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.
2020/08/12 11:20:35
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Stux wrote: I think people have also forgotten that Marines spent half of 8e as a mid tier at best army. With some chapters even lower.
There was a big chunk of Eldar and Chaos dominance.
Yes. Space Marines were only the top army for the first 2-3 months and the last ~year of a slightly more than two year long edition of 40k.
How TERRIBLE. how AWFUL for them.
It was a 3 year edition. So less than half by your reckoning.
I didnt say it was terrible. Just that the pendulum swings, and people have very short memories.
Thanks for pointing that out, Stux - I was struggling to figure out how June 2017 to July 2020 was slightly more than two years.
I assume we're all just going to forget Razorback spam and Flyer spam (or just Guilliman firebases in general) from the first ~half a year?
Yeah, I don't know, I'm having a hard time squaring the fact that Codex: Space Marines is 1 out of...what...20 codexes? And they spent nearly a year and a half as generally considered the "meta" army to beat.
Of a - mea culpa here - THREE year long edition.
So 1.333/3, carry the 1, hold the fries....
Seems like your expected length of time as the meta top dog as 1/20 factions in the game should be somewhere around....2 months.
For each army to get 2 months, that requires an army to be objectively better for 2 months at a time, which I'm not really sure is any healthier than 1 faction being unbalanced at the expense of 19 other being of parity, given whoever gets the first 2 months by proxy would be bottom of the pile for the next 38.
Or, it requires something like a rotating meta where releases aren't so wildly out of line that an army stays top dog for a full fething year until the game designer heavily nerfs what they added to them in the update.
You know, some kind of situation where GW gives some new tricks to an army, it makes a big splash in the tournament meta, and lists adjust to counter them naturally. Like what the meta did with Codex Drukhari, Codex Orks, Codex Genestealer Cults.... When something comes out and just stays the king undisputed respected saluted and loathed for the bs it is for nearly a year like Codex SM 2.0 or Castellan Soup or Ynnari did, that's a sign that it's fundamentally broken and needs either heavy nerfs or a scrap and a redesign.
"2 months as top dog and then reasonably present for the remainder of the edition" is what the reality was for most factions.it was a pretty dang good edition all told.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/08/12 12:02:38
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Stux wrote: I think people have also forgotten that Marines spent half of 8e as a mid tier at best army. With some chapters even lower.
There was a big chunk of Eldar and Chaos dominance.
Yes. Space Marines were only the top army for the first 2-3 months and the last ~year of a slightly more than two year long edition of 40k.
How TERRIBLE. how AWFUL for them.
It was a 3 year edition. So less than half by your reckoning.
I didnt say it was terrible. Just that the pendulum swings, and people have very short memories.
Thanks for pointing that out, Stux - I was struggling to figure out how June 2017 to July 2020 was slightly more than two years.
I assume we're all just going to forget Razorback spam and Flyer spam (or just Guilliman firebases in general) from the first ~half a year?
Yeah, I don't know, I'm having a hard time squaring the fact that Codex: Space Marines is 1 out of...what...20 codexes? And they spent nearly a year and a half as generally considered the "meta" army to beat.
Of a - mea culpa here - THREE year long edition.
So 1.333/3, carry the 1, hold the fries....
Seems like your expected length of time as the meta top dog as 1/20 factions in the game should be somewhere around....2 months.
For each army to get 2 months, that requires an army to be objectively better for 2 months at a time, which I'm not really sure is any healthier than 1 faction being unbalanced at the expense of 19 other being of parity, given whoever gets the first 2 months by proxy would be bottom of the pile for the next 38.
Or, it requires something like a rotating meta where releases aren't so wildly out of line that an army stays top dog for a full fething year until the game designer heavily nerfs what they added to them in the update.
You know, some kind of situation where GW gives some new tricks to an army, it makes a big splash in the tournament meta, and lists adjust to counter them naturally. Like what the meta did with Codex Drukhari, Codex Orks, Codex Genestealer Cults.... When something comes out and just stays the king undisputed respected saluted and loathed for the bs it is for nearly a year like Codex SM 2.0 or Castellan Soup or Ynnari did, that's a sign that it's fundamentally broken and needs either heavy nerfs or a scrap and a redesign.
"2 months as top dog and then reasonably present for the remainder of the edition" is what the reality was for most factions.it was a pretty dang good edition all told.
Yup overall it was a decent edition and like I say they had 2-3 outliers you identified which largely prevented anyone else running away with it. Maybe people are spending too much time fixating on that top - top 3 spots rather than appreciating that the bulk of armies were reasonably represented.
2020/08/12 12:07:36
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Stux wrote: I think people have also forgotten that Marines spent half of 8e as a mid tier at best army. With some chapters even lower.
There was a big chunk of Eldar and Chaos dominance.
Yes. Space Marines were only the top army for the first 2-3 months and the last ~year of a slightly more than two year long edition of 40k.
How TERRIBLE. how AWFUL for them.
It was a 3 year edition. So less than half by your reckoning.
I didnt say it was terrible. Just that the pendulum swings, and people have very short memories.
Thanks for pointing that out, Stux - I was struggling to figure out how June 2017 to July 2020 was slightly more than two years.
I assume we're all just going to forget Razorback spam and Flyer spam (or just Guilliman firebases in general) from the first ~half a year?
Yeah, I don't know, I'm having a hard time squaring the fact that Codex: Space Marines is 1 out of...what...20 codexes? And they spent nearly a year and a half as generally considered the "meta" army to beat.
