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.

 Eldarsif wrote:
I think the more interesting question is what will change for the xenos because of the increased resilience of Marines. An extra wound is no small feat. It means extra resilience which results in guns staying longer on the table and making them harder to shift off objectives.

I have a few ideas:

- All Aspects go to 2 Wound min. Will help differentiate between Aspects and Guardians.
- Shuriken Catapults go back to 24"
- Avenger Shuriken Catapults go to 30"
- Drukhari Poison weapon go to wounds on a 2+ or they get a -1 AP.
- Scatter Laser becomes -1 AP
- Shuriken Cannon becomes range 36 with -1 AP and the -3 AP bonus.

They've basically opened up a lot of design space for changes to Aeldari weapons with these changes to Marines. The big question is whether they will capitalize on it or leave it as is.

Or even better, no changes at all.
Almost everything you listed would increase the lethality against non SM factions, which is bad. This is clearly a push to make the game LESS lethal.

Or you can have those above but with matching point increases so that the overall lethality per point doesn't change, which would be my preferred way to do that. Do you want movie warp spiders? Fine, they can do whatever they do in the fluff, but they become 50 points per model. Increase the point distance between grunts and genetically enhanced fluff powered marines/aspects whatever. I fear though that this doesn't align with GW objective of selling a certain amount of models (but would make the game more accessible, so I wouldn't fully rule it out).

stratigo wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
What does that have to do with anything?

I thought I spelled that out pretty darn well, but if you want to argue for argument's sake, then fine:

The change from 7th to 8th was massive because it was like 2nd to 3rd - a complete re-write of the basic core rules and a total invalidation of all previous published material. This is why 8th (like 2nd and 3rd before it) started with Indices, so that everyone had updated army lists for the new game from the get go. They then went through Codex releases very quickly to bring everyone up to speed.

The change from 8th to 9th is like the change from 3rd to 4th, 4th to 5th, 5th to 6th, and 6th to 7th - it's a revised set of existing rules rather than a completely new set of core rules. As a result of this, the existing Codices have not been invalidated. The same level of urgency to update them need not exist. This does not mean that they cannot do that, only that they don't have to.

I know you know all this, but since you started your post with a bafflingly obtuse "What does that have to do with anything?", I figured I'd explaini it in excruciatingly unnecessary detail.

I think the new business model GW's shifted to will push an aggressive cycling of codexes to something of a similar level to 8th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
What does that have to do with anything? During 8th, over half the Codexes were released two in one month, month after month after month. That's not something that happened before. Do you really think GW is going to go back to quarterly Codex releases after putting out a new edition and announcing a restructuring of units?

8th ed had no codexes before so needed codexes fast. 9th ed has codexes.

GW wants to release miniatures. Seeing any model not released ~3 months sells already only trickles and GW gets most of sales via models releasing just books rather than miniatures isn't good.

I don't think you have any way to prove this

Not to Mention the fact that they could just do an FAQ similar to the one with shock assault And Bolter discipline. I think they also know this thing applying only at a codex drop will make Everyone angry, so a quick fix to put everything in line is not that far off... it just sucks for everyone that isn’t a marine.... or imperial/chaos

Not Online!!! wrote:
Tbf , i Find the 30 " boltguns more problematic then +1w more on classic marines...
Especially when gw lowered Minimum size boards.

This is the only aspect* about this change that I dislike. I get why they've made them 30", but they shouldn't've. Increasing the range just makes them more static.

*Unless it really wasn't a misprint and Heavy Bolters are going to 1 shot. Then that would also annoy me greatly.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- All Aspects go to 2 Wound min. Will help differentiate between Aspects and Guardians.

Eldar are not a durable race. 2 wounds doesn't seem right for them outside of characters.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Shuriken Catapults go back to 24"

Still a baffling change from better Storm Bolters in 2nd Ed to 12" pop-guns forever after. That does need to change.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Avenger Shuriken Catapults go to 30"

I don't think they should be 30", but neither should bolters. Given that the latter is, I don't see the harm in increasing Avenger guns to 30" to match.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Drukhari Poison weapon go to wounds on a 2+ or they get a -1 AP.

I don't think people will want to fight an army that wounds everything on a 2+.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Scatter Laser becomes -1 AP
- Shuriken Cannon becomes range 36 with -1 AP and the -3 AP bonus.

