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.

 Jidmah wrote:
^most interesting post in this thread so far

Thank you! High praise, because there's a lot of posts in this thread. Too bad the interesting tangent is off topic.

So... where were we.

Uh...

SM sux?

 aphyon wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:


Sounds like Cawl and Primaris to a 'T'.

Another good example is Rei from disney starwars-no training, but somehow knows all the things it took jedi masters years or decades to master and she is better at it than anybody else. with rei around you don't even need a rebel alliance. but yeah basically Cawl in 40K, especially when they, with very thin back story, first introduced him, and even with the new retconned lore it is still a hard push to make it workable in universe.

What did Cawl retcon?

Tyranids eating planets. Now they can be cawl fixed in a 100-150 years.

So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?

Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?

 Denegaar wrote:
So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?

Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?

Multiwound models might as well not even have it. For single wound it's fine though.

 Denegaar wrote:
So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?

Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?

Multiwound: Just as non-existant as before. Just different reason.

Single wound: Maybe gives extra 4-5 warriors back for 20 strong blop. Assuming you don't get wiped out in one go(which is still possible seeing how 40k lethality goes up).

So far looks more of codex: c'tan than codex: necron

 Denegaar wrote:
So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?

Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?

Good for warriors and immortals, bad for the things with more wounds like the various flavors of destroyers and lychguard. I guess the latter are probably going to spend another edition in the dumpster.

 Denegaar wrote:
So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?

Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?

We still don't have the Codex in hand with final point costs, special rules and further interactions with RP, do we?

But you have some info!

I'm not expert on Necrons but it seems that you now have more opportunities to use your "signature rule" than before. A friend of mine that plays Necrons says that in 8th is not something that you use much.

For me, is what I want from Xenos books, having more ways to use our cool rules, we are aliens after all.

 Denegaar wrote:
But you have some info!

I'm not expert on Necrons but it seems that you now have more opportunities to use your "signature rule" than before. A friend of mine that plays Necrons says that in 8th is not something that you use much.

For me, is what I want from Xenos books, having more ways to use our cool rules, we are aliens after all.

you use it virtually never for multi wound(oh sorry. You get to use it more often. You just don't BENEFIT from it any more). For single wound still not much. Opponent starts with some small weak firepower that drops couple, then drops big unit that simply wipes out entire unit at once. 40k is so deadly that plenty of units will drop 10 immortals in one go. 20 warriors might get 4-5 warriors from it if you get lucky and then whole unit just dissapears.

It's basically worse than 5+++ unless you are 1W AND face tons of dam2 weapons. If DG will keep the 5+++ they get lot more mileage out of that with 2W than necrons get out of RP.

Still fairly trivial to negate.

I think it's too early to say for sure as obviously there are things we dunno for sure, over all the impression I get is it's definatly a buff for 'crons. the command protocals suggests that GW right now is in an "Experimental phase" and is trying to feel out how to make the "non soup bonuses" work best. I feel the necron command protocals might be a bit fiddly but it's the type of thing I can see the right type of player REALLY enjoying and using to suprisingly good effect. (I can also see a lot of people forgetting to use them)

one thing I wanna notes is that while we know Marines HAVE doctrines we have no idea what's happening on that front. Anyone remember when Doctrines where the Ultramarines chapter trait back in 7th edition? no you proably don't because they kinda sucked. you could activate each type of doctrine ONCE on one of your turns. it was potentially potent but it wasn't exactly a super OP game winner.

TBF, 7th had a lot, of effects that were not just potent but outright broken. Comparing an technically immensively potent ability within an edition that was by all acounts full of broken gak (OP and UP) will make it look favourably especially against the really OP stuff.....

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 Denegaar wrote:
So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?

Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?

Good for warriors and immortals, bad for the things with more wounds like the various flavors of destroyers and lychguard. I guess the latter are probably going to spend another edition in the dumpster.

+1A for lychguard at the very least. It is kinda sad just HOW bad immortals are as compared to basic assault terminators, so at least A3 helps a tiny bit.

it does kind of boggle the mind that warscythes remain such a sad weapon.

BrianDavion wrote:

one thing I wanna notes is that while we know Marines HAVE doctrines we have no idea what's happening on that front. Anyone remember when Doctrines where the Ultramarines chapter trait back in 7th edition? no you proably don't because they kinda sucked. you could activate each type of doctrine ONCE on one of your turns. it was potentially potent but it wasn't exactly a super OP game winner.

UM definitely got to use their doctrines more than once, iirc I was able to get doctrine rerolls for the whole game.

 Denegaar wrote:
So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?

Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?

I haven't been a Necron player, but I'm painting up my Indomitus and pile of shame stuff like many others I imagine. I think the rule is very interesting...

