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.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

stratigo wrote:
eradicators are too new for them to have a huge adjustment yet. Remember, this book's rules were fully written a while ago, long before eradicators first came out

That would make more sense if the rules for eradicaters weren't in the book in question. They're an odd blemish on what otherwise seems to be a fairly well thought out codex.

As long as they fix resurrecting ATVs I'm on the same page.

My two cents

It's a lot to take in but on first viewing I think they did a pretty good job with Marines and that should be the level they aim at for all factions.

Necrons in comparison? Well...... The book is just too restrictive and too specialised. It's not a clusterfeth, but it's not great and you shouldn't listen to anyone telling you it is

stratigo wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
ITS precisely why they are being talked about !!!

Most of the rest seems fair - this just feths it up - they change the power level of the Army massively - you know what the actual thread is about!???

For general talk about the various changes there is a whole other thread - right

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/792600.page

It's a discussion of marines power level overall, Eradicators are 1 unit in the codex, they might be what pushes them up a notch but consider the discussion without them for a moment.

That's not how things work. Like to ignore eradicators you have to start to consider alternative AT that you really don't need in an army that has eradicators. Eradicators have you covered, so as a marine player, you have your AT options set and should be thinking mostly about option that cover other avenues of play, and not other AT options you don't need.

Yes that's great, what about their psychic phase, board presence, anti infantry, ranged capacity, melee capacity, stratagem options, ability to play missions. Or shall we spend another 3 months complaining about eradicators like they're single handedly the only unit in the book?

The thread is "space marines power level with new codex" not how many times can people complain (rightly or otherwise) about eradicators.

Dudeface wrote:

stratigo wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
ITS precisely why they are being talked about !!!

Most of the rest seems fair - this just feths it up - they change the power level of the Army massively - you know what the actual thread is about!???

For general talk about the various changes there is a whole other thread - right

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/792600.page

It's a discussion of marines power level overall, Eradicators are 1 unit in the codex, they might be what pushes them up a notch but consider the discussion without them for a moment.

That's not how things work. Like to ignore eradicators you have to start to consider alternative AT that you really don't need in an army that has eradicators. Eradicators have you covered, so as a marine player, you have your AT options set and should be thinking mostly about option that cover other avenues of play, and not other AT options you don't need.

Yes that's great, what about their psychic phase, board presence, anti infantry, ranged capacity, melee capacity, stratagem options, ability to play missions. Or shall we spend another 3 months complaining about eradicators like they're single handedly the only unit in the book?

The thread is "space marines power level with new codex" not how many times can people complain (rightly or otherwise) about eradicators.

So, do YOU have any opinions then? Or are you gonna spend the next 3 months complaining about complaining? Because I can guarantee to you that grousing about how people don't like eradicators is only gonna inspire people to reply to your own complaints. That's how forums work.

So, you want to talk about something else? Well, go on. Say something.

stratigo wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

stratigo wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
ITS precisely why they are being talked about !!!

Most of the rest seems fair - this just feths it up - they change the power level of the Army massively - you know what the actual thread is about!???

For general talk about the various changes there is a whole other thread - right

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/792600.page

It's a discussion of marines power level overall, Eradicators are 1 unit in the codex, they might be what pushes them up a notch but consider the discussion without them for a moment.

That's not how things work. Like to ignore eradicators you have to start to consider alternative AT that you really don't need in an army that has eradicators. Eradicators have you covered, so as a marine player, you have your AT options set and should be thinking mostly about option that cover other avenues of play, and not other AT options you don't need.

Yes that's great, what about their psychic phase, board presence, anti infantry, ranged capacity, melee capacity, stratagem options, ability to play missions. Or shall we spend another 3 months complaining about eradicators like they're single handedly the only unit in the book?

The thread is "space marines power level with new codex" not how many times can people complain (rightly or otherwise) about eradicators.

So, do YOU have any opinions then? Or are you gonna spend the next 3 months complaining about complaining? Because I can guarantee to you that grousing about how people don't like eradicators is only gonna inspire people to reply to your own complaints. That's how forums work.

So, you want to talk about something else? Well, go on. Say something.

I did, a full page ago:

Dudeface wrote:
Eradicators aside, yes the marine books appears to be toned down enough that it's a fair prospect to face all sorts of lists without them having any really huge advantage.