I say give the Scatter Laser 6 shots instead.

Then put the Shuricannon to S5 but AP-2 by default, AP-4 bonus for the odd good hit.

And then the other updates to match the rest - 12" flamers, Fusion weapons with D6+2 damage, and so on.

Spoletta wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
I think the more interesting question is what will change for the xenos because of the increased resilience of Marines. An extra wound is no small feat. It means extra resilience which results in guns staying longer on the table and making them harder to shift off objectives.

I have a few ideas:

- All Aspects go to 2 Wound min. Will help differentiate between Aspects and Guardians.
- Shuriken Catapults go back to 24"
- Avenger Shuriken Catapults go to 30"
- Drukhari Poison weapon go to wounds on a 2+ or they get a -1 AP.
- Scatter Laser becomes -1 AP
- Shuriken Cannon becomes range 36 with -1 AP and the -3 AP bonus.

They've basically opened up a lot of design space for changes to Aeldari weapons with these changes to Marines. The big question is whether they will capitalize on it or leave it as is.

Or even better, no changes at all.
Almost everything you listed would increase the lethality against non SM factions, which is bad. This is clearly a push to make the game LESS lethal.

Or you can have those above but with matching point increases so that the overall lethality per point doesn't change, which would be my preferred way to do that. Do you want movie warp spiders? Fine, they can do whatever they do in the fluff, but they become 50 points per model. Increase the point distance between grunts and genetically enhanced fluff powered marines/aspects whatever. I fear though that this doesn't align with GW objective of selling a certain amount of models (but would make the game more accessible, so I wouldn't fully rule it out).

Im sorry are you saying that dark eldar dont need buffs? im gong to laugh at your face and walk away in disgust. Kabalites are in serious trouble at 9pts with a gun just barely better than a lasgun by itself at nearly twice the cost of a guardsman.

Gw is trying to diversify heavy infantry from light infantry, and finally gave in and doing it on wounds, which means weapons designed to kill heavy infantry need an adjustment, and weapons designed to kill light infantry also need a slight adjustment.

If anything from the above lists, Catapults should go back to 24" like they originally wore, or 18" at the minmum, with avenger Catapults being 24 or 30 definately agree. There is 0 reason catapults should still be hard nerfed from third edition when the game has gotten so much more deadly and everyone has run and gun and assault weapons, the catapult isnt unique anymore and doesnt need the nerfs.

If anything i would see the Shuriken Cannon would go up to 2D if it isnt already. Cannon for killing heavy infantry (putting it in line with heavy bolters), Scatter laser for killing light infantry.

for DE splinter rifles definitely need something, even if its just +1 to wound vs infantry, a point or AP, or something. right now DE infantry outside of wracks are a complete joke, and with heavy infantry going up to 2w makes them even more of a joke.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Tbf , i Find the 30 " boltguns more problematic then +1w more on classic marines...
Especially when gw lowered Minimum size boards.

Yeah, fully agreed. I still really hope that this was just some special-issue bolter the veterans get and the normal ones remain at 24".

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Tbf , i Find the 30 " boltguns more problematic then +1w more on classic marines...
Especially when gw lowered Minimum size boards.

This is the only aspect* about this change that I dislike. I get why they've made them 30", but they shouldn't've. Increasing the range just makes them more static.

*Unless it really wasn't a misprint and Heavy Bolters are going to 1 shot. Then that would also annoy me greatly.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- All Aspects go to 2 Wound min. Will help differentiate between Aspects and Guardians.

Eldar are not a durable race. 2 wounds doesn't seem right for them outside of characters.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Shuriken Catapults go back to 24"

Still a baffling change from better Storm Bolters in 2nd Ed to 12" pop-guns forever after. That does need to change.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Avenger Shuriken Catapults go to 30"

I don't think they should be 30", but neither should bolters. Given that the latter is, I don't see the harm in increasing Avenger guns to 30" to match.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Drukhari Poison weapon go to wounds on a 2+ or they get a -1 AP.

I don't think people will want to fight an army that wounds everything on a 2+.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Scatter Laser becomes -1 AP
- Shuriken Cannon becomes range 36 with -1 AP and the -3 AP bonus.

I say give the Scatter Laser 6 shots instead.

Then put the Shuricannon to S5 but AP-2 by default, AP-4 bonus for the odd good hit.

