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 Custom Traits don't appear in the Codex's they'll almost certainly be dead in a couple of years, along with all of PA.

I can understand the idea of making your dudes... your dudes. But from a balancing and general design perspective, I think they are terrible and should be cut out.

As I see it the purpose of chapter tactics is to facilitate different lists. So you have this big SM range, you shouldn't end up with the same 3 models on every table because they are objectively the best. Instead with differing bonuses, warlord traits, stratagems etc, these will be better with IF, these will be better RG, these will be better as WS etc, and so facilitate a different style of play. The aim - if internal balance is vaguely desired - is to move these things into balance.

But GW unfortunately seems to have abandoned that concept to just spam special rules and faux-diffentialisation for no reason. "We need some relics and warlord traits for this chapter uh... uh... just phone it in". I think Harlequins was the most blatant, as there were almost as many different "chapters" as there were units. The idea each could have a meaningfully different style of play was nonsense - and so its largely proved.

I'd much rather GW went *here are 3-9 actual ways to play the faction, and here is a buff to encourage you to play that way, and we've tried to balance them accordingly" than "here's a dozen rules, the internet will decide the best two, everyone will take that. Thanks for playing." Might be an impossible dream, but still.

But GW did just that. No one was running assault centurions till RG got the option to teleport them.

Flamer agressors are a very salamander thing.
Melee intercessor units or assault bolters are more a BA, SW or WS thing, then other chapters.

Who took heavy bolters or bolter centurions, before IF got the rules too make them work?

The armies do play different, that is why the supposed marine mirror matchs are a lot less mirrors, then eldar on eldar or tyranid on tyranid games.

yukishiro1 wrote:
And the biggest problem is just that certain ones of them are fundamentally ridiculous and never should have made it into the game. I have no idea how anybody who did the math on master artisans / expert crafters could have thought that was ok to give as a custom trait, much less one that can be comboed with something else too. The only thing I can think of is that nobody actually did the math. Which is itself telling.

Yeah, master artisans were sooo OP that when the first SM codex hit at the start of 8th, almost no one played Salamanders for three years.

Oh wait...

 Irbis wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
And the biggest problem is just that certain ones of them are fundamentally ridiculous and never should have made it into the game. I have no idea how anybody who did the math on master artisans / expert crafters could have thought that was ok to give as a custom trait, much less one that can be comboed with something else too. The only thing I can think of is that nobody actually did the math. Which is itself telling.

Yeah, master artisans were sooo OP that when the first SM codex hit at the start of 8th, almost no one played Salamanders for three years.

Oh wait...

I've only played Salamanders....for ever.

yukishiro1 wrote:
In theory? Sure. In reality? GW can't. There isn't a single example of custom traits from 8th that works and is worth having in the game. The Space Marine and Craftworld Eldar ones are overpowered and super problematic for both factions in terms of how it warps the game; the other custom traits are inferior and don't get used.

It's hard enough for GW to come up with 6+ different sub-faction traits, relics and strat combinations that are balanced with one another, it's clearly far beyond their abilities to do it in with a mix and match style.

The PA traits are a failed experiment. There's not much to it. Talking about 5th is silly because this isn't 5th. If they can come up with a custom traits system that works great...but what we got from PA doesn't work and should be binned as the failure it was.

some chapter traits where unbalanced, but using that logic why not just get rid of chapter tactics over all? Most of the chapter traits where fluff and entirely about right. There are a few that proably should go by the wayside on that I won't disagree. but the entire system isn't inheriantly broken

BrianDavion wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
In theory? Sure. In reality? GW can't. There isn't a single example of custom traits from 8th that works and is worth having in the game. The Space Marine and Craftworld Eldar ones are overpowered and super problematic for both factions in terms of how it warps the game; the other custom traits are inferior and don't get used.

It's hard enough for GW to come up with 6+ different sub-faction traits, relics and strat combinations that are balanced with one another, it's clearly far beyond their abilities to do it in with a mix and match style.

The PA traits are a failed experiment. There's not much to it. Talking about 5th is silly because this isn't 5th. If they can come up with a custom traits system that works great...but what we got from PA doesn't work and should be binned as the failure it was.

some chapter traits where unbalanced, but using that logic why not just get rid of chapter tactics over all? Most of the chapter traits where fluff and entirely about right. There are a few that proably should go by the wayside on that I won't disagree. but the entire system isn't inheriantly broken

God yes, remove that terrible rule bloat that only benefits imperium armies. Please.

