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.

 Argive wrote:
Hmm I wonder if disgustingly resiliant will stay at 5+++/function as a rule with two wound DG and three wound blightlords. Maybe they will make it into an AP negating rule or a better save..

DG is finally getting as durable as they are supposed to be in the fluff and everyone is already whining about how they are way too resilient...
People seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that regular space marines have units that can take just as much or even more punishment than plague marines or blightlords while they also have vastly superior shooting output and move faster.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Hmm I wonder if disgustingly resiliant will stay at 5+++/function as a rule with two wound DG and three wound blightlords. Maybe they will make it into an AP negating rule or a better save..

DG is finally getting as durable as they are supposed to be in the fluff and everyone is already whining about how they are way too resilient...
People seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that regular space marines have units that can take just as much or even more punishment than plague marines or blightlords while they also have vastly superior shooting output and move faster.

yeah I for one see no issue with DG being that resiliant, so long as they are properly costed. and points can always be changed if they end up too cheap or two expensive

Reddit thread with Necron Ghost Ark, Doomsday Ark, Night/Doom Scythe

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/idsjio/codex_v9_necrons_ghost_ark_doomsday_ark_doom/

Moar range! Moar shots! Moar damage! Moar of everything except models! Moar fun!

Well, at least you can kill stuff now in 9th. Last edition was such a slog, what with the armies having enough left after Turn 2 to actually maneuver and try to beat eachother with tactics.

Thank god that's over.

Hopefully in 10th there will be some system called something like "strategic time-saver" where instead of putting your models on the table you can just leave them in your carry case and in return get one free round of shooting with them at anything in your opponent's army before they count as being destroyed by the inevitable return volley.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Hopefully in 10th there will be some system called something like "strategic time-saver" where instead of putting your models on the table you can just leave them in your carry case and in return get one free round of shooting with them at anything in your opponent's army before they count as being destroyed by the inevitable return volley.

I think it'd be more narrative if the two players rolled off and the one who wins shoots first. That represents the strategic initiative that's so important in 40k. Also, shooting first means you win, since each unit is expected to make its points back in one round, and since armies are made up of units, that means your army has to make it's points back in one round. Logic!

December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

That's not the complaint and you know that. They're complaining about amped up killing potential and the fact GW is keeping us in the dark for everything.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

That's not the complaint and you know that. They're complaining about amped up killing potential and the fact GW is keeping us in the dark for everything.

Well the keeping in the dark is normal, it shouldn't be a shock to anyone who has been in the hobby any real length of time.

As for increasing killing potential, they're buffing guns that either weren't used (multimeltas) or under performing (most of the necron improvements). Some of these are by rules tweaks I.e. the melta rule or removing randomisation (death ray); also asked for by the community, which is what Daedlaus is pointing at.

You're also complaining about killing power going up while we had pages of "how am I supposed to keep up with marines increased survivability" which suggests maybe more killing power is needed in some peoples eyes?

 Jidmah wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Hmm I wonder if disgustingly resiliant will stay at 5+++/function as a rule with two wound DG and three wound blightlords. Maybe they will make it into an AP negating rule or a better save..

DG is finally getting as durable as they are supposed to be in the fluff and everyone is already whining about how they are way too resilient...
People seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that regular space marines have units that can take just as much or even more punishment than plague marines or blightlords while they also have vastly superior shooting output and move faster.

To quote a really good radio play, "name three".

Blightlords are 43 ppm* for W2* T5 2+ 4++ 5+++. I can't think of anything in the Marine arsenal that can match that on a per point basis without getting some expensive characters/strats involved, and the Blightlords have some solid defensive buffs available too.

* changes incoming, obviously.

Daedalus81 wrote:December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

right???

Dudeface wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

That's not the complaint and you know that. They're complaining about amped up killing potential and the fact GW is keeping us in the dark for everything.

Well the keeping in the dark is normal, it shouldn't be a shock to anyone who has been in the hobby any real length of time.

As for increasing killing potential, they're buffing guns that either weren't used (multimeltas) or under performing (most of the necron improvements). Some of these are by rules tweaks I.e. the melta rule or removing randomisation (death ray); also asked for by the community, which is what Daedlaus is pointing at.

You're also complaining about killing power going up while we had pages of "how am I supposed to keep up with marines increased survivability" which suggests maybe more killing power is needed in some peoples eyes?

The irony being the first faction to receive improved killing power weapons is also the faction getting more wounds per model.

You don't fix the over killing power of marines by making them more durable and more killy qhile everyone esle looks on going WTF?

Dudeface wrote:
Some of these are by rules tweaks I.e. the melta rule or removing randomisation (death ray); also asked for by the community, which is what Daedlaus is pointing at.

