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.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Squad per slot. If you want more Guardsmen you either need to stretch detachments or run Conscripts (50 model squads).

Just a real quick comment as I read the thread:
Conscripts haven't been able to do 50 model squads since the Codex dropped in 8th. Going from the Index to Codex dropped them down to 20 models base and then 30 models max.

They also cannot be targeted by "Consolidate Squads" stratagem, unless there's an FAQ I've missed, because it specifies Infantry Squads not infantry squads.

Sorry if you think I'm picking on you here Anomander, it just really stuck out at me. This is the kind of thing that I am usually talking about when I comment with regards to some people still not 'getting' what Guard are doing with regards to their core unit(the 10 model strong, no variable size beyond a Stratagem Infantry Squads) and why I thought the whole Horde+Blast thing was kinda daft.

could be they'll bring back large consrcipt squads in the 9E Guard 'dex mind you.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Wyverns, Mortars, Airfrag projectors, Aeldari Missile Launchers, normal ass frag grenades, Fragstorm Aggressors, Thunderfire Cannons, etc etc

Plenty of blast weapons that hit hordes. People aren’t filling their anti-infantry slots with LRBT, blast on those weapons is just an added bonus for the few times it might be relevant.

Soooo..mostly Imperial and Chaos stuff...got it

I'm sorry, what on that list besides frag grenades is available to chaos? Remember, gw killed R&H, those guard weapons are gone from the spikey hordes.

This is a shonky argument and you know it. I’m no Chaos expert, but off the top of my head, you’ve also got Frag Missiles, Havoc Launcher, Vindicators, Battle Cannons, Blasmaster, Blight Grenades etc. Full list on page 359 of the rule book.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Wyverns, Mortars, Airfrag projectors, Aeldari Missile Launchers, normal ass frag grenades, Fragstorm Aggressors, Thunderfire Cannons, etc etc

Plenty of blast weapons that hit hordes. People aren’t filling their anti-infantry slots with LRBT, blast on those weapons is just an added bonus for the few times it might be relevant.

Soooo..mostly Imperial and Chaos stuff...got it

I'm sorry, what on that list besides frag grenades is available to chaos? Remember, gw killed R&H, those guard weapons are gone from the spikey hordes.

This is a shonky argument and you know it. I’m no Chaos expert, but off the top of my head, you’ve also got Frag Missiles, Havoc Launcher, Vindicators, Battle Cannons, Blasmaster, Blight Grenades etc. Full list on page 359 of the rule book.

Yes, but none of those are on Nitro Zeus's list, which is what I was referring to. There's lots of Xenos weapons on that page as well. Want a list of those? Pick a species.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Wyverns, Mortars, Airfrag projectors, Aeldari Missile Launchers, normal ass frag grenades, Fragstorm Aggressors, Thunderfire Cannons, etc etc

Plenty of blast weapons that hit hordes. People aren’t filling their anti-infantry slots with LRBT, blast on those weapons is just an added bonus for the few times it might be relevant.

Soooo..mostly Imperial and Chaos stuff...got it

I'm sorry, what on that list besides frag grenades is available to chaos? Remember, gw killed R&H, those guard weapons are gone from the spikey hordes.

This is a shonky argument and you know it. I’m no Chaos expert, but off the top of my head, you’ve also got Frag Missiles, Havoc Launcher, Vindicators, Battle Cannons, Blasmaster, Blight Grenades etc. Full list on page 359 of the rule book.

Yes, but none of those are on Nitro Zeus's list, which is what I was referring to. There's lots of Xenos weapons on that page as well. Want a list of those? Pick a species.

Hrud.

...

In all seriousness, it looks like Nitro just pulled a list together with around a half-dozen items from their short-term memory. No malice in that, nor in Blndmage's comment.

If we look at vict0988's post from earlier in the thread, there are plenty of Xenos and Chaos options in both the anti-infantry category and the anti-everything category - though I need to stop reading the high-capacitance railgun as the high-cappuccino railgun.