Of a - mea culpa here - THREE year long edition.
So 1.333/3, carry the 1, hold the fries....
Seems like your expected length of time as the meta top dog as 1/20 factions in the game should be somewhere around....2 months.
For each army to get 2 months, that requires an army to be objectively better for 2 months at a time, which I'm not really sure is any healthier than 1 faction being unbalanced at the expense of 19 other being of parity, given whoever gets the first 2 months by proxy would be bottom of the pile for the next 38.
Or, it requires something like a rotating meta where releases aren't so wildly out of line that an army stays top dog for a full fething year until the game designer heavily nerfs what they added to them in the update.
You know, some kind of situation where GW gives some new tricks to an army, it makes a big splash in the tournament meta, and lists adjust to counter them naturally. Like what the meta did with Codex Drukhari, Codex Orks, Codex Genestealer Cults.... When something comes out and just stays the king undisputed respected saluted and loathed for the bs it is for nearly a year like Codex SM 2.0 or Castellan Soup or Ynnari did, that's a sign that it's fundamentally broken and needs either heavy nerfs or a scrap and a redesign.
"2 months as top dog and then reasonably present for the remainder of the edition" is what the reality was for most factions.it was a pretty dang good edition all told.
Yup overall it was a decent edition and like I say they had 2-3 outliers you identified which largely prevented anyone else running away with it. Maybe people are spending too much time fixating on that top - top 3 spots rather than appreciating that the bulk of armies were reasonably represented.
So, in your life if you have a really excellent thing you're working on and it's got one big glaring flaw but otherwise it's pretty much where you want it to be....do you usually not focus on fixing that flaw first? Does that not usually bug you more than something that's just all-round awful? Because that might just end up being a difference in attitude between the two of us, that kind of situation bugs the absolute hell out of me. If a movie, or a project I'm working on, or a recipe I've cooked is nearly amazing, but there's just one thing that's bad and I can't ignore it, that bothers me far more than something I can just dismiss as a total loss.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/08/12 12:15:57
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Stux wrote: I think people have also forgotten that Marines spent half of 8e as a mid tier at best army. With some chapters even lower.
There was a big chunk of Eldar and Chaos dominance.
Yes. Space Marines were only the top army for the first 2-3 months and the last ~year of a slightly more than two year long edition of 40k.
How TERRIBLE. how AWFUL for them.
It was a 3 year edition. So less than half by your reckoning.
I didnt say it was terrible. Just that the pendulum swings, and people have very short memories.
Thanks for pointing that out, Stux - I was struggling to figure out how June 2017 to July 2020 was slightly more than two years.
I assume we're all just going to forget Razorback spam and Flyer spam (or just Guilliman firebases in general) from the first ~half a year?
Yeah, I don't know, I'm having a hard time squaring the fact that Codex: Space Marines is 1 out of...what...20 codexes? And they spent nearly a year and a half as generally considered the "meta" army to beat.
Of a - mea culpa here - THREE year long edition.
So 1.333/3, carry the 1, hold the fries....
Seems like your expected length of time as the meta top dog as 1/20 factions in the game should be somewhere around....2 months.
For each army to get 2 months, that requires an army to be objectively better for 2 months at a time, which I'm not really sure is any healthier than 1 faction being unbalanced at the expense of 19 other being of parity, given whoever gets the first 2 months by proxy would be bottom of the pile for the next 38.
Or, it requires something like a rotating meta where releases aren't so wildly out of line that an army stays top dog for a full fething year until the game designer heavily nerfs what they added to them in the update.
You know, some kind of situation where GW gives some new tricks to an army, it makes a big splash in the tournament meta, and lists adjust to counter them naturally. Like what the meta did with Codex Drukhari, Codex Orks, Codex Genestealer Cults.... When something comes out and just stays the king undisputed respected saluted and loathed for the bs it is for nearly a year like Codex SM 2.0 or Castellan Soup or Ynnari did, that's a sign that it's fundamentally broken and needs either heavy nerfs or a scrap and a redesign.
"2 months as top dog and then reasonably present for the remainder of the edition" is what the reality was for most factions.it was a pretty dang good edition all told.
Yup overall it was a decent edition and like I say they had 2-3 outliers you identified which largely prevented anyone else running away with it. Maybe people are spending too much time fixating on that top - top 3 spots rather than appreciating that the bulk of armies were reasonably represented.
So, in your life if you have a really excellent thing you're working on and it's got one big glaring flaw but otherwise it's pretty much where you want it to be....do you usually not focus on fixing that flaw first? Does that not usually bug you more than something that's just all-round awful? Because that might just end up being a difference in attitude between the two of us, that kind of situation bugs the absolute hell out of me. If a movie, or a project I'm working on, or a recipe I've cooked is nearly amazing, but there's just one thing that's bad and I can't ignore it, that bothers me far more than something I can just dismiss as a total loss.
Hard to say, it depends what it is. My monitor with a literal bug stuck in bothers me more than if it had broken completely for example. The issue here is my monitor minus the bug functions perfectly on it's own, however it isn't THE perfect monitor, it's not that big, it's max resolution isn't 4k, it hasn't got in-built speakers etc.
I do acknowledge that it's fine for my needs, I have no requirement or want to have the best monitor where in your example you would since it hasn't got the perfect refresh rate or w/e, it just does what it's supposed to at an acceptable level. Extrapolating that to 40k, my current monitor is a mid tier army with a completely dud unit in that I enjoy playing but don't care that it's only 75% as powerful as the top army.
