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.

 G00fySmiley wrote:

 Oborosen wrote:
I've played mainly GKs for the last two editions. Though I've dabbled in both chaos and IG as well.

I've only found problems at larger games. 2K pnts and up, and even then. It's a problem with unit balance and coaxing new players into the game.

that is actually a really important distinction. its a very different and more balanced game in the 1k-1250 range imo. I think i prefer 1k point games they are fast, people bring interesting lists and its genuinely (subjectively) more fun.

I would like to play smaller point games more. It isn't very often I get a chance though. It is usually Kill Team or 2,000pts back when I could get games in. Plus, anytime someone suggested they wanted to play less than 2,000pts, I generally want to field my Genestealer Cult as I didn't have enough models ready before the pandemic to field a very good list at 2,000pts. I probably still don't as GSC have just seem to get harder and harder to play. I didn't get one opportunity to play at a 1,000pts with my Primaris. That was after bringing a 2,000pt list that I paired down to something like 900 points as I wasn't prepared for a smaller point game. Still was a lot of fun.

I definitely like playing two 1,000pt games over one 2,000pt game. Especially if both players have the ability to tweak/sideboard their list and the losing player of the first game is allowed to make some adjustments. That way it is possible both players to get a win for the day, or at very least, have a closer second game. Especially with me. It is getting somewhat know that playing me is like rolling a 1d20 for the first game. Sometimes I play at a crazy good level. Sometimes I am absolute trash. However, my second game has me at about half my ability. And any potential 3rd game is basically an easy win for my opponent. For a while, a player consistently better than me in my first game of the day would get a 3rd game in Kill Team, and I felt bad since every one of those games was like shooing fish in a barrel for him.

 catbarf wrote:

Plus for a whopping 2CP you can take a Patrol to get some more slots, or 3CP for a Battalion. You're Marines, your HQs and Troops are good, it's a very low tax to get all the HS slots you need.

Or just take a spearhead,as that's just as expensive as a battalion and you don't need to bring troops at all in your second detachment.

the_scotsman wrote:

Azuza001 wrote:
Eradicators are not broken, they are SEVERELY undercosted. I have run mine only once, in a ravenguard army. I held them in deep strike thanks to ravenguard strat. I popped them up t2 at 13" from a repulsor. I dropped it to 1w. It was a bit nuts.

Personally I think they should be 60 pts a model with their current loadout and rules. They are too good at their job otherwise.

As for intercessors, my local group and I have come to the conclusion that the auto bolt rifle is the answer to their job. 3 squads putting out 45 bolter shots a turn? Yeah that will work just fine........

Finally, on the bahsee thing, I have been running banshees almost all of 8th. I love my girls, they are fast, useful harrassment units. But I would never have said they were good at killing stuff. Anyone who thinks that needs to stop drinking the Kool aid. I am excited for the power sword update because "gasp" they will be able to kill stuff again! But atm.... thats a weak argument lol.

So yeah, my local meta is fine. I am still games happening here, at least 1 a week. Marines are seen as a tough army to face but not unbeatable. Personally i think DG and Imperial Guard are tougher enemies to take on depending on who is running them. But can marines be overwhelming? Yes. The core changes to rerolls is going to be huge and I can't wait for it. Game I played last week (my black legion vs new imperial fist army, I won thanks to my lord of skulls) I was very nervous going in because he had a repulsor executioner and leviathan dread and contemptor relic dread.... and a smash captain as chapter master and relic to make him a lieutenant as well. Thats a ton of anti tank rerolls that just makes those units so freaking good.

Question...how does one use a "Harrassment unit" in a game of 9th edition?

The only units I would class as such in my own gameplay would be ultra-cheap chaff infantry units and characters, in which the 'harrassment' generally takes the form of forcing an opponent to target them to prevent them from scoring, or move around them, preventing expensive units from going where they want to go.

Banshees are neither durable nor inexpensive, nor do they deep strike. They are mobile, but not compared to vypers or windriders. They are less durable for the points vs shooting than almost anything else in the army. What do you use them for that you would call "useful harrassment"?

So i normally run 3 squads of 5 in my games. 2 of them start on the board, with 1 getting quicken so they typically run across the table t1 and charge into something. The other is in position to help t2.