They seem like as a whole they're maybe a slight bump up from crons but I feel crons will mature to be less generalist and once they funnel down into a specialism they'll be better at it than marines.

All my uneducated opinion on the mostly complete info we have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
A full new codex and most of this is talking about 1 unit... yeah ignoring this topic it seems, we don't need another 20pg topic on 1 unit.

This.

So how do you respond to dreadnaughts having a 50%,33% or 25% damage reduction ability making them probably one of the most viable Vehicals yet in 9th.

Chief apocothory got buffed.
Okay the idiocy of agressors got nerfed finally but they still look like an A+ codex.

The biggest issue with Marines is they are designed at a codex level to gice away 0 max points for kill secondarys.

Ice_can wrote:
So how do you respond to dreadnaughts having a 50%,33% or 25% damage reduction ability making them probably one of the most viable Vehicals yet in 9th.

Chief apocothory got buffed.
Okay the idiocy of agressors got nerfed finally but they still look like an A+ codex.

The biggest issue with Marines is they are designed at a codex level to gice away 0 max points for kill secondarys.

Depends on the points. FW Dreads better go up in points.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
So how do you respond to dreadnaughts having a 50%,33% or 25% damage reduction ability making them probably one of the most viable Vehicals yet in 9th.

Chief apocothory got buffed.
Okay the idiocy of agressors got nerfed finally but they still look like an A+ codex.

The biggest issue with Marines is they are designed at a codex level to gice away 0 max points for kill secondarys.

Depends on the points. FW Dreads better go up in points.

Well I am just happy that I can add Ironclad Dreadnought for Flesh Tearers (and few other things). And any buffs dreadnought got translates to BA specific dreadnoughts getting few too (when supplement drops, eventually).

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
So how do you respond to dreadnaughts having a 50%,33% or 25% damage reduction ability making them probably one of the most viable Vehicals yet in 9th.

Chief apocothory got buffed.
Okay the idiocy of agressors got nerfed finally but they still look like an A+ codex.

The biggest issue with Marines is they are designed at a codex level to gice away 0 max points for kill secondarys.

Depends on the points. FW Dreads better go up in points.

Let's see if FW dreads even get the rule

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
ITS precisely why they are being talked about !!!

Most of the rest seems fair - this just feths it up - they change the power level of the Army massively - you know what the actual thread is about!???

For general talk about the various changes there is a whole other thread - right

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/792600.page

It's a discussion of marines power level overall, Eradicators are 1 unit in the codex, they might be what pushes them up a notch but consider the discussion without them for a moment.

That makes no sense - they are the most powerful unit but in a discussion about the power of the dex we should ignore them - ok.....

Having watched Titans game and Tactics game, salamanders remain drastically powerful. Their aggressors barely notice the nerf and trounce hordes easy, but now come back almost as reliably as necrons do XD XD.

I think this book more winnows out the chaff of marine players. You can't just toss marines on a table with a half baked list and just win cause you are playing marines. But if you are pushing for the most competitive a list you can, marines still get you to the very top of all the armies in the game.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

stratigo wrote:
eradicators are too new for them to have a huge adjustment yet. Remember, this book's rules were fully written a while ago, long before eradicators first came out

That would make more sense if the rules for eradicaters weren't in the book in question. They're an odd blemish on what otherwise seems to be a fairly well thought out codex.

As long as they fix resurrecting ATVs I'm on the same page.

Remember when I told you they should have made those things vehicles instead of bikes?

Daedalus81 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
So how do you respond to dreadnaughts having a 50%,33% or 25% damage reduction ability making them probably one of the most viable Vehicals yet in 9th.

Chief apocothory got buffed.
Okay the idiocy of agressors got nerfed finally but they still look like an A+ codex.

The biggest issue with Marines is they are designed at a codex level to gice away 0 max points for kill secondarys.

Depends on the points. FW Dreads better go up in points.

They already did, except the relic Contemptor, which went down. They could probably use a bump though, for other reasons. I did the math on a double chainclaw contemptor hitting a various vehicle profiles now that the chainclaws got a 50% buff in damage against vehicles. It's basically like 7th when they had Armourbane again. I'm at work so I'll let you do the math. Just remember, if you take combi-bolters in the claws it's a 151 point unit. I think it's time to dust off my Dreadclaws....