It feels like a straw man because it's grossly simplistic and ignores two points of criticism:
1. That there are lots of units that need a rules overhaul, rather than mere points drops. Changing weapons can be part of that, but it's the core unit profiles that have the bigger issues and need to be fixed first.
2. Some of these changes feel really reactionary. Changing the melta rule is great; doubling multimelta shots is less great.

Who was saying 'I really want GW to fix the game by selectively changing weapon profiles outside of their codex'?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

That's not the complaint and you know that. They're complaining about amped up killing potential and the fact GW is keeping us in the dark for everything.

Then maybe don't play 1500pts games. Maybe playing the old 2000 aka new 2250 or 2500, or even more points is the right way to play w40k.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

the stupid thing is not doing all weapons and profiles at once

Karol wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

That's not the complaint and you know that. They're complaining about amped up killing potential and the fact GW is keeping us in the dark for everything.

Then maybe don't play 1500pts games. Maybe playing the old 2000 aka new 2250 or 2500, or even more points is the right way to play w40k.

Luckily 9th edition actually has different missions for different points values of game! Each with Primary Objectives built to work at that specific point value.

Karol wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

That's not the complaint and you know that. They're complaining about amped up killing potential and the fact GW is keeping us in the dark for everything.

Then maybe don't play 1500pts games. Maybe playing the old 2000 aka new 2250 or 2500, or even more points is the right way to play w40k.

Funny. You suggest something that　has no relation whatsoever. And right way by your opinion holds more weight than gw's since...when?

So my two cents with these changes is that we're going to see a pretty significant reduction in the number of rerolls available to all armies.

The thing is there are 2 main problems they COULD be solving here by improving weapon profiles, if they do it correctly. One is the reroll issue, the other is what I call 'the multimelta problem'.

The reroll issue has been discussed ad nauseum but basically the consensus is that there are too many ways to mitigate bad rolling in the game. If they increase weapon stats while also removing a fair whack of the methods players use to insulate themselves from probability, they can keep the game at roughly the same overall level of lethality (which they seem more or less comfortable with) while also increasing the swingy-ness. That seems to go with GW's general design paradigm of "drama is good", though whether you agree with that philosophy or not is obviously debateable.

The 'Multimelta Problem' is the idea that some weapon profiles/units are so inherently flawed that in their current state they can't be fixed by points changes. This is most commonly seen in terrible weapons like the multimelta. Multimeltas, as they existed before the change, were unusable garbage at 20/25. They were actively detrimental to any model that HAD to bring them over something more reasonable than a lascannon. At 15/20 they would still never see play over a lascannon and wouldn't offer a significant enough benefit to be taken over a standard meltagun for armies like SoB that don't really have the option of running better weapons like plasma. At 10/15 they're now way better than standard meltaguns, but end up in this weird place where they're simultaneously being crammed onto everything in armies that use melta and still not being taken on armies that have better bespoke weaponry (ala eradicators). Basically no matter what points cost they end up at, it never makes sense for the weapon.

At 2 shots, especially with the new melta rule, they can actually balance it by increasing the points to the point where the output makes sense for the cost. My guess would be that it ends up at 25/30 or 30/35.

Now, unfortunately Multimeltas are presumably coming in pretty hot out of the gate at a very generous 20/25, but that's ultimately only going to effect a small number of armies and isn't going to be that big of a deal for anything but Sisters and Guard.

All of this relies on GW actually reducing the number of reroll mechanics and being willing to increase the point costs of the newly buffed weapons until their cost makes sense to their new profiles. So...we'll see how it goes.

Interesting idea. And we know that the next CSM has cut back on two chapter tactics with re-rolls with Dark Angels getting +1 to Hit and Salamanders losing their re-roll one hit roll per unit.

Not sure if this has been verified yet, but wasn't there's going to be a limitation on the number of captains/lieutenants per detachment as well? It makes up for not being able to stack negatives to hit anymore and not have borderline auto-hitting units for SM.

 Grimskul wrote:
Not sure if this has been verified yet, but wasn't there's going to be a limitation on the number of captains/lieutenants per detachment as well? It makes up for not being able to stack negatives to hit anymore and not have borderline auto-hitting units for SM.

Well yes but generally that affects more for smashcaptains and those are more for melee rather than providing rerolls so...not that much effect. In single detachments for gunlines it was captain+lietnaunt+chaplain/librarian more than 2 captains+lietnatnant or two. And if you have 2 det's(which is common for HQ slots anyway if you plan to spam captains..) you still have 2 captains and 4 lietnaunt. Not big drop.

tneva82 wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:
Not sure if this has been verified yet, but wasn't there's going to be a limitation on the number of captains/lieutenants per detachment as well? It makes up for not being able to stack negatives to hit anymore and not have borderline auto-hitting units for SM.