And then the other updates to match the rest - 12" flamers, Fusion weapons with D6+2 damage, and so on.

Iff they go to 2 wounds they would just be slightly more durable as they are only T3 with average saves compared to SM. This would also just apply to Aspects that are already woefully bad except for Shining Spears. It would also help differentiate elite chaff from infantry(guardians). Otherwise we need to add invuln saves to Aeldari which I don't think is a good idea.

For the sake of clarity my original take was that the 2+ wound would be with similar rule as the old poison regarding vehicles; so only wounding infantry and such on a 2+. I might not have expressed that outright.

Drukhari poison is woefully bad right now and Deathwatch already has 2+ to wound with their special thingy. Could add caveat that it doesn't affect monsters. Currently poison weapons only wound on a 6+ on vehicles either way. I might agree to a wound on a 3+ instead of 2+, but I would then argue DW should move their special ammunition into the same range. Splinter Rifles are Rapid Fire 1 at 24 which isn't exactly the best thing ever, and with 5+ save and 6+++ they are already weak. Drukhari should be a glass cannon army but currently there is nothing cannon about Drukhari except dissies and darklight which for the most part are only on a select few units. For the sake of clarity my original take was that the 2+ wound would be with similar rule as the old poison regarding vehicles; so only wounding infantry and such on a 2+. I might not have expressed that outright.

If nothing is changed for Kabalite Warriors they will need to go to 6 points or something ridiculous.

Ultimately Craftworlds and Drukhari need a serious rework as they are currently just relying on a very small set of units to carry everything.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I don't think people will want to fight an army that wounds everything on a 2+.

Ultimately an army that wounds everything on a 2+ has a lot going for it .

 warmaster21 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
I think the more interesting question is what will change for the xenos because of the increased resilience of Marines. An extra wound is no small feat. It means extra resilience which results in guns staying longer on the table and making them harder to shift off objectives.

I have a few ideas:

- All Aspects go to 2 Wound min. Will help differentiate between Aspects and Guardians.
- Shuriken Catapults go back to 24"
- Avenger Shuriken Catapults go to 30"
- Drukhari Poison weapon go to wounds on a 2+ or they get a -1 AP.
- Scatter Laser becomes -1 AP
- Shuriken Cannon becomes range 36 with -1 AP and the -3 AP bonus.

They've basically opened up a lot of design space for changes to Aeldari weapons with these changes to Marines. The big question is whether they will capitalize on it or leave it as is.

Or even better, no changes at all.
Almost everything you listed would increase the lethality against non SM factions, which is bad. This is clearly a push to make the game LESS lethal.

Or you can have those above but with matching point increases so that the overall lethality per point doesn't change, which would be my preferred way to do that. Do you want movie warp spiders? Fine, they can do whatever they do in the fluff, but they become 50 points per model. Increase the point distance between grunts and genetically enhanced fluff powered marines/aspects whatever. I fear though that this doesn't align with GW objective of selling a certain amount of models (but would make the game more accessible, so I wouldn't fully rule it out).

Im sorry are you saying that dark eldar dont need buffs? im gong to laugh at your face and walk away in disgust. Kabalites are in serious trouble at 9pts with a gun just barely better than a lasgun by itself at nearly twice the cost of a guardsman.

Gw is trying to diversify heavy infantry from light infantry, and finally gave in and doing it on wounds, which means weapons designed to kill heavy infantry need an adjustment, and weapons designed to kill light infantry also need a slight adjustment.

If anything from the above lists, Catapults should go back to 24" like they originally wore, or 18" at the minmum, with avenger Catapults being 24 or 30 definately agree. There is 0 reason catapults should still be hard nerfed from third edition when the game has gotten so much more deadly and everyone has run and gun and assault weapons, the catapult isnt unique anymore and doesnt need the nerfs.

If anything i would see the Shuriken Cannon would go up to 2D if it isnt already. Cannon for killing heavy infantry (putting it in line with heavy bolters), Scatter laser for killing light infantry.

for DE splinter rifles definitely need something, even if its just +1 to wound vs infantry, a point or AP, or something. right now DE infantry outside of wracks are a complete joke, and with heavy infantry going up to 2w makes them even more of a joke.

I never said that DE don't need buffs, especially on kabalites, I'm saying that wanting more firepower on your weapons because some models of a faction have increased in durability is an overly dumb reasoning.

