extremist mentality that says everthing regardless is justifiable.
If you truely believe such stuff you probably should speaj to someone about that.

 Brutallica wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

Yet, alot of the true melee armies like Space Wolves and World Eaters (chaos space marines in general), Blood Angels, Demons, Chaos Knights, Tyranids. Have been sucking hard. So codex creep and nitpicking a select few combos is not something ill attribute to 8th being good melee rules.
Many of those you list here also a good portion have faded away. And green tide (the ONLY way to run orcs melee if you wanted a chance against a gunline), again further telling that 8th is pile of gunline garbage.

I fail to understand your point. In those lists i mentioned there were Blood Angels, Demons and Tyranids, so you probably didn't even read.

Also, obviously most of them are no longer top table material, that's why I said that they were good "At some point in time".

Spoletta wrote:
Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).
We had succesful melee armies based on slow footslogging protected models (Possessed bomb).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

Hordes armies were never melee oriented though, mostly tarpits oriented. 180 boyz don't kill anything valuable enough to make their points back, they just control the board and tarpit stuf; they just had their glory days when lists were made to counter knights and games lasted 3 turns because of tournaments time limitations. The same exact lists struggled a lot in real metas, with full games and more variety of enemy factions.

All the other examples are actually mostly shooting oriented armies with a melee oriented niche in addition. Are those SM successful lists melee based just because they had 3 smash dudes? What about the rest of the army?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 Brutallica wrote:

Well... Elite Melee have been licking the floor the entire 8th ediition. See that fallback gak removed or ajusted in a BIG way, the ranged people NEEDS to learn how to play, AND grow a god damn spine and not just gunline to win. People could do it in 5-7th ofc they can do it here aswel if it gets removed.

Exactly, I 100% agree. And all pure shooting armies like AM and Tau have plenty of options to play mobile shooting armies, not just boring gunlines. SM even have melee specialists. Castles are so annoying that I'd rather go back to assaulted units that could be tied in combat forever than having a meta based on gunline armies.

Tau actually dont have great mobility in 8th never have, when you have assualt ranges of 24+ inches reliably having 18 inch shooting and no JSJ their isnt a counter play, it's nuke it off the board or you die when you get charged.
Its a large part of the mess with Crisis suits in 8th.
Also with primaris they have lost the advange they used to have of having the longest ranged infantry shooting marine's now do that with free AP.

I was thinking about vespids, piranhas and troops in devifishes. All units that exist and never see the table. Tau do have the options, if only GW wanted to add some variety in their style of playing.

 Blackie wrote:

Spoiler:

Spoletta wrote:
Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).
We had succesful melee armies based on slow footslogging protected models (Possessed bomb).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

Hordes armies were never melee oriented though, mostly tarpits oriented. 180 boyz don't kill anything valuable enough to make their points back, they just control the board and tarpit stuf; they just had their glory days when lists were made to counter knights and games lasted 3 turns because of tournaments time limitations. The same exact lists struggled a lot in real metas, with full games and more variety of enemy factions.

All the other examples are actually mostly shooting oriented armies with a melee oriented niche in addition. Are those SM successful lists melee based just because they had 3 smash dudes? What about the rest of the army?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 Brutallica wrote:

Well... Elite Melee have been licking the floor the entire 8th ediition. See that fallback gak removed or ajusted in a BIG way, the ranged people NEEDS to learn how to play, AND grow a god damn spine and not just gunline to win. People could do it in 5-7th ofc they can do it here aswel if it gets removed.

Exactly, I 100% agree. And all pure shooting armies like AM and Tau have plenty of options to play mobile shooting armies, not just boring gunlines. SM even have melee specialists. Castles are so annoying that I'd rather go back to assaulted units that could be tied in combat forever than having a meta based on gunline armies.

Tau actually dont have great mobility in 8th never have, when you have assualt ranges of 24+ inches reliably having 18 inch shooting and no JSJ their isnt a counter play, it's nuke it off the board or you die when you get charged.
Its a large part of the mess with Crisis suits in 8th.
Also with primaris they have lost the advange they used to have of having the longest ranged infantry shooting marine's now do that with free AP.