Can we knock this particular tangent on the head now?

ccs wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Most of the anti hordes blasts have been severely increased in cost. The few good reamining ones (mostly the AM ones) rapresent only a small percentage of the blast weapons. The vast majority of it prefer targeting elite targets.

Incorrect.
Unless there's some rule in play concerning target priority, my troops weapons don't get a preference. I decide what to shoot at & with what. And if I deem that to be a hoard? Then I'll hit it with enough of whatever's needed/in range/in LoS to accomplish the job.

Sorry to break this to you, but your weapons do get a preference. There are things they are good at and things they are not good at. Just because You decide to shoot at a grot squad with a rift cannon, it doesn't make it good against that target. Your argument is nonsense.

I don't have a problem with GW hating hordes, PROVIDED that they give the armies that traditionally play hordes an alternative way to play.

And yes, horde armies got gak-ed.

"But blast weapons became more expensive". No gak sherlock, so did the horde models. A thunderfire went up 30 pts. A unit of 30 hormagaunts also went up 30 pts. Only the hormagaunts do exactly what they did before and the thunderfire got max shots against them for basically free.

As for the morale change being in favor of hordes, the two most popular horde armies (orks and tyranids) don't care about morale in the first place so the change wasn't made for them and it does not work as a consolation for them.

If the troop slot of the Ork codex is just boyz or grotz, then what the frack is the Ork player supposed to fill his list with?

If the Tyranid troop slot has termagants, hormagaunts, genestealers (all of which play more than 10 models per unit), why should I have to put all of them up my private parts and just play warriors and rippers, just because GW decided that horde armies can gak themselves AND they offer no alternative?

Playing horde does not mean I field 300 termagants and nothing else. People only fielded 300 termagants because most options in the Nid codex is gak and because that was the only way to survive the marine onslaught. It was a reaction, not an action.

I want to be able to play a nice all around list with monsters, some long range shooters, couple of melee threats and yes, 60-80 gribbles running around contesting objectives because that's how Tyranids are designed to play. But then I begin the game with my gribbles dead on board, not because the opponent tailored his list to match me, but because the same things he brought before sudenly became perfect in killing gribbles.

Spoletta wrote:

ccs wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Most of the anti hordes blasts have been severely increased in cost. The few good reamining ones (mostly the AM ones) rapresent only a small percentage of the blast weapons. The vast majority of it prefer targeting elite targets.

Incorrect.
Unless there's some rule in play concerning target priority, my troops weapons don't get a preference. I decide what to shoot at & with what. And if I deem that to be a hoard? Then I'll hit it with enough of whatever's needed/in range/in LoS to accomplish the job.

Sorry to break this to you, but your weapons do get a preference. There are things they are good at and things they are not good at. Just because You decide to shoot at a grot squad with a rift cannon, it doesn't make it good against that target. Your argument is nonsense.

No, the weapons don't get a vote. There may be targets they are designed to be better (or worse) at killing, but they don't get to choose the target. Apparently that's player agency, or something, not weapon agency.

If your weapons do appear to be voting, I recommend seeking medical help.

im not following this debate lol

It's simple actually. a battlecannon is good when shooting at heavy targets (well it's not really good at anything but it was made for killing heavy targets). But now against hordes it gets 6 shots for free. So it is good at shooting heavy targets and -if need be- it is also decent at shooting hordes as well.

Suddenly, if your army was already bringing 4 - 5 battle cannons, you might as well get by bringing less anti-horde options because when you need to, you got 24-30 shots available.

I'm not sure I agree with the basic premise of the thread, TBH. I think hordes are likely going to turn out to be just fine. There's a perception issue at work because there are a couple of rules that specifically affect hordes and it's certainly true some horde units were hit pretty hard in the points update, but some non-horde units were also screwed over by that debacle too.