Power of the dex is interesting. I have to see detailed points of things like vanguard vets to be sure, but I’d say it’s even overall. Bumped up the power of firstborn, which is good. They dumpstered all the primaris vehicles pretty hard, which annoys me. Lucky I resisted buying an Executioner (which was barely useful before), as its now garbo. All the new Gladiators and speeders seem... bad.

On the other hand. . . DREADNOUGHTS!!! Oh lawd my 9 iron hands dreads are going to be strong. I will happily trade every space marine tank away if it means dreadnoughts are good, lol.

Quasistellar wrote:
Power of the dex is interesting. I have to see detailed points of things like vanguard vets to be sure, but I’d say it’s even overall. Bumped up the power of firstborn, which is good. They dumpstered all the primaris vehicles pretty hard, which annoys me. Lucky I resisted buying an Executioner (which was barely useful before), as its now garbo. All the new Gladiators and speeders seem... bad.

On the other hand. . . DREADNOUGHTS!!! Oh lawd my 9 iron hands dreads are going to be strong. I will happily trade every space marine tank away if it means dreadnoughts are good, lol.

Just threw a 6 Dreadnought list (3 Ironclads and 3 Vens) together and can't wait to try it out.. eventually

One thing I haven't seen mentioned at all in these threads, but which I thought of immediately when I read the review (and I'm not sure if I'm right or not, cos I haven't seen the datasheet)...

But Contemptors went down to 9 wounds. So... doesn't that mean they not only get character protection in an iron hands list (potentially), but they also lose their degradation table, which is a significant buff? Right?

I have several points to consider as a marine player:

1.- It's a solid dex. It has good internal balance but yet some things stand out.
2.- I was expecting an eradicator tone down. Like the doubletap being once per game or something. Not happy with the current power of the unit, it would take a nerf full honestly. Just the doble tap.
3.- The nerf of the aggressors was ouchie. I imagined losing one but losing two abilities was impressive. At least their random weapons are blast now so they remain a horde clearing asset. I love the models too much as to stop using them. If the rules team deemed the aggressors double tap so overpowered...Why did eradicators keep it?
4.- My poor poor eliminators took another hit below the belt. I think they were in a decent position before the codex, but right now they are weak.
5.- I have scouts for sale. Really, they turned them unusable.
6.- I wonder if Shrike remains at the same point cost. If he does, he's way better than any Chapter Master I can build.
7.- Finally a good note, I can include a small assault marine unit, 5 men with two plasma pistols and fist on the sargent and give them some utility. Also, vanguard vets are scary now. The melta bomb strat gives these two units a nice bite against vehicles

4.- My poor poor eliminators took another hit below the belt. I think they were in a decent position before the codex, but right now they are weak.

Took a price hike for their trouble too. +2 points per model.


---
Also ATSNKF has changed. No longer a reroll, just 'ignore modifiers on combat attrition tests.' (-1 for half strength, for example).
Its a weird stealth change that may not matter other than the need to remind to people that you don't reroll that.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
ITS precisely why they are being talked about !!!

Most of the rest seems fair - this just feths it up - they change the power level of the Army massively - you know what the actual thread is about!???

For general talk about the various changes there is a whole other thread - right

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/792600.page

It's a discussion of marines power level overall, Eradicators are 1 unit in the codex, they might be what pushes them up a notch but consider the discussion without them for a moment.

That makes no sense - they are the most powerful unit but in a discussion about the power of the dex we should ignore them - ok.....

No they should be taken into consideration but it's not the place to complain about them. It's not codex eradicators, if you want to complain bout them being broken there's another thread for that and you can at least provide an opinion on the codex outside of 1 unit.

"This dex is so well written!... if you ignore the parts where it's totally imbalanced of course."

One stupidly, ridiculously overpowered unit is all it takes to push a dex to ridiculous levels. It's just because Space Marines went to having a dex full of them, to maybe having just a couple of them, that people are acting like this dex is some sort of a good achievement for balance. People didn't focus on Vespid's and Kroot when Riptide Wings were OP, people didn't focus on Warp Spiders and Wraith Guard when Wave Serpents were OP, so no, people aren't gonna sit around and ignore Eradicators and Blade Guard and appreciate how fair the rest of this dex is when there's units in it that at the end of the day are still gonna leave Space Marines with some stupidly OP bs.