I deep strike a squad of 5 with the webway strat, and I play Beil Tan. This gives me access to court of the young king for +2 to charge. Also if i position stuff correctly I should have a warlock in range to give them ghost walk (additonal + to charge) so they get into cc from deep strike pretty easily.

I try to go on flanks, hitting a side seems safer than going up the middle. But my true goal is to hit a backfield unit that doesn't want to be in cc. Thunderfire cannon tech priests, a predator annihilatior, a dev squad, hellblasters, i hit whatever i can but aim for stuff that shutting down their shooting for 1 turn will help keep the rest of the army alive. Finally by blitzing on a flank like this I find that I can stall my opponents advance to mid board objectives, helping me "hold more" for a turn or 2 is vital.

I understand they are too expensive at this point for what I am using them for. My beil tan army went up 250 pts with this edition change (vs my white scar army going up 4....... thanks gw....) and it has taken a lot of bite from my list, but I am still able to put up a fight and win if I play smart. But I have to make sure everything has a job it can actually accomplish now, and banshees are my t1 / t2 harrassment unit that also can help grab engage on all fronts t1 and vs t3 targets (hi guard/ bye guard) are quite useful.

nekooni wrote:
Same with relic contemptors and long range firepower. Elite slot.

 catbarf wrote:
Plus you still have your Elites slots open to take Aggressors for anti-horde and Contemptors for long-range fire support, so it's not like the Heavy Support slot is your only source of firepower.

I like how people keep bringing broken, pay to win forge world garbage as ""marine"" units. Show me where it is in codex, THEN you can complain.

Maybe it will shock you, but most SM players aren't WAAACers spamming recasts from book most of 40K fans don't even know exists and if your argument against Eradicators is a strawman "why, if SM player has 15 OP FW dreads to compensate for wasting all his HS slots on one-dimensional unit" then it pretty much debunks it on the spot. So, thanks for conceding. And even if you spam said broken FW junk (including new tournament hotness, resin land speeders) SM currently don't even qualify as top 3 (or even arguably top 5) book, and that is with their best subfactions, not 7/10 marine armies hovering in 30-40% win range) so the whole complain was nonsense to begin with.

And I still like how people who were defending VASTLY more broken reapers and quad fusion suits as ToTeS BaLaNcEd GiT gUd are now complaining because SM lost bad army status they had for 2.8 editions - especially hilarious coming from Eldar and Tau players

It's not even necessarily that FW units are "pay to win . . . garbage". It's that GW, when they wrote the codex/supplements, just straight up didn't acknowledge that there were broken interactions with the new GAMES WORKSHOP (note--not Forgeworld) stratagems and relics.

The Leviathan was simply a good, top tier unit before codex 2.0 + iron hands supplement + psychic awakening. It's those supplements that turned it into a broken unit. Same with the Chaplain Dreadnought. I happen to own both of these, by the way, since I started building Iron Hands with a dreadnought themed army in mind years before the supplement was even known to exist. I have one of every dreadnought in that army, except the MKIV Ironclad, which I missed out on :(.

The main issue I see is that GW is giving out a TON of power via stratagems, relics, and warlord traits, and not just incorporating that power into datasheets where it can be more easily pointed.

Take the "chief apothecary", for instance. That should be a datasheet entry in the codex with an appropriate cost (and it sounds like GW is doing just that, thankfully).

I don't terribly mind "combo hammer", as it adds a layer of depth to the gameplay beyond simply maneuvering and rolling dice to wipe your opponent off the board. I do have a problem with certain stratagems VASTLY changing the value of certain units in certain factions. Another example is Salamanders and flamer Aggressors. The strat combos for that unit in Salamanders makes their offensive output insane vs their standard expected output. How can you properly point balance Aggressors so that they can be used in other factions? It was the same thing with Alaitoc flyers and ynnari shining spears etc, etc.

They need to tone down the stratagems and give the power back to the datasheets in ALL factions.

Well I'm still new to it, but I know I'll still play my elves, regardless of if they're weak. (heard that the Ynnari I've picked is pretty bad right now xD) But I just play to have fun and I love their theme, I don't really mind losing to be honest.