Well, Drukhari poison weapons are doing near nil damage these days unless you are a cultist so...

10 shots of Splinter Rifles are doing 1 wound on a marine on average. When Marines are 2 wounds that isn't going to change a thing. By putting those shots to wounding infantry on a 2+ it changes to about 2 wounds. So a 90 points of kabalites can either do 1 wound or 2 wounds at 24" range. 90 points to kill 20 points.

Marine durability would still hold.

 Eldarsif wrote:
Well, Drukhari poison weapons are doing near nil damage these days unless you are a cultist so...

10 shots of Splinter Rifles are doing 1 wound on a marine on average. When Marines are 2 wounds that isn't going to change a thing. By putting those shots to wounding infantry on a 2+ it changes to about 2 wounds. So a 90 points of kabalites can either do 1 wound or 2 wounds at 24" range. 90 points to kill 20 points.

Marine durability would still hold.

I play nid monster heavy, and an entire army of wound on 2+ no matter what would leave a pretty sour taste in my mouth personally. It may help against marines but also would kick MC heavy armies harder.

 Eldarsif wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Tbf , i Find the 30 " boltguns more problematic then +1w more on classic marines...
Especially when gw lowered Minimum size boards.

This is the only aspect* about this change that I dislike. I get why they've made them 30", but they shouldn't've. Increasing the range just makes them more static.

*Unless it really wasn't a misprint and Heavy Bolters are going to 1 shot. Then that would also annoy me greatly.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- All Aspects go to 2 Wound min. Will help differentiate between Aspects and Guardians.

Eldar are not a durable race. 2 wounds doesn't seem right for them outside of characters.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Shuriken Catapults go back to 24"

Still a baffling change from better Storm Bolters in 2nd Ed to 12" pop-guns forever after. That does need to change.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Avenger Shuriken Catapults go to 30"

I don't think they should be 30", but neither should bolters. Given that the latter is, I don't see the harm in increasing Avenger guns to 30" to match.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Drukhari Poison weapon go to wounds on a 2+ or they get a -1 AP.

I don't think people will want to fight an army that wounds everything on a 2+.

 Eldarsif wrote:
- Scatter Laser becomes -1 AP
- Shuriken Cannon becomes range 36 with -1 AP and the -3 AP bonus.

I say give the Scatter Laser 6 shots instead.

Then put the Shuricannon to S5 but AP-2 by default, AP-4 bonus for the odd good hit.

And then the other updates to match the rest - 12" flamers, Fusion weapons with D6+2 damage, and so on.

Iff they go to 2 wounds they would just be slightly more durable as they are only T3 with average saves compared to SM. This would also just apply to Aspects that are already woefully bad except for Shining Spears. It would also help differentiate elite chaff from infantry(guardians). Otherwise we need to add invuln saves to Aeldari which I don't think is a good idea.

For the sake of clarity my original take was that the 2+ wound would be with similar rule as the old poison regarding vehicles; so only wounding infantry and such on a 2+. I might not have expressed that outright.

Drukhari poison is woefully bad right now and Deathwatch already has 2+ to wound with their special thingy. Could add caveat that it doesn't affect monsters. Currently poison weapons only wound on a 6+ on vehicles either way. I might agree to a wound on a 3+ instead of 2+, but I would then argue DW should move their special ammunition into the same range. Splinter Rifles are Rapid Fire 1 at 24 which isn't exactly the best thing ever, and with 5+ save and 6+++ they are already weak. Drukhari should be a glass cannon army but currently there is nothing cannon about Drukhari except dissies and darklight which for the most part are only on a select few units. For the sake of clarity my original take was that the 2+ wound would be with similar rule as the old poison regarding vehicles; so only wounding infantry and such on a 2+. I might not have expressed that outright.

If nothing is changed for Kabalite Warriors they will need to go to 6 points or something ridiculous.

Ultimately Craftworlds and Drukhari need a serious rework as they are currently just relying on a very small set of units to carry everything.

Looking at leaked Immortal rules i doubt aeldar are going to 2 wounds, most probably they will be moved to T4. Probably units like reapers and scorpions to T5.

Which leads to its own issues of us now having a bunch of units in other codex's that are supposed to be more durable than marines and definitely more durable than eldar sporting similar Statlines.