Well yes but generally that affects more for smashcaptains and those are more for melee rather than providing rerolls so...not that much effect. In single detachments for gunlines it was captain+lietnaunt+chaplain/librarian more than 2 captains+lietnatnant or two. And if you have 2 det's(which is common for HQ slots anyway if you plan to spam captains..) you still have 2 captains and 4 lietnaunt. Not big drop.

Very much the above not to mention as the aura buffs are within (not the wholly within they should be) you can still cover way too much of the army with 1 Captain and LT combo, short of them removong CM strategum or preferably the whole aura the issue isn't going to change.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

Now:
Why is GW buffing the stats on Marines who are already very dominant.

The issue isn't changes, its buffs to marines who have been S tier for the past year.

 Ordana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

Now:
Why is GW buffing the stats on Marines who are already very dominant.

The issue isn't changes, its buffs to marines who have been S tier for the past year.

And they're also going to nerf them at the same time by increasing point costs. Once we have the adjusted points cost, we'll see if the sky's falling or not.
Not like that's the only changes that're going to happen - we already know that Salamanders are getting a nerfed Chapter Tactic, for example.

 Ordana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

Now:
Why is GW buffing the stats on Marines who are already very dominant.

The issue isn't changes, its buffs to marines who have been S tier for the past year.

Because as usual people are short-sightedly applying the new stuff from rumours/leaks to the 8th ed codex. If marines lost bolter discipline, shock assault and doctrines stopped adding free ap, suddenly are these changes adding to an op book?

Ofc I doubt they stripped all those off but the point that we don't know they haven't, shows people are jumping the gun using predetermined opinions based in what they know currently, rather than trying to draw a picture of what could be.

When GW puts out incomplete info to get people worked up, people are going to get worked up based on incomplete info. That's surely to be expected.

If GW had put up a marketing release that instead of trumpeting about how marines are just becoming more powerful in every way instead said "Ok guys. We know marines are already very dominant, and we know this looks like we're making them even more dominant. But trust us, that isn't the case. You may have seen some leaked datasheets from boxes, but those aren't the full picture, and rest assured that the codex is not going to ramp up the power of marines; to the contrary, we are rebalancing them to be more in line with the rest of the game" the reaction would be totally different. But that's literally the opposite of what they have done.

Now obviously GW is not going to hype a new release by telling people it's nerfing the faction most people play. But the point is that when they release hype about how the most powerful faction is becoming even more powerful - whether or not it's true - people are bound to react to that in predictable and understandable ways. "Don't pay any attention to GW's PR, maybe they're just blowing smoke up your butt, wait and see" isn't a very convincing message to people worried about what they're seeing.

The Newman wrote:
Blightlords are 43 ppm* for W2* T5 2+ 4++ 5+++.

How convenient of you to leave out 4" movement and halved advance rolls.

I can't think of anything in the Marine arsenal that can match that on a per point basis without getting some expensive characters/strats involved,

How about 35 ppm suppressors, 40 ppm inceptors, 45 ppm outrider, 40 ppm eradicators or 35 ppm bladeguard veterans, or pretty much any terminator that can get a stormshield.with your choice of defensive chapter tactics added on top.

and the Blightlords have some solid defensive buffs available too.

No, they don't, and with the sole exception of cloud of flies, vanilla marines have better variants of them available.

Dudeface wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
December 2019:
"GW is so stupid to drop points to fix units. They should change rules instead."

Now :
"OMG GW is changing weapons and profiles. That's so stupid!"

Now:
Why is GW buffing the stats on Marines who are already very dominant.

The issue isn't changes, its buffs to marines who have been S tier for the past year.

Because as usual people are short-sightedly applying the new stuff from rumours/leaks to the 8th ed codex. If marines lost bolter discipline, shock assault and doctrines stopped adding free ap, suddenly are these changes adding to an op book?

Ofc I doubt they stripped all those off but the point that we don't know they haven't, shows people are jumping the gun using predetermined opinions based in what they know currently, rather than trying to draw a picture of what could be.

Well so far when the shoe fits which when it comes to GW and Marines is very much over buff and then spend the next year gently tickling aroudn the edges to slowely reduce them from WTAF tier to OP tier to just S tier. It's called reasonable assumptions based upon precedence.

Not to mention all of this being released after many of the previously A tier armies having just been demoted because of the shoddy work in CA2020 isnt helping consumer confidence in the design team.

Then follwing up with a press release of "oh you've seen these new stat sheets, oh yeah Marines are being buffed but not to worry they are taking minimal points increases to balance their increasing durability aswell as being the first to get all new extra damage weapons.

Oh yeah you'll be rebalanced when we get arround to your codex at a TBD time in the future."

That's like a master class on how to destroy your customer relations in the name of outrage marketing.

I think people also need to realize that Doctrines and Angels of Death are very likely getting changed. Plus, Aggressors have been stated by numerous playtesters to now basically be un-competitive because of upcoming nerfs in their rules.