2020/08/12 12:50:25
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Stux wrote: I think people have also forgotten that Marines spent half of 8e as a mid tier at best army. With some chapters even lower.
There was a big chunk of Eldar and Chaos dominance.
Yes. Space Marines were only the top army for the first 2-3 months and the last ~year of a slightly more than two year long edition of 40k.
How TERRIBLE. how AWFUL for them.
It was a 3 year edition. So less than half by your reckoning.
I didnt say it was terrible. Just that the pendulum swings, and people have very short memories.
Thanks for pointing that out, Stux - I was struggling to figure out how June 2017 to July 2020 was slightly more than two years.
I assume we're all just going to forget Razorback spam and Flyer spam (or just Guilliman firebases in general) from the first ~half a year?
Yeah, I don't know, I'm having a hard time squaring the fact that Codex: Space Marines is 1 out of...what...20 codexes? And they spent nearly a year and a half as generally considered the "meta" army to beat.
Of a - mea culpa here - THREE year long edition.
So 1.333/3, carry the 1, hold the fries....
Seems like your expected length of time as the meta top dog as 1/20 factions in the game should be somewhere around....2 months.
For each army to get 2 months, that requires an army to be objectively better for 2 months at a time, which I'm not really sure is any healthier than 1 faction being unbalanced at the expense of 19 other being of parity, given whoever gets the first 2 months by proxy would be bottom of the pile for the next 38.
Or, it requires something like a rotating meta where releases aren't so wildly out of line that an army stays top dog for a full fething year until the game designer heavily nerfs what they added to them in the update.
You know, some kind of situation where GW gives some new tricks to an army, it makes a big splash in the tournament meta, and lists adjust to counter them naturally. Like what the meta did with Codex Drukhari, Codex Orks, Codex Genestealer Cults.... When something comes out and just stays the king undisputed respected saluted and loathed for the bs it is for nearly a year like Codex SM 2.0 or Castellan Soup or Ynnari did, that's a sign that it's fundamentally broken and needs either heavy nerfs or a scrap and a redesign.
"2 months as top dog and then reasonably present for the remainder of the edition" is what the reality was for most factions.it was a pretty dang good edition all told.
Yup overall it was a decent edition and like I say they had 2-3 outliers you identified which largely prevented anyone else running away with it. Maybe people are spending too much time fixating on that top - top 3 spots rather than appreciating that the bulk of armies were reasonably represented.
So, in your life if you have a really excellent thing you're working on and it's got one big glaring flaw but otherwise it's pretty much where you want it to be....do you usually not focus on fixing that flaw first? Does that not usually bug you more than something that's just all-round awful? Because that might just end up being a difference in attitude between the two of us, that kind of situation bugs the absolute hell out of me. If a movie, or a project I'm working on, or a recipe I've cooked is nearly amazing, but there's just one thing that's bad and I can't ignore it, that bothers me far more than something I can just dismiss as a total loss.
Hard to say, it depends what it is. My monitor with a literal bug stuck in bothers me more than if it had broken completely for example. The issue here is my monitor minus the bug functions perfectly on it's own, however it isn't THE perfect monitor, it's not that big, it's max resolution isn't 4k, it hasn't got in-built speakers etc.
I do acknowledge that it's fine for my needs, I have no requirement or want to have the best monitor where in your example you would since it hasn't got the perfect refresh rate or w/e, it just does what it's supposed to at an acceptable level. Extrapolating that to 40k, my current monitor is a mid tier army with a completely dud unit in that I enjoy playing but don't care that it's only 75% as powerful as the top army.
Yeah, that's usually my attitude when pretty much any army but marines is the top dog. When Tau are broken overpowered, that means one army owned by one single guy where I play is broken overpowered...and he usually swaps over to one of his other three when that happens, because he's a competitive player and doesn't enjoy stomping people with OP rules in a non-tournament setting.
When knights are overpowered, that means....no army owned by anybody where I play is overpowered. When Custodes are, that's 2 people who also have other armies. Ditto for CWE. For Guard it's 4 guys, one of which only plays guard. When Drukhari are overpowered it's literally just me, and I own tons of different armies. You get the idea.
When marines are overpowered, that means 20/50 players have the unbeatable tournament-tier army that is miserable to play against, and what happens is, nobody has fun playing against the marines, the marines end up playing only against each other, they don't have fun because non-marine players avoid them, and attendance at the club drops massively.
As it did, a year ago, when marines 2.0 hit. Our attendance dropped from roughly 50 to roughly 20 over the last year of 8th. We started rebuilding during quarantine, ironically, and with the excitement surrounding 9th. I was really really hoping 9th would fix the issue of the most ubiquitous army in the entire game being the miserable one to play against, but given the leaks we're getting for the upcoming codex, I'm becoming less and less hopeful about it.
Marine players love being the exception when it comes to model releases, supplement books, subfactions, lore books, etc - they love being treated like more than just 1 of 20 factions when it comes to positive attention and extra goodies. But when it comes to negative attention because everyone feels it 10x more when they're the unbeatable OP army, suddenly it's unfair that people complain more when they're OP then they do when some faction 1/50 people plays like Necrons or Drukhari is unbeatable.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/08/12 13:06:13
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Stux wrote: I think people have also forgotten that Marines spent half of 8e as a mid tier at best army. With some chapters even lower.
There was a big chunk of Eldar and Chaos dominance.