I was thinking about vespids, piranhas and troops in devifishes. All units that exist and never see the table. Tau do have the options, if only GW wanted to add some variety in their style of playing.

Vespis have 18inch weapons
Piranhas still have 18 inch range weapons same issue.
Devilish have 18 inch burst cannon and is the Tau equivalents of a rhino, still doesnt solve the issue of 24+ reliable charges making the range of engagement far to short.

Those "options" still have the same issue of having to be in Reliable charge range being longer than most infantry weapons means their isnt options as they just dont work.

Spoletta 789387 10838739 wrote:

I fail to understand your point. In those lists i mentioned there were Blood Angels, Demons and Tyranids, so you probably didn't even read.

Also, obviously most of them are no longer top table material, that's why I said that they were good "At some point in time".

only those BA lists consited of 15 scouts 2 smash hammers, and the rest of the points in IG and a castellans. That is the point of it. With almost all other marines it was the case of well you can run the same thing as BA, only it will have worse rules. Then 2.0 came and suddenly the top melee army was RG, and it happened clearly because GW forgot that centurions exist.

Plus there still were armies that GW made to do melee, but which were bad at it all 8th ed.

Spoletta wrote:
Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).
We had succesful melee armies based on slow footslogging protected models (Possessed bomb).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

Yes, BUT - those mostly required the strongest units in the game to work or silly amounts of CP forced into one or two units. Others were exploiting times where most other people didn't have their codex and hadn't solved for those units. I think people want to see "medium level" melee armies work. Like the Possessed Bomb is so one-dimensional push these models forward yawn-fest.

Therion wrote:

Spoiler:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Seabass wrote:
I WANT melee to be strong in 9th edition because i want the game to be a bit better balanced between the two prevailing concepts of how to play. But that doesn't mean I want it to be broken. I want my opponents to play a tau army to feel like they have an equal chance against my space wolves or Tyranids as they would against my Ad Mech.

Yes, very much this. I play Thousand Sons. I have a good mix of stuff that really likes melee and stuff that really does not. I couldn't tell you if killing Fallback will balance the game. For all I know it could totally ruin T'au - and let's face it - Auxiliaries aren't coming around any time soon. Would it make melee good? Absolutely? Does melee need it to be successful in 9th? I don't know yet.

If Fallback goes away...people with heavy ranged armies will lose their damned minds.
If it doesn't go away...people with heavy melee armies will lose their damned minds.

It isn’t going away! You can take that to the bank. Fall back is still available, and this stratagem is a super fall back for when you’re wrapped.

There’s just more limitations to what you can do after falling back, and fly units and flyers don’t get a free pass either.

If the limitations only apply to the unit falling back then they don't matter, the problem is all the other units in the army blowing the melee unit off the board after the unit falling back does so.

Insectum7 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
Has there ever been an edition of 40k that wasn't a bit of a hot mess at release? Honest question, not being snarky, I haven't been around for most of them, I took a big break for about 15 years and returned for 8th.

The start of 4th was pretty nice.

Csm had the 3.5 codex.

4th was great. CSM kept their 3.5 book until about 2 months before 5th ed too, iirc.

Yes, that's why 5th was lame.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

We have 20+ years of info. What more do you want?

GW hasn't ever been this focused. It takes a long time to reboot a 35+ faction army system. Their thought process has been pretty open and on point - even where people disagree about the outcome (blast weapons). Also, absolutely none of us would have said GW would ever give digital codexes away for free.

And, no, this doesn't mean this will become the most balanced game, ever. It doesn't have to be. It just have to be fair and fun.

So, yea, maybe giving the benefit of doubt for a little while would be refreshing, but I guess that isn't as fun for some as being histrionic.

Spoletta wrote:
Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).
We had succesful melee armies based on slow footslogging protected models (Possessed bomb).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

In the context of the game, though, look at what had to happen to make them "good". under what we know now and what we know of 9th, I'd argue that of those lists all almost all changed in significant ways because of how broken the mechanics were.
If melee is on roughly equal footing, then these mechanics wouldn't be needed to make the armies functional. Instead, I think its very telling that all of these armies have to have some kind of some breaking mechanism to get them onto the table vs imperial soup and later SM 2.0 (iron hands and crimson fists).