In reality I think the meta will likely settle somewhere in the middle, possibly leaning towards more elite armies, with hordes being viable in some situations and for some armies because the super-efficient anti-horde weapons (of which there are fewer than people think) simply won't be very common in most lists because they're usually not that efficient at killing non-horde units. The Wyvern is the best example here. It's got a terrifying number of shots against hordes, but that's only relevant if you ever have to face one. It's been a good 3 editions since I last saw one, I think, and that's not likely to change while their cost remains too high to include one in the hope you end up facing horde that you can't deal with using weapons that are better all-rounder choices.

Slipspace wrote:
I'm not sure I agree with the basic premise of the thread, TBH. I think hordes are likely going to turn out to be just fine. There's a perception issue at work because there are a couple of rules that specifically affect hordes and it's certainly true some horde units were hit pretty hard in the points update, but some non-horde units were also screwed over by that debacle too.

In reality I think the meta will likely settle somewhere in the middle, possibly leaning towards more elite armies, with hordes being viable in some situations and for some armies because the super-efficient anti-horde weapons (of which there are fewer than people think) simply won't be very common in most lists because they're usually not that efficient at killing non-horde units. The Wyvern is the best example here. It's got a terrifying number of shots against hordes, but that's only relevant if you ever have to face one. It's been a good 3 editions since I last saw one, I think, and that's not likely to change while their cost remains too high to include one in the hope you end up facing horde that you can't deal with using weapons that are better all-rounder choices.

You got that backwards. You haven't seen horde armies for three editions BECAUSE things like Wyverns exist. Not that Wyvern won't justify its presence because there are no horde armies.

As for the horde vs non horde armies getting screwed by points debacle:

A thunderfire went up 30 pts. A suad of hormagaunts also went up 30 pts. Difference is, hormagaunts do exactly the same thing they did before, but the thunderfire got max shots against them for basically free.

topaxygouroun i wrote:
I don't have a problem with GW hating hordes, PROVIDED that they give the armies that traditionally play hordes an alternative way to play.

And yes, horde armies got gak-ed.

"But blast weapons became more expensive". No gak sherlock, so did the horde models. A thunderfire went up 30 pts. A unit of 30 hormagaunts also went up 30 pts. Only the hormagaunts do exactly what they did before and the thunderfire got max shots against them for basically free.

As for the morale change being in favor of hordes, the two most popular horde armies (orks and tyranids) don't care about morale in the first place so the change wasn't made for them and it does not work as a consolation for them.

If the troop slot of the Ork codex is just boyz or grotz, then what the frack is the Ork player supposed to fill his list with?

If the Tyranid troop slot has termagants, hormagaunts, genestealers (all of which play more than 10 models per unit), why should I have to put all of them up my private parts and just play warriors and rippers, just because GW decided that horde armies can gak themselves AND they offer no alternative?

Playing horde does not mean I field 300 termagants and nothing else. People only fielded 300 termagants because most options in the Nid codex is gak and because that was the only way to survive the marine onslaught. It was a reaction, not an action.

I want to be able to play a nice all around list with monsters, some long range shooters, couple of melee threats and yes, 60-80 gribbles running around contesting objectives because that's how Tyranids are designed to play. But then I begin the game with my gribbles dead on board, not because the opponent tailored his list to match me, but because the same things he brought before sudenly became perfect in killing gribbles.

And what if a Custodes player wants to play cheap hoards? Armies can't do everything that's just a fact of life for 40k (even Marines can't do everything, we don't exactly have a cheap hoard unit and rumor has it scouts are moving into elites)

All BLAST does it make weapons that used blast templates back before 8th edition goty rid of them, once more, more effective vs large formations of troops. that's something 8th edition screwed up and GW is correcting.