I did play an intro game with space marines and yeah, they felt pretty strong, but I can't really say much being inexperienced.

I'll still play my weaker lists against marine players, just so I can learn how to play properly and have a bit of fun for both of us haha

Dark Reapers haven't been overpowered ever since Index Xenos Ynnari. The only thing making them decent was double shoot from a psychic power and the magic box ITC rules.

Try actually using Reapers in a normal game of 9th and see how actually strong they are.

And making a statement that the only good stuff for Marines is FW and how they aren't a top 3 army would hold more weight if Marine armies were not consistently placing highly and winning tournaments with Codex and Indomitus units.

Hyperbole goes both ways and the insane lengths some Marine players will go to try and twist themselves in a knot to excuse imbalance is actually where a lot of resentment towards the army comes from. By comparison, no Eldar player ever said Ynnari Dark Reapers were fair or balanced. Everyone acknowledged they were busted.

That's the key difference between this period of Marine dominance and other periods of dominance. The refusal of some players to admit some stuff might be skewed a little.

Quasistellar wrote:
It's not even necessarily that FW units are "pay to win . . . garbage". It's that GW, when they wrote the codex/supplements, just straight up didn't acknowledge that there were broken interactions with the new GAMES WORKSHOP (note--not Forgeworld) stratagems and relics.

The Leviathan was simply a good, top tier unit before codex 2.0 + iron hands supplement + psychic awakening. It's those supplements that turned it into a broken unit. Same with the Chaplain Dreadnought. I happen to own both of these, by the way, since I started building Iron Hands with a dreadnought themed army in mind years before the supplement was even known to exist. I have one of every dreadnought in that army, except the MKIV Ironclad, which I missed out on :(.

The main issue I see is that GW is giving out a TON of power via stratagems, relics, and warlord traits, and not just incorporating that power into datasheets where it can be more easily pointed.

Take the "chief apothecary", for instance. That should be a datasheet entry in the codex with an appropriate cost (and it sounds like GW is doing just that, thankfully).

I don't terribly mind "combo hammer", as it adds a layer of depth to the gameplay beyond simply maneuvering and rolling dice to wipe your opponent off the board. I do have a problem with certain stratagems VASTLY changing the value of certain units in certain factions. Another example is Salamanders and flamer Aggressors. The strat combos for that unit in Salamanders makes their offensive output insane vs their standard expected output. How can you properly point balance Aggressors so that they can be used in other factions? It was the same thing with Alaitoc flyers and ynnari shining spears etc, etc.

They need to tone down the stratagems and give the power back to the datasheets in ALL factions.

You know what? I agree with this. Strats are an easy way to break things, and while I think they are useful in the end they are extremely easy to break and cause huge fluctuations in unit power. The flame Aggressor example is a good one, and i have a Salamanders army with 6 flame Aggressors in it. Its cool, but its also a bit op, but only when you also use the count as stationary strat so you are basically using 24 flamers there. Its oppressive without the stationary strat, but down right stupid with. Maybe they will get rid of the stationary strat in the new codex, who knows, but atm strats can make or break a unit.

Azuza001 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Azuza001 wrote:
Eradicators are not broken, they are SEVERELY undercosted. I have run mine only once, in a ravenguard army. I held them in deep strike thanks to ravenguard strat. I popped them up t2 at 13" from a repulsor. I dropped it to 1w. It was a bit nuts.

Personally I think they should be 60 pts a model with their current loadout and rules. They are too good at their job otherwise.

As for intercessors, my local group and I have come to the conclusion that the auto bolt rifle is the answer to their job. 3 squads putting out 45 bolter shots a turn? Yeah that will work just fine........

Finally, on the bahsee thing, I have been running banshees almost all of 8th. I love my girls, they are fast, useful harrassment units. But I would never have said they were good at killing stuff. Anyone who thinks that needs to stop drinking the Kool aid. I am excited for the power sword update because "gasp" they will be able to kill stuff again! But atm.... thats a weak argument lol.