Yes. Space Marines were only the top army for the first 2-3 months and the last ~year of a slightly more than two year long edition of 40k.
How TERRIBLE. how AWFUL for them.
It was a 3 year edition. So less than half by your reckoning.
I didnt say it was terrible. Just that the pendulum swings, and people have very short memories.
Thanks for pointing that out, Stux - I was struggling to figure out how June 2017 to July 2020 was slightly more than two years.
I assume we're all just going to forget Razorback spam and Flyer spam (or just Guilliman firebases in general) from the first ~half a year?
Yeah, I don't know, I'm having a hard time squaring the fact that Codex: Space Marines is 1 out of...what...20 codexes? And they spent nearly a year and a half as generally considered the "meta" army to beat.
Of a - mea culpa here - THREE year long edition.
So 1.333/3, carry the 1, hold the fries....
Seems like your expected length of time as the meta top dog as 1/20 factions in the game should be somewhere around....2 months.
For each army to get 2 months, that requires an army to be objectively better for 2 months at a time, which I'm not really sure is any healthier than 1 faction being unbalanced at the expense of 19 other being of parity, given whoever gets the first 2 months by proxy would be bottom of the pile for the next 38.
Or, it requires something like a rotating meta where releases aren't so wildly out of line that an army stays top dog for a full fething year until the game designer heavily nerfs what they added to them in the update.
You know, some kind of situation where GW gives some new tricks to an army, it makes a big splash in the tournament meta, and lists adjust to counter them naturally. Like what the meta did with Codex Drukhari, Codex Orks, Codex Genestealer Cults.... When something comes out and just stays the king undisputed respected saluted and loathed for the bs it is for nearly a year like Codex SM 2.0 or Castellan Soup or Ynnari did, that's a sign that it's fundamentally broken and needs either heavy nerfs or a scrap and a redesign.
"2 months as top dog and then reasonably present for the remainder of the edition" is what the reality was for most factions.it was a pretty dang good edition all told.
Yup overall it was a decent edition and like I say they had 2-3 outliers you identified which largely prevented anyone else running away with it. Maybe people are spending too much time fixating on that top - top 3 spots rather than appreciating that the bulk of armies were reasonably represented.
So, in your life if you have a really excellent thing you're working on and it's got one big glaring flaw but otherwise it's pretty much where you want it to be....do you usually not focus on fixing that flaw first? Does that not usually bug you more than something that's just all-round awful? Because that might just end up being a difference in attitude between the two of us, that kind of situation bugs the absolute hell out of me. If a movie, or a project I'm working on, or a recipe I've cooked is nearly amazing, but there's just one thing that's bad and I can't ignore it, that bothers me far more than something I can just dismiss as a total loss.
Hard to say, it depends what it is. My monitor with a literal bug stuck in bothers me more than if it had broken completely for example. The issue here is my monitor minus the bug functions perfectly on it's own, however it isn't THE perfect monitor, it's not that big, it's max resolution isn't 4k, it hasn't got in-built speakers etc.
I do acknowledge that it's fine for my needs, I have no requirement or want to have the best monitor where in your example you would since it hasn't got the perfect refresh rate or w/e, it just does what it's supposed to at an acceptable level. Extrapolating that to 40k, my current monitor is a mid tier army with a completely dud unit in that I enjoy playing but don't care that it's only 75% as powerful as the top army.
Yeah, that's usually my attitude when pretty much any army but marines is the top dog. When Tau are broken overpowered, that means one army owned by one single guy where I play is broken overpowered...and he usually swaps over to one of his other three when that happens, because he's a competitive player and doesn't enjoy stomping people with OP rules in a non-tournament setting.
When knights are overpowered, that means....no army owned by anybody where I play is overpowered. When Custodes are, that's 2 people who also have other armies. Ditto for CWE. For Guard it's 4 guys, one of which only plays guard. When Drukhari are overpowered it's literally just me, and I own tons of different armies. You get the idea.
When marines are overpowered, that means 20/50 players have the unbeatable tournament-tier army that is miserable to play against, and what happens is, nobody has fun playing against the marines, the marines end up playing only against each other, they don't have fun because non-marine players avoid them, and attendance at the club drops massively.
As it did, a year ago, when marines 2.0 hit. Our attendance dropped from roughly 50 to roughly 20 over the last year of 8th. We started rebuilding during quarantine, ironically, and with the excitement surrounding 9th. I was really really hoping 9th would fix the issue of the most ubiquitous army in the entire game being the miserable one to play against, but given the leaks we're getting for the upcoming codex, I'm becoming less and less hopeful about it.
Marine players love being the exception when it comes to model releases, supplement books, subfactions, lore books, etc - they love being treated like more than just 1 of 20 factions when it comes to positive attention and extra goodies. But when it comes to negative attention because everyone feels it 10x more when they're the unbeatable OP army, suddenly it's unfair that people complain more when they're OP then they do when some faction 1/50 people plays like Necrons or Drukhari is unbeatable.
What's going on in the world, there's a positive discourse about the marine imbalance without screeching, GW shaming or flinging insults. I doff my cap sir.
I understand your perspective there entirely, I'd emphasise there's a degree of player agency involved in finding an appropriate balance point in your group maybe where the marine players need to be spoken to and asked to tone it down slightly if possible like the Tau player. I'd personally hate to think people despised games against me and would tone my lists down or w/e to make it a good atmosphere, so that might be part of the issue.