TLDR, 9th edition isn't anti-hoard, 8th edition was just pro-hoard

Wot? A custodes army isn't meant or designed to be a horde army. An Ork and a Nid army are meant to be played as hordes. It's in their rulebook, it's in their fluff, it's in their past 25 years of history. I also can't play 2+ supersoldiers in my Nid army but that's part of how the army plays, and I didn't see any weapon changes to specifically ruin super terminator type armies.

No, the blast weapon does not revert back to previous template editions at all. First of all blast templates needed to roll for scatter. Second there was no way that a small blast from , say, a battle cannon could hit 6 termagants if they were not clamped on each other, and third a small blast from said battle cannon would hit the same number of 3-4 termagants out of a unit of 30 as it would hit 3-4 marines out of a group of 7-8.

And if 8th edition was so pro-horde, where were all them horde armies dominating the tournament scene?

BrianDavion wrote:
TLDR, 9th edition isn't anti-hoard, 8th edition was just pro-hoard

There's a sort of argument that can be made for the CA missions being pro-horde - but tournaments rarely if ever worked out this way.

I think there is a powerful argument that *blast* makes it unlikely horde could ever be meta dominant - but arguably that hasn't changed. In 8th if you knew something like 40% of lists were going to be Green Tide, you can easily tailor a list with most factions that would expect to clear 90~ boys a turn which would stack the odds in your favour.

Its just that... most of the time you didn't encounter that. The number of horde lists at a tournament probably didn't get much above 10-15%. If you wanted to win you'd therefore be much more sensible tailoring for knights, Ynnari or flyer spam (or both), and then Marines, other Marines and Marines. The reason I think you regularly saw a green tide style build get through (although very rarely win the whole thing) was that if you are packing nothing but Damage 2 or higher weapons, you often can't clear enough boyz in time.

The fear was that every army could just say pack in a few missile launchers and go "right, can destroy any horde lists, now back to working out how to crack marines/custodes/death guard etc." I don't think that's proven the case - although obviously its early days. Things like Wyverns may be an issue - but then wyverns are terrible against those tougher, seemingly stronger lists, so I'm not sure how meta relevant they are going to be. Similar story for say mortars.

Which would suggest the issue will be list tailoring against your friendly local player who you know is bringing a horde - but arguably that's been an issue at least all through 8th and arguably forever.

As someone who regularly plays a Guard horde, blast weapons aren't what wakes me up sweating in the middle of the night. It's certain Space Marine units that have just so much anti-infantry firepower (like aggressors. Those things are just insane). That's where the real danger lies. Perhaps Wyverns and the like could do some real damage as well, but they're not the main threat in the current meta.

 Dolnikan wrote:
As someone who regularly plays a Guard horde, blast weapons aren't what wakes me up sweating in the middle of the night. It's certain Space Marine units that have just so much anti-infantry firepower (like aggressors. Those things are just insane). That's where the real danger lies. Perhaps Wyverns and the like could do some real damage as well, but they're not the main threat in the current meta.

The problem with Blast is that you now simply don't have to take aggressors in the list any more. You can build a list full of krak missiles to mess with heavy units, and still have a metric frackton of frag shots if you happen to meet the occasional horde army out there.

Much as I hate the thunderfire, it went from having 8 shots to having 12 against hordes. A havoc launcher is really good in 9th. For 5 pts I can get 6 str 5 shots against hordes. But I could get 3.5 anyways and it was still useless against tanks so I can live with that. But if I build a list with 12 krak missiles and 6 battle cannons, I do pretty damn good against heavy and if I ever meet the orks, I still have 120 shots per turn from these weapons alone.

I don't think blast weapons pay enough points for the versatility they just got.

topaxygouroun i wrote:
Wot? A custodes army isn't meant or designed to be a horde army. An Ork and a Nid army are meant to be played as hordes. It's in their rulebook, it's in their fluff, it's in their past 25 years of history. I also can't play 2+ supersoldiers in my Nid army but that's part of how the army plays, and I didn't see any weapon changes to specifically ruin super terminator type armies.