Like seriously a Crusis suit and a Custodian Guard T5 W3 3+ and 2+ armour are they going to get similar buffs or are they just going to do another Cawlathon and Yet 20+ years of fluff into the Not convenient retco pile. Despite their models being significantly more imposing than a DG marine. Who will be T5 W2 Sv3+.

That's before we get into things like vehicals etc which apparently aren't seeing stat changes and are going to go back to old 3-7 edition chocolate armour.

Gir Spirit Bane wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
Well, Drukhari poison weapons are doing near nil damage these days unless you are a cultist so...

10 shots of Splinter Rifles are doing 1 wound on a marine on average. When Marines are 2 wounds that isn't going to change a thing. By putting those shots to wounding infantry on a 2+ it changes to about 2 wounds. So a 90 points of kabalites can either do 1 wound or 2 wounds at 24" range. 90 points to kill 20 points.

Marine durability would still hold.

I play nid monster heavy, and an entire army of wound on 2+ no matter what would leave a pretty sour taste in my mouth personally. It may help against marines but also would kick MC heavy armies harder.

Unfortunately, it seems someone basically has to get screwed. Especially since GW decided that it would be a great idea to have stuff like Riptides be Monsters.

So Dark Eldar are expected to shoot the same weapons as Riptides with 2+ saves and 14 wounds as Hive Tyrants with 3+ saves and 12 wounds (to say nothing of Marines with 2 wounds apiece). You can argue that they should shoot other weapons at the Riptide, but then what even is the point of Poison weapons? It's certainly not anti-infantry because they're no better than Bolters against Marines (and I'm talking about basic bolters here - not the bolters that have better poison than anything in the DE arsenal just because) and are actually worse against T3 targets. So if they also suck against Monsters then what's the point of them at all?

Hence, the nature of poison weapons means that DE have to either be too good against the monsters of one faction or abysmal against the monsters of another.

To be honest, I really don't know how you solve this without changing poison weapons entirely. If they're to keep a fixed value, the best solution I could suggest would be:
Poison Weapons: "Weapons with this special rule always count as having a strength value 1pt higher than the toughness of the unit they're attacking (e.g. against a T5 unit they will count as S6). However, against any unit with the VEHICLE or TITANIC keyword, they instead count as having a strength value 1pt lower than the toughness of the unit they're attacking (e.g. against a T5 unit, they will count as S4)."
Basically a long-winded way of saying they wound VEHICLES and TITANIC units on 5s and everything else on 3s.

I think that that is the *absolute minimum* that Poison weapons would need to still be moderately effective, without wounding everything on 2s. Otherwise, I think you'd have to drop the fixed-value wounding thing and make them do something else entirely. No idea what, frankly.

Unpopular as it is, if DE poison's a problem, its one shared by essentially every lowish strength AP- 1 damage weapon in the game.

Yes, for plinking away at guardsmen or cultists you shoot like a BS3+ lasgun. Which is a bit sad. But for hitting anything tougher (vehicles aside) you move up to being a bolter, a pulse rifle and so on.

The fact Marines in cover have a 2+ and shooting them with AP- sucks is true for everyone else.

Really think Kabalites just need to be about 7~ points, and splinter cannons should be 10 points on vehicles. Then give DE some more tools for cracking solid armour saves beyond a sprinkle of blaster style weapons or dissies on vehicles. Dare I say *new units*. (cue: haha, we sending Grotesques and Mandrakes to legends).

Marin wrote:

Looking at leaked Immortal rules i doubt aeldar are going to 2 wounds, most probably they will be moved to T4. Probably units like reapers and scorpions to T5.

Not gonna happen. Absolutely no chance in h...

GW elves (be it 40k or WFB) have always been known for their frailty, which they compensate for by hitting fast and hard.
They will remain T3, but will probably get some movement/save-shenanigans. An updated Battle Focus if you will.

Tyel wrote:
Unpopular as it is, if DE poison's a problem, its one shared by essentially every lowish strength AP- 1 damage weapon in the game.

I assume you mean every AP0 weapon?

Because believe me, I would really love for DE poison weapons to have AP-1.

Tyel wrote:

Yes, for plinking away at guardsmen or cultists you shoot like a BS3+ lasgun. Which is a bit sad. But for hitting anything tougher (vehicles aside) you move up to being a bolter, a pulse rifle and so on.