My only other thought is that no press is bad press. If GW sees people constantly talking about marines in a positive way - release more. If they see negative feedback, re-balance them which is an excuse to release more. The best thing a community can do to temper the release pattern is simply ignore them right now imo.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/12 13:06:53
2020/08/12 13:33:55
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Stux wrote: I think people have also forgotten that Marines spent half of 8e as a mid tier at best army. With some chapters even lower.
There was a big chunk of Eldar and Chaos dominance.
Yes. Space Marines were only the top army for the first 2-3 months and the last ~year of a slightly more than two year long edition of 40k.
How TERRIBLE. how AWFUL for them.
It was a 3 year edition. So less than half by your reckoning.
I didnt say it was terrible. Just that the pendulum swings, and people have very short memories.
Thanks for pointing that out, Stux - I was struggling to figure out how June 2017 to July 2020 was slightly more than two years.
I assume we're all just going to forget Razorback spam and Flyer spam (or just Guilliman firebases in general) from the first ~half a year?
Yeah, I don't know, I'm having a hard time squaring the fact that Codex: Space Marines is 1 out of...what...20 codexes? And they spent nearly a year and a half as generally considered the "meta" army to beat.
Of a - mea culpa here - THREE year long edition.
So 1.333/3, carry the 1, hold the fries....
Seems like your expected length of time as the meta top dog as 1/20 factions in the game should be somewhere around....2 months.
For each army to get 2 months, that requires an army to be objectively better for 2 months at a time, which I'm not really sure is any healthier than 1 faction being unbalanced at the expense of 19 other being of parity, given whoever gets the first 2 months by proxy would be bottom of the pile for the next 38.
Or, it requires something like a rotating meta where releases aren't so wildly out of line that an army stays top dog for a full fething year until the game designer heavily nerfs what they added to them in the update.
You know, some kind of situation where GW gives some new tricks to an army, it makes a big splash in the tournament meta, and lists adjust to counter them naturally. Like what the meta did with Codex Drukhari, Codex Orks, Codex Genestealer Cults.... When something comes out and just stays the king undisputed respected saluted and loathed for the bs it is for nearly a year like Codex SM 2.0 or Castellan Soup or Ynnari did, that's a sign that it's fundamentally broken and needs either heavy nerfs or a scrap and a redesign.
"2 months as top dog and then reasonably present for the remainder of the edition" is what the reality was for most factions.it was a pretty dang good edition all told.
Yup overall it was a decent edition and like I say they had 2-3 outliers you identified which largely prevented anyone else running away with it. Maybe people are spending too much time fixating on that top - top 3 spots rather than appreciating that the bulk of armies were reasonably represented.
So, in your life if you have a really excellent thing you're working on and it's got one big glaring flaw but otherwise it's pretty much where you want it to be....do you usually not focus on fixing that flaw first? Does that not usually bug you more than something that's just all-round awful? Because that might just end up being a difference in attitude between the two of us, that kind of situation bugs the absolute hell out of me. If a movie, or a project I'm working on, or a recipe I've cooked is nearly amazing, but there's just one thing that's bad and I can't ignore it, that bothers me far more than something I can just dismiss as a total loss.
Hard to say, it depends what it is. My monitor with a literal bug stuck in bothers me more than if it had broken completely for example. The issue here is my monitor minus the bug functions perfectly on it's own, however it isn't THE perfect monitor, it's not that big, it's max resolution isn't 4k, it hasn't got in-built speakers etc.
I do acknowledge that it's fine for my needs, I have no requirement or want to have the best monitor where in your example you would since it hasn't got the perfect refresh rate or w/e, it just does what it's supposed to at an acceptable level. Extrapolating that to 40k, my current monitor is a mid tier army with a completely dud unit in that I enjoy playing but don't care that it's only 75% as powerful as the top army.
Yeah, that's usually my attitude when pretty much any army but marines is the top dog. When Tau are broken overpowered, that means one army owned by one single guy where I play is broken overpowered...and he usually swaps over to one of his other three when that happens, because he's a competitive player and doesn't enjoy stomping people with OP rules in a non-tournament setting.
When knights are overpowered, that means....no army owned by anybody where I play is overpowered. When Custodes are, that's 2 people who also have other armies. Ditto for CWE. For Guard it's 4 guys, one of which only plays guard. When Drukhari are overpowered it's literally just me, and I own tons of different armies. You get the idea.
When marines are overpowered, that means 20/50 players have the unbeatable tournament-tier army that is miserable to play against, and what happens is, nobody has fun playing against the marines, the marines end up playing only against each other, they don't have fun because non-marine players avoid them, and attendance at the club drops massively.
As it did, a year ago, when marines 2.0 hit. Our attendance dropped from roughly 50 to roughly 20 over the last year of 8th. We started rebuilding during quarantine, ironically, and with the excitement surrounding 9th. I was really really hoping 9th would fix the issue of the most ubiquitous army in the entire game being the miserable one to play against, but given the leaks we're getting for the upcoming codex, I'm becoming less and less hopeful about it.
Marine players love being the exception when it comes to model releases, supplement books, subfactions, lore books, etc - they love being treated like more than just 1 of 20 factions when it comes to positive attention and extra goodies. But when it comes to negative attention because everyone feels it 10x more when they're the unbeatable OP army, suddenly it's unfair that people complain more when they're OP then they do when some faction 1/50 people plays like Necrons or Drukhari is unbeatable.
What's going on in the world, there's a positive discourse about the marine imbalance without screeching, GW shaming or flinging insults. I doff my cap sir.