No, the blast weapon does not revert back to previous template editions at all. First of all blast templates needed to roll for scatter. Second there was no way that a small blast from , say, a battle cannon could hit 6 termagants if they were not clamped on each other, and third a small blast from said battle cannon would hit the same number of 3-4 termagants out of a unit of 30 as it would hit 3-4 marines out of a group of 7-8.

And if 8th edition was so pro-horde, where were all them horde armies dominating the tournament scene?

the bit about custodes not being hoard is kinda my point. complaining that Orks don't have an option for running elites instead of Boyz is the same as complainining custodes don't have a hoard option.

as for 8th being pro-hoard, I do remember times when guard where running top. that changed yes, but as early as the Index days I recall commenting that we needed a blast keyword to make blast weapons a choice for dealing with hoards. because what we had was artillery dealing 1d6 hits vs a machine gun that had 6 shots.

BrianDavion wrote:

topaxygouroun i wrote:
Wot? A custodes army isn't meant or designed to be a horde army. An Ork and a Nid army are meant to be played as hordes. It's in their rulebook, it's in their fluff, it's in their past 25 years of history. I also can't play 2+ supersoldiers in my Nid army but that's part of how the army plays, and I didn't see any weapon changes to specifically ruin super terminator type armies.

No, the blast weapon does not revert back to previous template editions at all. First of all blast templates needed to roll for scatter. Second there was no way that a small blast from , say, a battle cannon could hit 6 termagants if they were not clamped on each other, and third a small blast from said battle cannon would hit the same number of 3-4 termagants out of a unit of 30 as it would hit 3-4 marines out of a group of 7-8.

And if 8th edition was so pro-horde, where were all them horde armies dominating the tournament scene?

the bit about custodes not being hoard is kinda my point. complaining that Orks don't have an option for running elites instead of Boyz is the same as complainining custodes don't have a hoard option.

as for 8th being pro-hoard, I do remember times when guard where running top. that changed yes, but as early as the Index days I recall commenting that we needed a blast keyword to make blast weapons a choice for dealing with hoards. because what we had was artillery dealing 1d6 hits vs a machine gun that had 6 shots.

On custodes vs Orks, the point is that 9th edition developed new rules specifically designed to kill hordes better, then it slapped said rule onto more than 150 different weapons in the game. But they didn't develop any new rule specifically designed to kill custodes better.

Also my problem with blast is that the weapons that got it do not pay any premium points for being able to kill stuff better. And if an already anti-infantry weapon got blast that's one thing, just doing the same thing a little better. But I can honestly now just make a list with nothing else other than 30 missile launchers, and while you would expect that I would be doing great against heavy and getting screwed vs hordes, suddenly WAIT! I also have 180 shots per turn against hordes now basically for free. So now I don't need to bring dedicated anti-infantry at all (which would be useless against heavy armies).

Guard was being top not by playing hordes but by playing all the tanks and scion plasma drops. And Guard power only lasted for like 2 months or so at the beginning of the edition anyways.

BrianDavion wrote:

TLDR, 9th edition isn't anti-hoard, 8th edition was just pro-hoard

Nonsense. 8th edition was, like any other edition, pro SM. Which aren't an horde army at all.

Among all broken combos of 8th only a few ones were horde oriented. I remember Guilliman and his goons, 5 stormravens, the castellan, aeldari cheese, etc.

BrianDavion wrote:

the bit about custodes not being hoard is kinda my point. complaining that Orks don't have an option for running elites instead of Boyz is the same as complainining custodes don't have a hoard option.

Comparing orks with custodes isn't right. Orks are a major army and a stand alone faction while custodes are a small subfaction and belong to the widest big faction. Compare orks with SM and custodes with harlequins or something like that.