So, with the default, statistically for every 3 guys you lose, you get one back provided the squad has not been wiped out. If you can get a +1 to that roll, now for every two you lose you get one back.

However the extra dice rolls needed to bring multi wound models means that in practice those units are much more vulnerable to being whittled down by multiple anti infantry units, and also being wiped out before they have a chance to roll by harder hitting stuff. Without getting a +1 to their roll, a 3 man squad of 3W things might as well not even have the ability. With people expecting marines, the 2W units will be especially vulnerable.

That doesn't mean it is useless on multi wound units though:

-Personally I was planning on going Nephrek for the 6" advance through terrain and now see they have an army wide 6++ on top of that. Both abilities make it significantly harder to wipe out those smaller multi wound units.

-The max size units of these multi wound types will usually be overkill for what you want them to do and therefore something of a waste, but maybe there is a sweet spot in between where say 4 of the 3W models makes the most sense to put on the field.

-Those 2W guys that are vulnerable to being whittled down (1 in 9 chance to make the RP roll) do get a lot tougher with some investment. Make them Nephrek and now in many situations where just one of them would have died that invuln combined with the RP gives them about 28% chance to survive, almost as good as a 1W guy from a different dynasty. Give them the +1 RP buff and now its 42%. And thats with just one of them dying, your chances of getting at least one guy back increases with each squad member killed. It seems significant to me.

-Wait and see stuff. A strategem that lets you resurrect one guy automatically or roll even if the whole unit gets wiped out seem like possibilities. AFAIK the whole book has not been leaked yet.

Just a few thoughts on it, I'm certainly no Necron expert.

Note that the fact that RP for multi-wounds models is not very good when you lose a single model, it gets much better when you lose multiple models. For 2 wound model your recover rate is:

1 Model = 11% for 1 Model (vs 33% for 1 Wound Models)
2 Models = 30% for 1 Model, 1% for 2 Models (vs 55/11% for 1 Wound Models)
3 Models = 65% for 1 Model, 10% for 2 Models (vs 70/26/4% for 1 Wound Models)
4 Models = 80% for 1 Model, 25% for 2 Models, 2% for 3 Models (vs 80/41/11% for 1 Wound Models)

Sure that isn't as good as for 1 Wound Models, but 2 wound models are harder to kill and indications are they will also have Living Metal to increase overall durability.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Spoiler:

 CommanderWalrus wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 CommanderWalrus wrote:

We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things.

Is it worth mentioning that we could easily have all the rules if GW didn't insist on forcing people to pay through the nose for them?

Pretty much every other wargame I'm aware of has free, downloadable rules. If GW went that route, they could release the rules for every faction right at the start of each edition - because they wouldn't have to be (re)printing entire codices for each faction.

Furthermore, it would allow GW to still do gradual model releases, without even having to worry about being beaten to the post by 3rd party manufacturers - as they could simply add new dataslates to the online rules (which is a lot trickier when you're expecting people to purchase physical rulebooks).

I mean, they could still sell some rulebooks for those who want all the extra fluff (or who just prefer physical rules), but it wouldn't matter as much if different factions got their physical books later in the edition.


I know it's not exactly what you were talking about. However, when someone defends GW by saying 'we don't know all the rules yet', it seems reasonable to ask 'well whose fault is that?'.

It is a good point, and I do think it's completely ridiculous exactly how many books you need, a number that increases constantly. It could be so much easier if GW was willing to release rules a little faster and maybe for a little cheaper, i agree.
It is worth noting that I'm not exactly defending GW, so kuch as just trying to caution fellow fans to not speak too soon.

"WHY WON'T THEY GIVE ME FREE STUUUUF!"
isn't a good point. we've GOT the rules right now, 8th and 9th are cross compatable. most of the complaints about rules are people jumping to the gun about upcoming products, ones they have incomplete info about.

If we have all the rules, then what are we waiting for?

in this case the codices. 99% of the complaining has been about marines, when there's a new marine codex coming up in likely less then a month (I suspect the codex will be first week of October) waiting until we have a bit more info for that does seem wise. but too many people are assuming it'll be a straight buff of the last codex.

Oh! So if we have the codecies, and we see previews that look out of balance with other codecies (like 2w marines) can we complain about the disparity between the previewed marines and the other codexes that we're currently playing with? There might be some nerfs to marines in the marine codex, but we're plainly getting 2w marines and at the same time using 1w orks, aspect warriors and genestealers. Because we have all the rules, right?