Also, if we look at the worst armies, especially prior to codex 2.0, the worst armies in the game according to 40k stats were almost universally all melee armies, (or undeveloped armies like inquisition and such). I think its also a reasonable argument to add that many of these armies are supported by or soup into very shooty IG armies with knights backing them up. To say that because a list had 3 smash captains in it is a melee army is a kind of disingenuous. The list isn't a melee list. it had 3 melee models, that could operate because one of them could break a fundamental rule of the game. Its also like saying Ynnari was a melee army, it wasn't. Yes, they ran the big blob of shining spears, but that wasn't the primary focus of the army. The army shot things to pieces and once all of the important bits were destroyed, they could send in the spears. But the spears weren't just a melee threat, they were more often than not a harrying force.

I don't know man, I haven't spoken to anyone who doesn't want to see melee made better in 9th. Even my most stalwart AM players all agree that melee has been pretty atrocious in 8th, and it needs a boost. I dont know if it needs "no fallback" levels of buffs, but they do need a buff.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).
We had succesful melee armies based on slow footslogging protected models (Possessed bomb).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

Yes, BUT - those mostly required the strongest units in the game to work or silly amounts of CP forced into one or two units. Others were exploiting times where most other people didn't have their codex and hadn't solved for those units. I think people want to see "medium level" melee armies work. Like the Possessed Bomb is so one-dimensional push these models forward yawn-fest.

I could say the same for most of the shooting lists that have been seen around. They all revolved around some stupid interaction, a clearly OP model (or faction) or stuff like that.

I have yet to see a "Medium level" shooting army reach top tables.
It can be fun and challenging to play, but the same is true for a fluffy melee list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seabass wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).
We had succesful melee armies based on slow footslogging protected models (Possessed bomb).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

In the context of the game, though, look at what had to happen to make them "good". under what we know now and what we know of 9th, I'd argue that of those lists all almost all changed in significant ways because of how broken the mechanics were.
If melee is on roughly equal footing, then these mechanics wouldn't be needed to make the armies functional. Instead, I think its very telling that all of these armies have to have some kind of some breaking mechanism to get them onto the table vs imperial soup and later SM 2.0 (iron hands and crimson fists).

Also, if we look at the worst armies, especially prior to codex 2.0, the worst armies in the game according to 40k stats were almost universally all melee armies, (or undeveloped armies like inquisition and such). I think its also a reasonable argument to add that many of these armies are supported by or soup into very shooty IG armies with knights backing them up. To say that because a list had 3 smash captains in it is a melee army is a kind of disingenuous. The list isn't a melee list. it had 3 melee models, that could operate because one of them could break a fundamental rule of the game. Its also like saying Ynnari was a melee army, it wasn't. Yes, they ran the big blob of shining spears, but that wasn't the primary focus of the army. The army shot things to pieces and once all of the important bits were destroyed, they could send in the spears. But the spears weren't just a melee threat, they were more often than not a harrying force.

I don't know man, I haven't spoken to anyone who doesn't want to see melee made better in 9th. Even my most stalwart AM players all agree that melee has been pretty atrocious in 8th, and it needs a boost. I dont know if it needs "no fallback" levels of buffs, but they do need a buff.

Make no mistake, as I said shooting has been better than melee in 8th and we all want it to be better in 9th.

My argument is that 8th was already better than 7th for melee, so saying that No Fallback would be good under the current conditions because it was fine in 7th, is a huge mystake which could break the game.

Spoletta wrote:

Spoiler:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).
We had succesful melee armies based on slow footslogging protected models (Possessed bomb).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

Yes, BUT - those mostly required the strongest units in the game to work or silly amounts of CP forced into one or two units. Others were exploiting times where most other people didn't have their codex and hadn't solved for those units. I think people want to see "medium level" melee armies work. Like the Possessed Bomb is so one-dimensional push these models forward yawn-fest.

I could say the same for most of the shooting lists that have been seen around. They all revolved around some stupid interaction, a clearly OP model (or faction) or stuff like that.

I have yet to see a "Medium level" shooting army reach top tables.
It can be fun and challenging to play, but the same is true for a fluffy melee list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seabass wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Actually, melee has been succesful in 8th edition in pretty much all sauces at some point in time.