The point about orks is that they can either run horde troops and get hit by 9th rules that punish large squads or go elites with less CPs or pure tax units, as a small amount of boyz (1-2 30 man mobs or multiple smaller squads) don't work very well. Custodes don't run tax units, nor they are punished by 9th edition rules for being elite oriented. And they are a faction with way lesser units and options than orks.

topaxygouroun i wrote:
I don't have a problem with GW hating hordes, PROVIDED that they give the armies that traditionally play hordes an alternative way to play.

And yes, horde armies got gak-ed.

"But blast weapons became more expensive". No gak sherlock, so did the horde models. A thunderfire went up 30 pts. A unit of 30 hormagaunts also went up 30 pts. Only the hormagaunts do exactly what they did before and the thunderfire got max shots against them for basically free.

As for the morale change being in favor of hordes, the two most popular horde armies (orks and tyranids) don't care about morale in the first place so the change wasn't made for them and it does not work as a consolation for them.

If the troop slot of the Ork codex is just boyz or grotz, then what the frack is the Ork player supposed to fill his list with?

I

I've been doing fine with Boyz, in either horde or trukk boy form.

But because this forum only cares if a thing wins a tournament, here's one where the top three did both: https://spikeybits.com/2020/08/top-3-9th-edition-40k-army-lists-warzone-giga-bites-iv.html

topaxygouroun i wrote:


You got that backwards. You haven't seen horde armies for three editions BECAUSE things like Wyverns exist. Not that Wyvern won't justify its presence because there are no horde armies.

That doesn't make sense. Since I never saw a Wyvern their effect on the meta is irrelevant. It's not enough for an option to exist, it has to be good enough to include in a TAC army in order to have any real effect on the meta. 8th saw its fair share of horde armies doing well at various points too, from the IG Conscript hordes to Plaguebearer spam and even the very early Razorwing Flock and Horror spam lists, hordes were pretty effective at various times and not so good at others.

I suspect the same will remain true in 9th. The core rules themselves aren't as hostile to hordes as some people think and the practicalities of army building for the meta will mean most of the really good anti-horde weapons won't be taken unless hordes really start to swing the meta in their favour. In which case that'd be fine, kinda like how D2 weapons suddenly became so much more important once Primaris actually got good.

I don't really know that there was a huge hit to horde armies, honestly. I've been playing Tyranids, and I play 30 hormogaunts, 30 termagaunts, 30 gargoyles, and 20 genestealers with the big bugs to go with them (cause that's how I see them play) and the board control of a 30 model unit is really strong in 9th.

Yes, they are more expensive, yes blast weapons hurt, but I think it HAS to be that way given the smaller board and the importance of objectives and obsec as a rule.

I don't think they're as bad as people make them out to be. I've been testing larger hordes, and there does seem to be a point where it's just too much, but typically in that 130 model range, unless your opponent is taking a bunch of punisher leman Russ commanders, its been very difficult to chew through.

Backed up with some big bugs, either hiveguard (though maybe just a bit too expensive now, I'm not sure, they're still really good) or tyrannofexes (3 of them with big flamer things is freaking hilarious) having that many obsec models does put your opponent in quite the target priority situation. Kill the big bugs that can get work done, or kill the little ones that will win them the game?

I don't know man, I think they are better than people think. Hell, I think Tyranids are WAY better than people think they are.

Slipspace wrote:

topaxygouroun i wrote:


You got that backwards. You haven't seen horde armies for three editions BECAUSE things like Wyverns exist. Not that Wyvern won't justify its presence because there are no horde armies.

That doesn't make sense. Since I never saw a Wyvern their effect on the meta is irrelevant. It's not enough for an option to exist, it has to be good enough to include in a TAC army in order to have any real effect on the meta. 8th saw its fair share of horde armies doing well at various points too, from the IG Conscript hordes to Plaguebearer spam and even the very early Razorwing Flock and Horror spam lists, hordes were pretty effective at various times and not so good at others.