I understand your perspective there entirely, I'd emphasise there's a degree of player agency involved in finding an appropriate balance point in your group maybe where the marine players need to be spoken to and asked to tone it down slightly if possible like the Tau player. I'd personally hate to think people despised games against me and would tone my lists down or w/e to make it a good atmosphere, so that might be part of the issue.
My only other thought is that no press is bad press. If GW sees people constantly talking about marines in a positive way - release more. If they see negative feedback, re-balance them which is an excuse to release more. The best thing a community can do to temper the release pattern is simply ignore them right now imo.
It's just human nature that people are going to complain about something that gives them bad games. If their army is bad, they have bad games every game. If one out of 10 of their opponents' armies is OP, they have bad games maybe once every 2 months. If 5 out of 10 of their opponents' armies is OP, they have bad games every game. and WAY more people regularly play against marines than who play whatever the current worst faction in the game is.
Marines have the most players by incredibly far, and the most releases. People are not going to "just ignore them" because you just physically cannot play 40k and avoid playing against them nearly every other game. Especially when the biggest offender units come in the dang starter boxes of the game, so everyone has them. Throughout the entire Castellan meta, not a single person where I play bought a knight castellan. As of right now, we have 10 people painting up Eradicators.
That's also why there's far more complaining about Eradicators and Intercessors and Chapter Masters etc than there is about Chaplain Dreadnoughts and Leviathan Dreadnoughts. The squeakiest wheel gets the grease and the wheel that hits the potholes the most is going to squeak the most.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/08/12 16:32:49
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Dudeface wrote: I understand your perspective there entirely, I'd emphasise there's a degree of player agency involved in finding an appropriate balance point in your group maybe where the marine players need to be spoken to and asked to tone it down slightly if possible like the Tau player. I'd personally hate to think people despised games against me and would tone my lists down or w/e to make it a good atmosphere, so that might be part of the issue.
I'd emphasize that it's GW's responsibility to create a better game.
2020/08/12 16:45:37
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
When marines are overpowered, that means 20/50 players have the unbeatable tournament-tier army that is miserable to play against, and what happens is, nobody has fun playing against the marines, the marines end up playing only against each other, they don't have fun because non-marine players avoid them, and attendance at the club drops massively.
So you're saying your clubs SM players only have fun when playing unbalanced games? Give them an even match & they get all pouty?
2020/08/12 16:56:05
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
When marines are overpowered, that means 20/50 players have the unbeatable tournament-tier army that is miserable to play against, and what happens is, nobody has fun playing against the marines, the marines end up playing only against each other, they don't have fun because non-marine players avoid them, and attendance at the club drops massively.
So you're saying your clubs SM players only have fun when playing unbalanced games? Give them an even match & they get all pouty?
No, not at all. Just that it's boring to play against only Space Marines all the time, which is what they organically end up having to do when people who don't play marines get stomped, decide "well, that didn't feel particularly fair, I'm probably gonna take a couple weeks off" or "OK, definitely feel like my ticket's been punched for marines for a while, I'm going to specifically set up a game with someone I know doesn't have a marine army the next few games."
There's no grand conspiracy, and nobody is particularly evil, or entitled, or whiny or whatever. It's a natural reaction to showing up to play a game and feeling like you didn't get beaten by the player but by the crazy rules that they get to want to try and seek out different people to play against. In particular it happens most often when they playstyle of the army appears to be extremely basic - which is why all the most traditionally despised armies are the ones that win by either having just a couple really big models or the ones that just sit in their deployment zone shooting all game long.
If your impression at the end of the game is "well that stunk, I got basically tabled and my opponent didn't even move his stuff" you'll just try to avoid that army for a bit.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/08/12 18:34:12
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Stux wrote: I think people have also forgotten that Marines spent half of 8e as a mid tier at best army. With some chapters even lower.
There was a big chunk of Eldar and Chaos dominance.
Yes. Space Marines were only the top army for the first 2-3 months and the last ~year of a slightly more than two year long edition of 40k.
How TERRIBLE. how AWFUL for them.
It was a 3 year edition. So less than half by your reckoning.
I didnt say it was terrible. Just that the pendulum swings, and people have very short memories.
Well if you want to be all, technical i'll match you. Marines were top dog during index phase due mostly to Stormraven spam. At the first LVO in 8th edition (Jan 2018) the Marines featured in 4 of the top 10 places. in 2019 they finished in many top lists but only as supporting cast because Knights + The Loyal 32 were just too powerful and 2020....well, 2020 was a feth storm of awful rules writing and nonsense, pretty much the moment Space Marines got their new codex it was GG for most everyone.
So Marines controlled pretty much most of 8th, just like they controlled most of 7th, just like 6th etc. etc. etc.
Here is the thing, every edition a couple armies will always stand out as benefiting most from rules and what not. Orkz in 7th were horrendous. I mean we were bottom of the barrel, garbage. I literally went to tournaments and had opponents apologize to me. 8th edition orkz did ok, we had some serious issues and the index phase was god awful but we were pretty close to top tier for a bit. Space Marines on the other hand....have literally never had a bad edition. They might have had PART of an edition where they weren't top tier, or maybe the spent most of the edition in the top half of mid tier, but they have never had a bad edition. And 8th...wow. First part of 8th you guys were dominating with girlyman. Than you got massive primaris releases, than you had the last year of 8th where Iron hands and other shenanigans were top dog again. 2020's LVO was almost exclusively Space Marines in the top 10 lol.