 Eonfuzz wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
In theory? Sure. In reality? GW can't. There isn't a single example of custom traits from 8th that works and is worth having in the game. The Space Marine and Craftworld Eldar ones are overpowered and super problematic for both factions in terms of how it warps the game; the other custom traits are inferior and don't get used.

It's hard enough for GW to come up with 6+ different sub-faction traits, relics and strat combinations that are balanced with one another, it's clearly far beyond their abilities to do it in with a mix and match style.

The PA traits are a failed experiment. There's not much to it. Talking about 5th is silly because this isn't 5th. If they can come up with a custom traits system that works great...but what we got from PA doesn't work and should be binned as the failure it was.

some chapter traits where unbalanced, but using that logic why not just get rid of chapter tactics over all? Most of the chapter traits where fluff and entirely about right. There are a few that proably should go by the wayside on that I won't disagree. but the entire system isn't inheriantly broken

God yes, remove that terrible rule bloat that only benefits imperium armies. Please.

yes because eldar tooootaly lacked their own "make a chapter" rules.

 Irbis wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
And the biggest problem is just that certain ones of them are fundamentally ridiculous and never should have made it into the game. I have no idea how anybody who did the math on master artisans / expert crafters could have thought that was ok to give as a custom trait, much less one that can be comboed with something else too. The only thing I can think of is that nobody actually did the math. Which is itself telling.

Yeah, master artisans were sooo OP that when the first SM codex hit at the start of 8th, almost no one played Salamanders for three years.

Oh wait...

Uh lots of people were using master artisans as a custom trait ever since it became available. People didn't play salamanders because why would you when RG/IH/IF were so much stronger at the time and you could just play Master Artisans versions of those instead?

That's the whole point of the problem with MA as a custom trait. It is way too powerful a thing to just hand out to anybody who wants it with any space marine army.

But EC is a bigger problem than master artisans honestly, space marines have so many rerolls anyway and aren't really encouraged to take a bunch of single entity units. It's much worse for what it does to eldar.

given the salamanders nerf it's a safe bet that MA is going to get nerfed/removed in the new marines codex, if so exp[ect eldar's EC to follow.

BrianDavion wrote:
given the salamanders nerf it's a safe bet that MA is going to get nerfed/removed in the new marines codex, if so exp[ect eldar's EC to follow.

Folks said the same thing about Alpha Legion and Alaitoc traits, and we saw where that went. Just because something is happening to one army, doesnt for a moment mean its going to extend to others.

Sterling191 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
given the salamanders nerf it's a safe bet that MA is going to get nerfed/removed in the new marines codex, if so exp[ect eldar's EC to follow.

Folks said the same thing about Alpha Legion and Alaitoc traits, and we saw where that went. Just because something is happening to one army, doesnt for a moment mean its going to extend to others.

That's because they haven't had a new Codex yet.

yep - its going to continue to be a complete mess as they are going by the Update stuff with codexes medthod.

Alpha Legion and Alaitoc have arguably been nerfed by the base game rules.

Not sure you can do the same on rerolls.

yukishiro1 wrote:That would be better, but you'd still end up with people just taking whichever one was better.

That's a player problem, not a "here's some cool customisation choices" problem.

By that same logic, if we're ruling out that balance can genuinely be attained, no options should exist in the game whatsoever, because people would just take the best option. Congratulations. You removed all the customising out of 40k.

WhiteDog wrote:
Anyone saw the datasheet for inceptors ? Apparently they nerfed the plasma version and I'm slightly sad because of that.

Must have missed that.

Do you have a link?

 Bosskelot wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
given the salamanders nerf it's a safe bet that MA is going to get nerfed/removed in the new marines codex, if so exp[ect eldar's EC to follow.

Folks said the same thing about Alpha Legion and Alaitoc traits, and we saw where that went. Just because something is happening to one army, doesnt for a moment mean its going to extend to others.

That's because they haven't had a new Codex yet.

Ding ding ding!
Marines were the only ones to get a full new book. Alpha Legion was in a book that was literally billed as a "second edition", not a new Codex. It's been in the product info since the preorder went live for C: CSM that it is a "compilation" of Vigilus Ablaze and the CSM book.

Anyways, hopefully custom traits go the route of the AdMech stuff in Engine War. A 'primary' with a selection of 'secondaries' that are part of an archetype.

yukishiro1 wrote:
I don't think I've ever met a single player who uses the non-overpowered custom traits for their army for fluff reasons, in my experience people who play for fluff would much rather use the established, more fluffy rules including the relics, strats and characters than give that up in return for some generic bad rules. But if those people do exist and really want their bad custom traits to stay...I have no problem with that, as long as the overpowered ones are removed.