I suspect the same will remain true in 9th. The core rules themselves aren't as hostile to hordes as some people think and the practicalities of army building for the meta will mean most of the really good anti-horde weapons won't be taken unless hordes really start to swing the meta in their favour. In which case that'd be fine, kinda like how D2 weapons suddenly became so much more important once Primaris actually got good.

Yeah I've actually kept track. I have taken 11+ model units into every single game of 9th ed so far, have played against ZERO melee armies (all space marine subtypes, unsurprisingly enough) and have had a weapon get additional hits from the Blast rule 2 times. Once, a battlecannon rolled a 1 and got 3 instead (and promptly missed 2 shots because it was a defiler) and once a thunderfire cannon got full hits on a unit of Hellions.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
I'm not sure I agree with the basic premise of the thread, TBH. I think hordes are likely going to turn out to be just fine. There's a perception issue at work because there are a couple of rules that specifically affect hordes and it's certainly true some horde units were hit pretty hard in the points update, but some non-horde units were also screwed over by that debacle too.

In reality I think the meta will likely settle somewhere in the middle, possibly leaning towards more elite armies, with hordes being viable in some situations and for some armies because the super-efficient anti-horde weapons (of which there are fewer than people think) simply won't be very common in most lists because they're usually not that efficient at killing non-horde units. The Wyvern is the best example here. It's got a terrifying number of shots against hordes, but that's only relevant if you ever have to face one. It's been a good 3 editions since I last saw one, I think, and that's not likely to change while their cost remains too high to include one in the hope you end up facing horde that you can't deal with using weapons that are better all-rounder choices.

You got that backwards. You haven't seen horde armies for three editions BECAUSE things like Wyverns exist. Not that Wyvern won't justify its presence because there are no horde armies.

As for the horde vs non horde armies getting screwed by points debacle:

A thunderfire went up 30 pts. A suad of hormagaunts also went up 30 pts. Difference is, hormagaunts do exactly the same thing they did before, but the thunderfire got max shots against them for basically free.

You are double wrong.

First of all the thunderfire cannon increased by 48 points, not 30.
Secondly what matters is the percentage increase. Hormagaunts increased by 20%, TFC increased by 52%. It is now passable against hordes (28% return) and bad against all other targets, so you will not see them as much as you did in 8th.

Spoletta wrote:

Secondly what matters is the percentage increase. Hormagaunts increased by 20%, TFC increased by 52%. It is now passable against hordes (28% return) and bad against all other targets, so you will not see them as much as you did in 8th.

This is wrong. What matters is how much the unit costs now. Consider armies that need 3x5 man squads to fill up a battallion vs those ones which rely on 3x30 man squads. Even if those 5 dudes increased in percentage way more than the horde units it'd be like a +30/45 points on the entire list vs +90 points.

An infantry model could go up by 2 or 3 points without affecting the army by much because it just needs a few of those bodies. Going up by 1 is significant when the army doesn't work outside bringing 90+ of those "cheap" models.

The +1ppm on ork boyz is a bigger nerf than the +3ppm on intercessors.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seabass wrote:


I don't think they're as bad as people make them out to be. I've been testing larger hordes, and there does seem to be a point where it's just too much, but typically in that 130 model range, unless your opponent is taking a bunch of punisher leman Russ commanders, its been very difficult to chew through.

130 models aren't an horde at 2000 points. An horde is 180+ models, tipycally 220-300.

BrianDavion wrote:

could be they'll bring back large consrcipt squads in the 9E Guard 'dex mind you.

I don't see them doing that without stripping the <Regiment> tag, finally, from Conscripts and degrading their saves or the like.

But hey, what do I know. Whoever keeps spearheading the Guard book seems intent on making them into a NPC faction despite what people say here about them being OP.

130 models is 100% a horde.

Spoletta wrote:

topaxygouroun i wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
I'm not sure I agree with the basic premise of the thread, TBH. I think hordes are likely going to turn out to be just fine. There's a perception issue at work because there are a couple of rules that specifically affect hordes and it's certainly true some horde units were hit pretty hard in the points update, but some non-horde units were also screwed over by that debacle too.