We have enough rules to play. And certainly enough to play an engaging game versus most opponents. For some reason the more tournaments feature the fewer marines we see. Right now in the upside-down of Australia a podcaster is taking Nid hordes to a tournament. He beat 9 Eradicator Salamanders 83 to 58. Clearly a skew, but then if 9 Eradicators can't handle a simple skew and the horde can still place top tables then maybe the game doesn't work as the forum dictates. Maybe it is that he got first turn. We literally don't know.

So, why should you wait to draw conclusions? Because it isn't the same god damn dog and pony show.

When is the last time GW screwed something up with an FAQ and fixed it the same day?
When is the last time GW published a tournament-level mission set and didn't have competing mission sets like like Eternal & Maelstrom?
When is the last time you saw a fundamental rule dynamic like CORE that wasn't in the BRB? Even stratagems were there.

We don't know what will happen with the new book. We don't know how they'll handle new secondaries. Normally we'd have the first codexes out by now, but we don't. There are literally fundamental changes in those codexes.

You and I know nothing, but pretending to know something without all the information is just god damn intellectually dishonest now, isn't it? People that piss all over people who say, "just wait until we have all the info" just makes them donkey-caves.

L
M
A
O

“Wait and see instead of knee jerking about Marines being OP”, declares same poster who made a thread demanding everyone BOYCOTT the genestealer cult dex weeks before release, because he just knew that handflamers and the Kelermorph would be too powerful and meta warping.



Do you.... do you realise how transparent you are to literally every neutral poster who doesn’t share your particular Marine bias? You’re like a parody of yourself at this point. Please stop weighing in on these threads you are WAY too biased to contribute anything even resembling an honest opinion here.

 Nitro Zeus wrote:

L
M
A
O

“Wait and see instead of knee jerking about Marines being OP”, declares same poster who made a thread demanding everyone BOYCOTT the genestealer cult dex weeks before release, because he just knew that handflamers and the Kelermorph would be too powerful and meta warping.

Do you.... do you realise how transparent you are to literally every neutral poster who doesn’t share your particular Marine bias? You’re like a parody of yourself at this point. Please stop weighing in on these threads you are WAY too biased to contribute anything even resembling an honest opinion here.

I'm so tired of your ham-fisted posts. Yes, I went over the top on GSC. And guess what I did? I listened to other people, debated, and appreciated their point of view and then changed mine. I can't say the same for almost any of you.

I can admit mistakes. Can you?

And neutral? GTFO of here with your bs.

 alextroy wrote:
Note that the fact that RP for multi-wounds models is not very good when you lose a single model, it gets much better when you lose multiple models. For 2 wound model your recover rate is:

1 Model = 11% for 1 Model (vs 33% for 1 Wound Models)
2 Models = 30% for 1 Model, 1% for 2 Models (vs 55/11% for 1 Wound Models)
3 Models = 65% for 1 Model, 10% for 2 Models (vs 70/26/4% for 1 Wound Models)
4 Models = 80% for 1 Model, 25% for 2 Models, 2% for 3 Models (vs 80/41/11% for 1 Wound Models)

Sure that isn't as good as for 1 Wound Models, but 2 wound models are harder to kill and indications are they will also have Living Metal to increase overall durability.

Thats true but in order to see those higher returns you've got to lose more than one and less than all of your squad. Not much wiggle room there particularly in a squad of 3.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Nitro Zeus wrote:

L
M
A
O

“Wait and see instead of knee jerking about Marines being OP”, declares same poster who made a thread demanding everyone BOYCOTT the genestealer cult dex weeks before release, because he just knew that handflamers and the Kelermorph would be too powerful and meta warping.

Do you.... do you realise how transparent you are to literally every neutral poster who doesn’t share your particular Marine bias? You’re like a parody of yourself at this point. Please stop weighing in on these threads you are WAY too biased to contribute anything even resembling an honest opinion here.

I'm so tired of your ham-fisted posts. Yes, I went over the top on GSC. And guess what I did? I listened to other people, debated, and appreciated their point of view and then changed mine. I can't say the same for almost any of you.

I can admit mistakes. Can you?

And neutral? GTFO of here with your bs.

The pattern seems to be pro-Astartes and not anti-alarmist.

^ exactly. I’m all for “wait and see”. It’s funny that certain posters are also suddenly of the same mindset when it’s the army they CONSTANTLY downplay in question, but yet will literally ask for boycotts weeks before other’s dexes are even released over rules they couldn’t even recall correctly in their justification for it. It’s called hypocrisy, but I don’t think those people even have the self-awareness to grasp that as a possibility.