Hecaton wrote: I'd emphasize that it's GW's responsibility to create a better game.
I'd emphasize that 40k never had been a balanced game since I started playing in 3rd edition.
Waiting for a better game to happen is a waste of your time, as is complaining about conceived imbalance. GW will do what they did for the past 20 years: Pump out great models with some random rules.
If you feel other players in your group have stronger armies, then ask them to tone it down. That's the fastest way to getting a better game experience, outside of playing a different game.
Designer's Note: Hardened Veterans can be represented by any Imperial Guard models, but we've really included them to allow players to practise their skills at making a really unique and individual unit. Because of this we won't be making models to represent many of the options allowed to a Veteran squad - it's up to you to convert the models. (Imperial Guard, 3rd Edition)
2020/08/12 18:45:11
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Stux wrote: I think people have also forgotten that Marines spent half of 8e as a mid tier at best army. With some chapters even lower.
There was a big chunk of Eldar and Chaos dominance.
Yes. Space Marines were only the top army for the first 2-3 months and the last ~year of a slightly more than two year long edition of 40k.
How TERRIBLE. how AWFUL for them.
It was a 3 year edition. So less than half by your reckoning.
I didnt say it was terrible. Just that the pendulum swings, and people have very short memories.
Well if you want to be all, technical i'll match you. Marines were top dog during index phase due mostly to Stormraven spam. At the first LVO in 8th edition (Jan 2018) the Marines featured in 4 of the top 10 places. in 2019 they finished in many top lists but only as supporting cast because Knights + The Loyal 32 were just too powerful and 2020....well, 2020 was a feth storm of awful rules writing and nonsense, pretty much the moment Space Marines got their new codex it was GG for most everyone.
So Marines controlled pretty much most of 8th, just like they controlled most of 7th, just like 6th etc. etc. etc.
Here is the thing, every edition a couple armies will always stand out as benefiting most from rules and what not. Orkz in 7th were horrendous. I mean we were bottom of the barrel, garbage. I literally went to tournaments and had opponents apologize to me. 8th edition orkz did ok, we had some serious issues and the index phase was god awful but we were pretty close to top tier for a bit. Space Marines on the other hand....have literally never had a bad edition. They might have had PART of an edition where they weren't top tier, or maybe the spent most of the edition in the top half of mid tier, but they have never had a bad edition. And 8th...wow. First part of 8th you guys were dominating with girlyman. Than you got massive primaris releases, than you had the last year of 8th where Iron hands and other shenanigans were top dog again. 2020's LVO was almost exclusively Space Marines in the top 10 lol.
Bit like eldar and tau, consistently top tabling since 5th.
2020/08/12 18:46:07
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Hecaton wrote: I'd emphasize that it's GW's responsibility to create a better game.
I'd emphasize that 40k never had been a balanced game since I started playing in 3rd edition.
Waiting for a better game to happen is a waste of your time, as is complaining about conceived imbalance. GW will do what they did for the past 20 years: Pump out great models with some random rules.
If you feel other players in your group have stronger armies, then ask them to tone it down. That's the fastest way to getting a better game experience, outside of playing a different game.
In my perfect world?
40k would be a tight, well-balanced game.
In a more realistic, but still better world?
40k would be a reasonably balanced game, or at least every Codex is capable of competing, but there'd be absolute pooptons of customization. You could represent most anything from the background-from biker bosses to winged archons to even crazier things.
If 40k isn't going to be balanced, they can at least include rules for lots of customization.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2020/08/12 19:53:46
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Hecaton wrote: I'd emphasize that it's GW's responsibility to create a better game.
I'd emphasize that 40k never had been a balanced game since I started playing in 3rd edition.
Waiting for a better game to happen is a waste of your time, as is complaining about conceived imbalance. GW will do what they did for the past 20 years: Pump out great models with some random rules.
If you feel other players in your group have stronger armies, then ask them to tone it down. That's the fastest way to getting a better game experience, outside of playing a different game.
I do mostly play better games. Because I have self-respect and am not satisfied with shoddy rulesets designed around marketing more than balance or fun. The fact that so many of you are is a problem, and that's why GW has no incentive to ever improve.
I shouldn't have to ask other players in my playgroup to "tone it down" and not play with models that they bought. I shouldn't have to have options for my armies removed so that little Timmy with his Primaris always feels like he's gonna win. Both of these things are GW's fault, not my opponent's or other people in my playgroup, and I'm going to levy blame where it's due.
Hecaton wrote: I'd emphasize that it's GW's responsibility to create a better game.
I'd emphasize that 40k never had been a balanced game since I started playing in 3rd edition.
Waiting for a better game to happen is a waste of your time, as is complaining about conceived imbalance. GW will do what they did for the past 20 years: Pump out great models with some random rules.
If you feel other players in your group have stronger armies, then ask them to tone it down. That's the fastest way to getting a better game experience, outside of playing a different game.
In my perfect world?
40k would be a tight, well-balanced game.
In a more realistic, but still better world?
40k would be a reasonably balanced game, or at least every Codex is capable of competing, but there'd be absolute pooptons of customization. You could represent most anything from the background-from biker bosses to winged archons to even crazier things.
If 40k isn't going to be balanced, they can at least include rules for lots of customization.
Yup, right now 40k is poorly balanced *and* hostile towards customization. What's the point?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/12 19:54:11
2020/08/12 23:04:31
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
In Age of Sigmar, they let you kitbash your own character, and have rules on how to use it in matched play.