As soon as Blood of the Phoenix came out, my wraith army started using wrath of the dead and hunters of ancient relics as it's traits. Granted, Hunters has actually become a very solid trait with 9th's focus on objectives.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Congratulations. You removed all the customising out of 40k.

The genuinely disturbing thing is that there are people in this community who would be absolutely fine with that.

I keep seeing the thread title updated but not the op. What are the new stats for scouts and aggressors now too?

Racerguy180 790703 10906605 wrote:
I've only played Salamanders....for ever.

And I played GK, but it still doesn't mean , that one can say that people played GKs in 8th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Phenatix wrote:
I keep seeing the thread title updated but not the op. What are the new stats for scouts and aggressors now too?

the new thing about scouts is that they didn't get the second wound.

Spoletta wrote:

WhiteDog wrote:
Anyone saw the datasheet for inceptors ? Apparently they nerfed the plasma version and I'm slightly sad because of that.

Must have missed that.

Do you have a link?

Took some digging, but managed to find the new Inceptor sheet. Its the lack of overcharged plasma on their simplified sheet, just like every other plasma unit. The real "nerf" was their assault bolters not getting D2, but frankly its not a nerf as if they had actually gotten their damage output doubled they would go to instant auto-take status at 40ppm.

Thanks for that!

Sterling191 wrote:


Took some digging, but managed to find the new Inceptor sheet. Its the lack of overcharged plasma on their simplified sheet, just like every other plasma unit. The real "nerf" was their assault bolters not getting D2, but frankly its not a nerf as if they had actually gotten their damage output doubled they would go to instant auto-take status at 40ppm.

If that holds true it tells me GW is quite aware of some of the finer details.

Sterling191 wrote:
Took some digging, but managed to find the new Inceptor sheet. Its the lack of overcharged plasma on their simplified sheet, just like every other plasma unit. The real "nerf" was their assault bolters not getting D2, but frankly its not a nerf as if they had actually gotten their damage output doubled they would go to instant auto-take status at 40ppm.

How is it not a nerf when squatmarine/sister with HB can now output the same damage at twice the range for far less?

The HB change was stupid, they should raise all weapons using the same ammunition (Inceptor guns, heavy bolt pistols, etc) to D2 or go back to D1, doubling of firepower just created endless issues like devaluing whole swatches of guns at a stroke (the above, plus autocannons, gun that became largely pointless with HB change) and spat at game fluff verisimilitude at the same time...

 Irbis wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:
Took some digging, but managed to find the new Inceptor sheet. Its the lack of overcharged plasma on their simplified sheet, just like every other plasma unit. The real "nerf" was their assault bolters not getting D2, but frankly its not a nerf as if they had actually gotten their damage output doubled they would go to instant auto-take status at 40ppm.

How is it not a nerf when squatmarine/sister with HB can now output the same damage at twice the range for far less?

The HB change was stupid, they should raise all weapons using the same ammunition (Inceptor guns, heavy bolt pistols, etc) to D2 or go back to D1, doubling of firepower just created endless issues like devaluing whole swatches of guns at a stroke (the above, plus autocannons, gun that became largely pointless with HB change) and spat at game fluff verisimilitude at the same time...

"My unit got nerfed because my other unit got buffed so my FIRST unit isn't as good anymore IN COMPARISON!!!!"

-Space Marine Players, 2020

It's not a heavy bolter though, and remember they have 2x of them... Or did I miss heavy bolters going up to 6 shots? This is a chaff clearing unit, just like before. Also, why on earth would you faff around with the plasma versions if the assault bolters were D2 really outside of niche situations?

I've never used inceptors, have they always been 10 movement? I thought they were 12...

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
It's not a heavy bolter though, and remember they have 2x of them... Or did I miss heavy bolters going up to 6 shots? This is a chaff clearing unit, just like before. Also, why on earth would you faff around with the plasma versions if the assault bolters were D2 really outside of niche situations?

I've never used inceptors, have they always been 10 movement? I thought they were 12...

They have always been movement 10.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
It's not a heavy bolter though, and remember they have 2x of them... Or did I miss heavy bolters going up to 6 shots? This is a chaff clearing unit, just like before. Also, why on earth would you faff around with the plasma versions if the assault bolters were D2 really outside of niche situations?

Precisely. Plinceptors at 50ppm are still absurdly good for 9th. D2 Boltceptors at 40ppm would have made Eradicators look somewhat reasonable.

impulsor datasheet, source: the box I just received.

No information about the force field projector, then? Huh.