So yeah, my local meta is fine. I am still games happening here, at least 1 a week. Marines are seen as a tough army to face but not unbeatable. Personally i think DG and Imperial Guard are tougher enemies to take on depending on who is running them. But can marines be overwhelming? Yes. The core changes to rerolls is going to be huge and I can't wait for it. Game I played last week (my black legion vs new imperial fist army, I won thanks to my lord of skulls) I was very nervous going in because he had a repulsor executioner and leviathan dread and contemptor relic dread.... and a smash captain as chapter master and relic to make him a lieutenant as well. Thats a ton of anti tank rerolls that just makes those units so freaking good.

Question...how does one use a "Harrassment unit" in a game of 9th edition?

The only units I would class as such in my own gameplay would be ultra-cheap chaff infantry units and characters, in which the 'harrassment' generally takes the form of forcing an opponent to target them to prevent them from scoring, or move around them, preventing expensive units from going where they want to go.

Banshees are neither durable nor inexpensive, nor do they deep strike. They are mobile, but not compared to vypers or windriders. They are less durable for the points vs shooting than almost anything else in the army. What do you use them for that you would call "useful harrassment"?

So i normally run 3 squads of 5 in my games. 2 of them start on the board, with 1 getting quicken so they typically run across the table t1 and charge into something. The other is in position to help t2.

I deep strike a squad of 5 with the webway strat, and I play Beil Tan. This gives me access to court of the young king for +2 to charge. Also if i position stuff correctly I should have a warlock in range to give them ghost walk (additonal + to charge) so they get into cc from deep strike pretty easily.

I try to go on flanks, hitting a side seems safer than going up the middle. But my true goal is to hit a backfield unit that doesn't want to be in cc. Thunderfire cannon tech priests, a predator annihilatior, a dev squad, hellblasters, i hit whatever i can but aim for stuff that shutting down their shooting for 1 turn will help keep the rest of the army alive. Finally by blitzing on a flank like this I find that I can stall my opponents advance to mid board objectives, helping me "hold more" for a turn or 2 is vital.

I understand they are too expensive at this point for what I am using them for. My beil tan army went up 250 pts with this edition change (vs my white scar army going up 4....... thanks gw....) and it has taken a lot of bite from my list, but I am still able to put up a fight and win if I play smart. But I have to make sure everything has a job it can actually accomplish now, and banshees are my t1 / t2 harrassment unit that also can help grab engage on all fronts t1 and vs t3 targets (hi guard/ bye guard) are quite useful.

OK. That's how I'd use them as well, it's just that there's vastly better units in the Eldar arsenal for doing all those jobs that you're using the banshees for.

Scorpions deep strike for free, and with the scorpion's claw and Mandiblaster exarch trait deal more damage to almost everything on the charge. And Shining Spears are much tougher, much more damaging, and have exactly the same T1 threat range as a unit to sprint across the board and tie things up with 1 move, and more if you quicken them (24"+2d6" without fly vs 32" with fly)

Banshees have a job in the abstract, but can't really do any job better than their in-codex competitors. And S4 power swords doesn't fix that, just makes it slightly less embarrassing. Now the 110pts of shining spears just does twice as much damage as the 110pts of banshees instead of 4x against that predator you charged! They do still take 3x the firepower to remove, womp womp.

I agree there are other options that can do the same thing, shining spears being one of them. I dont care for scorpions, they may hit better but banshees being -1 to hit in cc can actually help keep them alive longer and i typically see the girls as extra wounds to keep the exarch alive.

But any way you cut it, aspect warriors as a whole are not that good anymore. :(

Azuza001 wrote:
I agree there are other options that can do the same thing, shining spears being one of them. I dont care for scorpions, they may hit better but banshees being -1 to hit in cc can actually help keep them alive longer and i typically see the girls as extra wounds to keep the exarch alive.

But any way you cut it, aspect warriors as a whole are not that good anymore. :(

Eh. -1 to hit is pretty much balanced out by +1sv for most competitors. Banshees are a wash durability-wise, and pay for their ability to move across the board and the AP-3 on their melee attacks. but in general in 9th deep strike is a more useful ability, because of the flexibility you have where you can either send a scorpion squad into melee, or you can drop them somewhere out of LOS and start performing an action.

regardless, we're comparing bad unit A with bad unit B.