In 40k, they ban you from using a model they sold you in the first place.
You know, if I didn't love modeling my orks as much as I do I'd wonder why I even bother with 40k as a game. I mean heck when we finally got our looted vehicles back they didn't even have the audacity to give us actual points (god I despise power level).
Whether its a ploy to get us to buy the wartrike, or the competitive scene and ITC strangleholding the game for everyone, or just a case of pure ol' stupid, I don't care. Repeatedly kicking xenos players in the groin has reached its breaking point. I hope the community continues to be more vocal about their distaste in the current direction of Primarishammer.
"People say on their first meeting a Man and an Ork exchanged a long, hard look, didn't care much for what they saw, and shot each other dead."
2020/08/13 00:48:22
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Yeah, that is another one of those things that irk me.
Every random BSF expansion model (except the flash git, obviously) has points so you can include them in your tau/eldar/chaos/imperial army if you really want to. Random promotional models get points so you can field them in matched play games, even the kill team boxes have points.
But when orks get something like the looted wagon or the goff models, they are PL only. Can't risk someone bringing those to a tournament, right?
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2020/08/13 00:58:04
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Yeah, it is odd and annoying how unwilling GW seems to be in regards to giving orks one off type stuff or making it PL only. Would love to have the goff rokkas in normal play. Have him following Ghaz in a horde army as his own personal Hype Ork.
2020/08/13 00:58:37
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
They seem irritated by Ork players excessive creativity. Viewing it not as the purest form of wargaming hobby expression but a threat to profit. (Despite tons of the creations coming from more $ in kits than just buying existing units)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/13 01:00:20
BlaxicanX wrote: A young business man named Tom Kirby, who was a pupil of mine until he turned greedy, helped the capitalists hunt down and destroy the wargamers. He betrayed and murdered Games Workshop.
2020/08/13 01:10:30
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Eldarain wrote: They seem irritated by Ork players excessive creativity. Viewing it not as the purest form of wargaming hobby expression but a threat to profit. (Despite tons of the creations coming from more $ in kits than just buying existing units)
In fairness they gave space marines "vehicle construction rules" for land raider varients and those are also "power level only"
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
2020/08/13 01:31:21
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Eldarain wrote: They seem irritated by Ork players excessive creativity. Viewing it not as the purest form of wargaming hobby expression but a threat to profit. (Despite tons of the creations coming from more $ in kits than just buying existing units)
In fairness they gave space marines "vehicle construction rules" for land raider varients and those are also "power level only"
Yeah that would have been massive fun to play with too. None of those vehicles were especially strong as I recall, but flavourful certainly. Imp fists would get a bolt raider, salimanders would get a flame raider.
Hell even the ork ones were simply, okay.
2020/08/13 02:36:44
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Eldarain wrote: They seem irritated by Ork players excessive creativity. Viewing it not as the purest form of wargaming hobby expression but a threat to profit. (Despite tons of the creations coming from more $ in kits than just buying existing units)
In fairness they gave space marines "vehicle construction rules" for land raider varients and those are also "power level only"
The "vehicle construction rules" let you swap out parts they sell for that weapon slot on the Land Raider. They didn't really stretch anyone's creativity with those.
cody.d. wrote: Yeah, it is odd and annoying how unwilling GW seems to be in regards to giving orks one off type stuff or making it PL only. Would love to have the goff rokkas in normal play. Have him following Ghaz in a horde army as his own personal Hype Ork.
They remade the Rokkas?
Rules? Pics?
2020/08/13 02:41:59
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
cody.d. wrote: Yeah, it is odd and annoying how unwilling GW seems to be in regards to giving orks one off type stuff or making it PL only. Would love to have the goff rokkas in normal play. Have him following Ghaz in a horde army as his own personal Hype Ork.
They remade the Rokkas?
Rules? Pics?
That may be a reference to the fact that they made the guitar Noise Marine as a one-off but couldn't be bothered to do the same for the Orks.
2020/08/13 02:47:18
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
cody.d. wrote: Yeah, it is odd and annoying how unwilling GW seems to be in regards to giving orks one off type stuff or making it PL only. Would love to have the goff rokkas in normal play. Have him following Ghaz in a horde army as his own personal Hype Ork.
They remade the Rokkas?
Rules? Pics?
I mean, Kinda? It was in last months white dwarf (454). A pair of pages had Open/narrative play rules for Grukk facerippa, some special nobs for him and Goff Rokkas. (truth be told the rokkas were pretty good and would have seen action in most if not all Goff lists)
A nice conversion with it too.
2020/08/14 07:47:34
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
cody.d. wrote: Yeah, it is odd and annoying how unwilling GW seems to be in regards to giving orks one off type stuff or making it PL only. Would love to have the goff rokkas in normal play. Have him following Ghaz in a horde army as his own personal Hype Ork.
They remade the Rokkas?
Rules? Pics?
I mean, Kinda? It was in last months white dwarf (454). A pair of pages had Open/narrative play rules for Grukk facerippa, some special nobs for him and Goff Rokkas. (truth be told the rokkas were pretty good and would have seen action in most if not all Goff lists)
A nice conversion with it too.
Thanks. I don't generally bother with WD so I'll have to track this issue down.
Lack of pts isn't a deal breaker in my group as we can all do math & figure out about how many pts 1 PL =.
And besides, we're about to start a Crusade, so PL only is just fine for the moment.