In reality I think the meta will likely settle somewhere in the middle, possibly leaning towards more elite armies, with hordes being viable in some situations and for some armies because the super-efficient anti-horde weapons (of which there are fewer than people think) simply won't be very common in most lists because they're usually not that efficient at killing non-horde units. The Wyvern is the best example here. It's got a terrifying number of shots against hordes, but that's only relevant if you ever have to face one. It's been a good 3 editions since I last saw one, I think, and that's not likely to change while their cost remains too high to include one in the hope you end up facing horde that you can't deal with using weapons that are better all-rounder choices.

You got that backwards. You haven't seen horde armies for three editions BECAUSE things like Wyverns exist. Not that Wyvern won't justify its presence because there are no horde armies.

As for the horde vs non horde armies getting screwed by points debacle:

A thunderfire went up 30 pts. A suad of hormagaunts also went up 30 pts. Difference is, hormagaunts do exactly the same thing they did before, but the thunderfire got max shots against them for basically free.

You are double wrong.

First of all the thunderfire cannon increased by 48 points, not 30.
Secondly what matters is the percentage increase. Hormagaunts increased by 20%, TFC increased by 52%. It is now passable against hordes (28% return) and bad against all other targets, so you will not see them as much as you did in 8th.

Percentage increase would only make sense if there was a consensus that in the previous edition the units were balanced. Otherwise it's moot. If the Thunderfire was undercosted in 8th (and it was) it makes sense to get more of a hike now. If the hormagaunts were overcosted in 8th (and they were) it doesn't really make sense for them to get any price hike now but here we are anyways.

Additionally, one unit of 30 hormas won't make a horde list (yet still will get punished by said thunderfire just the same). For the horde you will need 200 hormagaunts plus support, which means that the horde aspect itself went up by 200 pts. So you could bring 4 thunderfire cannons if you wanted and you would still be getting a better deal than the horde list.

Plus, one thunderfire is still enough to double tremor shells two enemy units out of the game AND still get to actually screw up with horde lists anyways.

My point is, I don't think any of the blast weapons (all 150+ of them) are paying enough points premium for the upside of being able to completely smash large units.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

A thunderfire went up 30 pts. A suad of hormagaunts also went up 30 pts. Difference is, hormagaunts do exactly the same thing they did before, but the thunderfire got max shots against them for basically free.

TFC went up 49.

topaxygouroun i wrote:
It's simple actually. a battlecannon is good when shooting at heavy targets (well it's not really good at anything but it was made for killing heavy targets). But now against hordes it gets 6 shots for free. So it is good at shooting heavy targets and -if need be- it is also decent at shooting hordes as well.

Suddenly, if your army was already bringing 4 - 5 battle cannons, you might as well get by bringing less anti-horde options because when you need to, you got 24-30 shots available.

This misses a lot. If your opponent was nothing but hordes then, sure, you have "less" to worry about. But if there is a mix of hordes and big targets are you shooting BC at hormagaunts still?

 Amishprn86 wrote:
130 models is 100% a horde.

130 models is nothing. on 5ppm units that's 650 pts. You still have 1350 pts to put in your list.

You know what 130 models is? 3 terma/horma units and 2 units of stealers. That's it. Baseline troops selection of a Tyranid army. Haven't even counted hive guard monsters and HQ at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


This misses a lot. If your opponent was nothing but hordes then, sure, you have "less" to worry about. But if there is a mix of hordes and big targets are you shooting BC at hormagaunts still?

I can shoot at both and be good against both. And for this kind of versatility, blast weapons should be costed higher.

Imagine a list with 30 missile launchers. Perfectly good against vehicle lists. Still gets 180 frag shots against hordes. Happy life of the generalist should be costed premium.