Except that other armies actually get better weapons on other units or as Heavy weapons.

You know how the Heavy Bolter is now Heavy 3 S5 AP-1 D2
Imagine if instead it was Rapid Fire 3 S4 AP0 D1.
Would that be a good upgrade?

Now imagine if it was like that for almost every weapon. Because that's the situation DE are in.

I wholeheartedly agree with those saying Eldar should stay at 1W at least for their regular INFANTRY that aren't Wraithguard.
Bikes could go to 3W, maybe. Eldar aren't known for durability on their INFANTRY.

But to me what would be far fluffier is for Eldar weapons to get overhauls to make them more lethal to Marines.
Star Cannons could go to flat D:3
Shuricannons could become D:2
And I like the idea of Scatter lasers being Heavy 6 (not really a change against Marines but would help it be on par with D2 Shuricannons)

Although if Star cannons do go to D:3, Bright (and Dark) Lance's would need some kind of bump too. Eldar have melta gun equivalents but nothing like Multimeltas. So lances would need to fill that niche.

Before 8th, Lance's counted amour above 12 as 12 but were otherwise just Lascannons with S8. That translated to AP-4 in 8th which was the same thing AP1 weapons like Melta became.
I'd like to see Lance's become D:d6+2 to counter all this additional wounds and be balanced with D:3 Star cannons

-

 vipoid wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Unpopular as it is, if DE poison's a problem, its one shared by essentially every lowish strength AP- 1 damage weapon in the game.

I assume you mean every AP0 weapon?

Because believe me, I would really love for DE poison weapons to have AP-1.

Tyel wrote:

Yes, for plinking away at guardsmen or cultists you shoot like a BS3+ lasgun. Which is a bit sad. But for hitting anything tougher (vehicles aside) you move up to being a bolter, a pulse rifle and so on.

Except that other armies actually get better weapons on other units or as Heavy weapons.

You know how the Heavy Bolter is now Heavy 3 S5 AP-1 D2
Imagine if instead it was Rapid Fire 3 S4 AP0 D1.
Would that be a good upgrade?

Now imagine if it was like that for almost every weapon. Because that's the situation DE are in.

Its not just DE that seem to be in a weird place though GW's decision to make poison weapons wound on fixed values is odd as it leads to them being almost OP vrs Mosters paying lots of points for high Toughness, and limp against weady units like grots and guardsmen.

More fundamental issue that's about to become a big problem is that with marine stats getting boosted your transports are about to dang near share a statline with models that come in units of 3 or 5.

Like seriously DG with 2-3 T5 wounds with their 5+FNP are going to need S6+ Flat 3 damage or more AP-1/-2 weapons in significant numbers.
That's a statline that feels like it's goijg to rip through Drukari transports.

 Insectum7 wrote:
The damage output of Special/Heavy weapons with the bonus of shielding bodies with 2W might be stronger than you think.

10 Intercessors vs. MEQ, Rapid Firing = 3.3 wounds
10 man Tac Squad vs MEQ, GravCannon, Plasma, Combi-Plasma, Rapid Firing = 8.16 wounds.
(Calculated no Doctrines, no rerolls)

With CM, Lt, Tac Doctrine for funsies:
Tacs 15.1W
Intercessors 7W

Points as we know makes Tacs 210. Intercessors I'm not sure but I think someone said 20 per for 200.

You could say something about Hellblasters, who put out lots of damage. But that damage output drops real fast and you lose points real quick as they die. Having your damage output shielded by other bodies makes for a more resilient unit that's also less of a bullet magnet. Quite different, imo.

This presumes that whole unit is w/i 12" and that overheats aren't worth consideration.

On the move the First Born get 4.8, but this presumes they're shooting stuff with W2 and 3+ or better. If they're shooting GEQ then its 7.4 vs 5 in favor of Intercessors.

Only problem here is the prevalence of said weapons. Craftworlds have a nice coverage with most of their weapons spanning jets, walkers, lords, bikes, weapons platforms, and so on; things that can take a hit and keep walking. Drukhari, however, are stuck with one transport, one tank, and two flyers. Everything else is T3 weak units that can be mowed off the table by a single TFC as an afterthought.

Ultimately the problem is that for a glass cannon army it lacks a certain amount of "cannon".