And Yes Daedulus. I can admit my mistakes and have done so many times in the past. However, can YOU? I read that entire thread, and at no point did you admit any mistake concerning kneejerk statements other than “I probably shouldn’t have framed this so aggressively”. Three months after GSC came out and had mild success instead of dominance (and for nearly none of the reasons you were whining about), you were STILL holding firm to your stance that they are the most busted army in the game and we just need more time to see that (and I can link to the quote if you need me to), so please don’t act like you recanted on your initial knee jerking in the slightest slightest - merely your ridiculously over the top delivery of it. Insectum7 wasn’t asking for boycotts, so what exactly distinguishes his early “kneejerking” from yours? His was far more moderate than yours, why does he have to wait and see but you do not? Could it be *gasp* your overwhelmingly pro-Space Marine bias that yet another neutral poster just pointed out? There’s nothing ham-fisted about my posts, there’s a different reason you’re sick of my honesty, and I think maybe it’s time to take some time for self reflection here.

 Slowroll wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Note that the fact that RP for multi-wounds models is not very good when you lose a single model, it gets much better when you lose multiple models. For 2 wound model your recover rate is:

1 Model = 11% for 1 Model (vs 33% for 1 Wound Models)
2 Models = 30% for 1 Model, 1% for 2 Models (vs 55/11% for 1 Wound Models)
3 Models = 65% for 1 Model, 10% for 2 Models (vs 70/26/4% for 1 Wound Models)
4 Models = 80% for 1 Model, 25% for 2 Models, 2% for 3 Models (vs 80/41/11% for 1 Wound Models)

Sure that isn't as good as for 1 Wound Models, but 2 wound models are harder to kill and indications are they will also have Living Metal to increase overall durability.

Thats true but in order to see those higher returns you've got to lose more than one and less than all of your squad. Not much wiggle room there particularly in a squad of 3.

Most 2W models are either min size 5 or going to be taken in larger squads than 3. You really don't see the squad of 3 except with the 3W+ units.

They could have easily made it so a multi-wound model can return with less than full wounds. I was actually pretty surprised they did not way; make it so RP rolls heal wounds, and over healing brings back models with however many left. That is how it works in AoS.

Pretty sure GW's not going to spend a year updating, revamping, and retooling any non-Marine faction, CSM included. Pretty sure that should indicate all you need to know about how balance will play out in the game. Happy to be wrong.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
They could have easily made it so a multi-wound model can return with less than full wounds. I was actually pretty surprised they did not way; make it so RP rolls heal wounds, and over healing brings back models with however many left. That is how it works in AoS.

That would be the logical way to do it.

Of course, look who's writing the rules...

 alextroy wrote:
Note that the fact that RP for multi-wounds models is not very good when you lose a single model, it gets much better when you lose multiple models. For 2 wound model your recover rate is:

1 Model = 11% for 1 Model (vs 33% for 1 Wound Models)
2 Models = 30% for 1 Model, 1% for 2 Models (vs 55/11% for 1 Wound Models)
3 Models = 65% for 1 Model, 10% for 2 Models (vs 70/26/4% for 1 Wound Models)
4 Models = 80% for 1 Model, 25% for 2 Models, 2% for 3 Models (vs 80/41/11% for 1 Wound Models)

Sure that isn't as good as for 1 Wound Models, but 2 wound models are harder to kill and indications are they will also have Living Metal to increase overall durability.

Living Metal only works on models that don't die. You think Lychguard and Praetorians are at all durable?

T5 W2 Sv 3+ is better than warriors in every way. So they are more durable than warriors.

Lychguard with shields are durable right now with Nihilakh because you can get them up to a 2++ against shooting after your turn.

I sincerely doubt any 2++ gak will make it into the codex, and would be shocked to even see them have a conditional 3++. We'll see though.

 Denegaar wrote:
So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?

Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?

Universally better than before, even on multiwound units.

Oh sure, on paper the old rule was better for those types of units. But in actual practice, in the real world in real games, you never made ANY RP rolls for units like Destroyers and this is what comparisons and stats of the two miss out on. It's pointless to posit that old RP would have let you resurrect one more Destroyer when the sad reality is you were never rolling for it in the first place.

 Bosskelot wrote:

 Denegaar wrote:
So the Necron players that were waiting and now they are seeing, what do you think about new RPs and new info about your units?

Can we Xenos have faith that we'll have a thought Codex?

Universally better than before, even on multiwound units.

Oh sure, on paper the old rule was better for those types of units. But in actual practice, in the real world in real games, you never made ANY RP rolls for units like Destroyers and this is what comparisons and stats of the two miss out on. It's pointless to posit that old RP would have let you resurrect one more Destroyer when the sad reality is you were never rolling for it in the first place.

And in 9e you get to roll but you don't bring multiwound models.

It's non-existant rule for multi wound, for 20 warrior blop you get maybe 4-5 back and then you die and no RP.

Either way if you pay like 2 pts for warrior it's more of nerf by tax than boon.