We had succesful horde melee armies (green tide).
We had succesful ultra elite melee armies (Demon brothers/Knights),
We had succesful melee armies based on stacking of buffs (Ynnari).
We had succesful melee armies based on deepstrikes (GSC and Assault centurions).
We had succesful melee armies based on fast shock units (Stealer shock).
We had succesful melee armies based on hero hammer (Shield captains and Smash Captains).
We had succesful melee armies based on slow footslogging protected models (Possessed bomb).


There has been less succesful melee lists than shooting lists, but surely there was no shortage of flavors for those.

In the context of the game, though, look at what had to happen to make them "good". under what we know now and what we know of 9th, I'd argue that of those lists all almost all changed in significant ways because of how broken the mechanics were.
If melee is on roughly equal footing, then these mechanics wouldn't be needed to make the armies functional. Instead, I think its very telling that all of these armies have to have some kind of some breaking mechanism to get them onto the table vs imperial soup and later SM 2.0 (iron hands and crimson fists).

Also, if we look at the worst armies, especially prior to codex 2.0, the worst armies in the game according to 40k stats were almost universally all melee armies, (or undeveloped armies like inquisition and such). I think its also a reasonable argument to add that many of these armies are supported by or soup into very shooty IG armies with knights backing them up. To say that because a list had 3 smash captains in it is a melee army is a kind of disingenuous. The list isn't a melee list. it had 3 melee models, that could operate because one of them could break a fundamental rule of the game. Its also like saying Ynnari was a melee army, it wasn't. Yes, they ran the big blob of shining spears, but that wasn't the primary focus of the army. The army shot things to pieces and once all of the important bits were destroyed, they could send in the spears. But the spears weren't just a melee threat, they were more often than not a harrying force.

I don't know man, I haven't spoken to anyone who doesn't want to see melee made better in 9th. Even my most stalwart AM players all agree that melee has been pretty atrocious in 8th, and it needs a boost. I dont know if it needs "no fallback" levels of buffs, but they do need a buff.

Make no mistake, as I said shooting has been better than melee in 8th and we all want it to be better in 9th.

My argument is that 8th was already better than 7th for melee, so saying that No Fallback would be good under the current conditions because it was fine in 7th, is a huge mystake which could break the game.

How is 8th edition better for melee than 7th specifically?

From my point of view melee ran into some considerable problems with the start of 8th edition.
The first was unlimited overwatch. There were units with hyper-effective overwatch that were near impossible to charge. At least in 7th edition you could cause that unit to expend all of its shooting into a sacrificial charging unit.
The next problem was the introduction of fallback. Enough said.
The third problem was removal sweeping advance. This made melee *lethal* against a lot of opponents. While Marines didn't suffer from this, they were at least elite enough that you could reasonably eliminate them.
The fourth problem is the escalation of fire power as the edition went on. It incentivised you to try and stay out of weapons range - completely the opposite of what melee armies want to do. This feed back into the overwatch problem as more units became effective with it - I saw a dramatic increase in middling strength low AP weapons. This was brutal for my Chaos Daemons, and my Space Wolves didn't fare much better either. I actually gave up on most of my melee elements in my Wolves lists because it just didn't work.

Firepower decreased from 7th to 8th.

In 7th edition with D weapons, grav spam, scat bikes and similar cheese, being tabled turn 1 was really easy if you weren't playing some cheese (read: Death star) of your own.

Right now we complain about units which sometimes in particular conditions and on good targets can take out 50% of their point cost in a single shooting phase, which is an enormous amount.

In 7th a 50 point model could easily remove a 200 point model every shooting phase.

Tie this with casualties taken from the front and melee was simply impossible (outside of some death star).

Vehicles were 100% unplayable, so forget transports.

Let's not forget that if your unit didn't have pathfinder, it was even more difficult to reach the target.

Also, the charges had to go straight to the target and you couldn't play around with movement in melee.

I understand that many don't like the current situation of melee, but let's remove our nostalgia tainted glasses and be objective for a second. This is the best melee has been in the last 3 editions.
I've played a lot of melee lists in 8th, and have won a lot. Nothing top level sure, but still much much more than I could ever do in 7th without using a Death Star.