Dark Lance could go to 2 shots, same with blasters. Blasters aren't exactly in abundance these days after Trueborns got removed so giving them assault 2 might be a nice bonus even if it doesn't fix the entire issue. 2 Dark Lance shots might get a bit overbearing with Ravagers fielding 3 of them.

Its not just DE that seem to be in a weird place though GW's decision to make poison weapons wound on fixed values is odd as it leads to them being almost OP vrs Mosters paying lots of points for high Toughness, and limp against weady units like grots and guardsmen.

This could be fixed by giving the weapon a Strength profile of 4. It would at least fix the grot and guardsmen issue.

More fundamental issue that's about to become a big problem is that with marine stats getting boosted your transports are about to dang near share a statline with models that come in units of 3 or 5.

Like seriously DG with 2-3 T5 wounds with their 5+FNP are going to need S6+ Flat 3 damage or more AP-1/-2 weapons in significant numbers.
That's a statline that feels like it's goijg to rip through Drukari transports.

Happy days...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gir Spirit Bane wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
Well, Drukhari poison weapons are doing near nil damage these days unless you are a cultist so...

10 shots of Splinter Rifles are doing 1 wound on a marine on average. When Marines are 2 wounds that isn't going to change a thing. By putting those shots to wounding infantry on a 2+ it changes to about 2 wounds. So a 90 points of kabalites can either do 1 wound or 2 wounds at 24" range. 90 points to kill 20 points.

Marine durability would still hold.

I play nid monster heavy, and an entire army of wound on 2+ no matter what would leave a pretty sour taste in my mouth personally. It may help against marines but also would kick MC heavy armies harder.

Deathwatch already has this rule, and yes, it is annoying if they can get their sights on one of your big ones. However, the question is whether Drukhari can provide the weight of fire to do proper damage. A drukhari in Rapid Fire range is most likely to get eaten the next turn.

 vipoid wrote:
I assume you mean every AP0 weapon?

Because believe me, I would really love for DE poison weapons to have AP-1.

Except that other armies actually get better weapons on other units or as Heavy weapons.

You know how the Heavy Bolter is now Heavy 3 S5 AP-1 D2
Imagine if instead it was Rapid Fire 3 S4 AP0 D1.
Would that be a good upgrade?

Now imagine if it was like that for almost every weapon. Because that's the situation DE are in.

I mean "AP-" (so yes AP0) - 1 damage weapons. Lasguns, boltguns, pulse rifles, the vast majority of infantry guns in the game that were pretty crap versus Primaris before and are now seemingly going to be crap versus all MEQ. Kabalites are screwed due to being 9 points - they were fine, even good at 6 points in 8th.

The Heavy Bolter has got a considerable number of buffs by the removal of the heavy penalty on vehicles and now getting 2 damage just because.
So yes, Splinter Cannons could do with more. I suggested a points cut - but maybe that wouldn't cut it.

But then it depends on what you want the weapon to do.

Shoot guardsmen:
Splinter Cannon: 6*2/3*1/2*2/3=1.333.
HB: 3*2/3*2/3*1/6=1.111.

Shoot Sister of battle:
Splinter Cannon 6*2/3*1/2*1/3=0.666.
HB: 3*2/3*2/3*1/2=0.666.

Shoot Immortals:
Splinter Cannon: 6*2/3*1/2*1/3=0.666.
HB: 3*2/3*1/2*1/2=0.5

So its shooting say Primaris/new Marines where there is a clear difference.
Splinter Cannon: 6*2/3*1/2*1/3=0.666 wounds.
HB: 3*2/3*2/3*1/2*2 damage=1.333 wounds. Skewed a bit down by any FNPs and so on.

If Splinter Cannons were 10 points and HBs were 15-20 would it be so bad? A venom with one would be 70 points, 80 for two (probably not worth it, but short of a major change versus 2 splinter rifles that's probably just inevitable.)

Could make Splinter Cannons AP-1 perhaps. Or always wound on 3s. But don't be surprised if they suddenly start to look quite good as per the above comparisons.

You could also I guess lament that you only get the 6 shots in 18", which is a bit of a tactical issue - but when you are on a vehicle that can fly 16" or something, I'm not sure that's apocalyptic.

The problem is that the splinter cannon on Venoms is competing with the TL Splinter Rifle which means that you are paying most of the time 5 points per extra shot or 10 if you keep outside of rapid fire range. For 10 points you can buy a kabalite warrior for 9 points who does 2 shots in Rapid Fire Range(RFR) and is an extra wound.

Splinter Cannon was nice in 5th edition(I ran many of them on foot), but ever since it got updated it has had a hard time competing with its siblings.

Currently the big selling point of Splinter Cannon is its range, but on a smaller table with ever increasing ranges this means less and less as you'll have a hard time evading either way.

 MinscS2 wrote:

Marin wrote:

Looking at leaked Immortal rules i doubt aeldar are going to 2 wounds, most probably they will be moved to T4. Probably units like reapers and scorpions to T5.

Not gonna happen. Absolutely no chance in h...

GW elves (be it 40k or WFB) have always been known for their frailty, which they compensate for by hitting fast and hard.
They will remain T3, but will probably get some movement/save-shenanigans. An updated Battle Focus if you will.

I hope they will not make that mistake, its not good for the game and not accurate according to the lore.
Aeldar are stronger than normal humans and have the some toughness as the power armor. It`s a joke that some random girl in power armor is more durable than aeldar that is trained for centuries.
Its good opportunity to think what toughness, wounds and save is according the the lore and gameplay.

Marin wrote:
It`s a joke that some random girl in power armor is more durable than aeldar

Girls? GIRLS? Every one knows that girls can't be durable, lol.
Especially when they are random.

Toughness is exactly that: physical constitution. Nothing about Aeldari has ever had them being tougher than humans. They're more agile and have more dexterity--the standard Elf tropes. Also, better with space magic!

Wounds are the other side of that: the amount of punishment one can take before being rendered ineffective. That doesn't mean "Bill's dead!"--it means "Bill is combat ineffective!".

Save is the amount of protection their armour grants them.

Being old doesn't increase any of those things, and I really don't know where you're getting the idea that a Sister of Battle(T3) is more durable than an Aspect Warrior, Wych, or Kabalite...the only Aeldari that are "trained for centuries" for warfare.

I wouldn't see a problem with splinter rifles wounding infantry on 2+ and splinter cannons wounding non vehicles on 2+.

Spoletta wrote:
I wouldn't see a problem with splinter rifles wounding infantry on 2+ and splinter cannons wounding non vehicles on 2+.

I'd rather avoid stuff like that happening again. Arc(which are Haywire weapons) bump their damage to D3 vs Vehicles now...maybe Splinter weapons could get an additional hit inflicted on Infantry?

 Kanluwen wrote:
Toughness is exactly that: physical constitution. Nothing about Aeldari has ever had them being tougher than humans. They're more agile and have more dexterity--the standard Elf tropes. Also, better with space magic!

Wounds are the other side of that: the amount of punishment one can take before being rendered ineffective. That doesn't mean "Bill's dead!"--it means "Bill is combat ineffective!".

Save is the amount of protection their armour grants them.

Being old doesn't increase any of those things, and I really don't know where you're getting the idea that a Sister of Battle(T3) is more durable than an Aspect Warrior, Wych, or Kabalite...the only Aeldari that are "trained for centuries" for warfare.

Yea, normal human is as tough as commandos, oo wait its not. Aeldar are much faster than humans and even SM cant keep up with them in combat, that is more that just 2 speed and currently is not presented in the game. Toughness could also be the ability to dodge hits or minimize the damage.
Currently sisters are 3+ save and have 6++ and aspect warrior is 4++ and no invul, its just stupid.

the Eldar units need serious buffs, but increasing toughness or wounds is completely wrong way to do it (at least outside Exarchs and Warlocks which should be proper characters with profiles to match.) The Eldar can have other buffs. If durability is desired, then dodge saves, an ability to move out of LOS or the hit penalties are the way to go.

 MinscS2 wrote:

Marin wrote:

Looking at leaked Immortal rules i doubt aeldar are going to 2 wounds, most probably they will be moved to T4. Probably units like reapers and scorpions to T5.

Not gonna happen. Absolutely no chance in h...

GW elves (be it 40k or WFB) have always been known for their frailty, which they compensate for by hitting fast and hard.
They will remain T3, but will probably get some movement/save-shenanigans. An updated Battle Focus if you will.

Eldar are not a durable race. 2 wounds doesn't seem right for them outside of characters.

Elves and Eldar in both universes are at least as durable as base line humans - with far faster reactions and agility.