There's no telling how long until GW fix this, anyone pretending otherwise is lying. Most recently, even just in "new GW" times, Ynnarri lasted for ages. Castellan lasted for ages. Space Marines 2.0 dominance lasted even longer than both AND IS STILL GOING NOW. It might be fixed, it (more likely) might not be, but there's zero reason to believe either option with any certainty at all, in fact patting GW on the back for what they've just released and ignoring the MASSIVE problems is more likely to just encourage them to leave it as is and keep the Primaris cash rolling in.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cynista wrote:
Necrons in comparison? Well...... The book is just too restrictive and too specialised. It's not a clusterfeth, but it's not great and you shouldn't listen to anyone telling you it is

And I certainly won't be believing people like yourself telling me it's not great before it's even been released, let alone playtested. It took Necron community like a year to work out how to best play their 8th ed dex, and it turned into a highly legitimate tournament alpha strike threat when they finally got there. You'll forgive me if I'm quite confident that you have no idea if it's great or not yet. Even the best players say they don't know yet and that theirs a whole heap to unpack and test.

Anyone who says Aggressors are an outright bad unit needs to go watch the Necrons v Salamanders game on TTTitans yesterday. 2 Aggressors managed to wipe out 6 Tomb Blades in one round of shooting. That's double the points of those two Aggressors and they did it easily.

The fact is, the double shoot mechanic was always unnecessary and meant that the unit would massively overkill or overperform vs it's intended targets (Hordes, generally) or it could basically one-shot stuff it had no business oneshotting. For an example of this, go and watch TTTactics Batrep of Marines vs Drukhari, where Salamander Aggressors shot twice and killed two, full-health Voidraven Bombers in one round of shooting. I struggle to think of other, non-Marine units, in the game that have that sort of efficiency. To not only make their points back in one go, but to DOUBLE their points back in one-go is just fething absurd and nothing else in the game in other armies is really capable of that.

Right now, Aggressors without any sort of buffs or auras are still capable of killing 2/3rd's of their points in Orks in a single round of shooting. That is still in the toppest tier of cost efficient attacks currently in 40k. I'm trying to think of Necron or Craftworld units that can do anything similar to that also without any buffs.

Until we see how they day 1 FAQ the existing Supplements, Salamanders Aggressors are still, in my opinion, oppressively strong. But even outside of that Chapter they're a solid unit and even that's restrained praise. I would happily take a unit like that in my CWE and my Necron armies, it is still the best anti-horde in the game. And of course with the new Codex you have a better Reanimation ability than Necrons get with Chief Apothecaries so you can boost their resilience up even further and bring them back to life.

And when it comes to the Necron dex, it's essentially an entirely new army. Even stuff that has been carried over namewise has changed. Like, I'm struggling to think of anything that hasn't been altered somehow aside from the Sautekh Warlord Trait. This essentially means that no-one has any idea how to play the army properly right now, but what is really interesting is that you can ask 5 different people for army list ideas and you'll get 5 completely different ones. Just in these early days that's a really promising sign and it even ripples out to things like Dynastic Choices which nobody can really decide which is the "best" one at the moment.

I think it also needs to be pointed out that both TTT's batreps yesterday were incredibly close; Tactics the Necrons won by about 4 points and the Titans one they lost by about 4. These were obviously very experimental lists being piloted by people who are still learning the book despite having playtested it over a year ago. Marines on the other hand are still basically figured out, even with a new Codex. It's still the same core army and is still operating under non-FAQ'd/Errata'd Supplement books. So even then, the fact that both of those Necron games were that close points to the potential of the book.

Exactly ^ And for what they trade off in damage they make up for with a bit of mobility now since they won't have to stand still to do their max damage output.

 Bosskelot wrote:

I think it also needs to be pointed out that both TTT's batreps yesterday were incredibly close; Tactics the Necrons won by about 4 points and the Titans one they lost by about 4. These were obviously very experimental lists being piloted by people who are still learning the book despite having playtested it over a year ago. Marines on the other hand are still basically figured out, even with a new Codex. It's still the same core army and is still operating under non-FAQ'd/Errata'd Supplement books. So even then, the fact that both of those Necron games were that close points to the potential of the book.

Please remember that writing battle reports is these guys jobs.

When you playtested the damn book, it is not in your interest to put out a one sided battle report, and there is no reason to believe the version posted was even the final version.
Dont take stuff like this at face value.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

I think it also needs to be pointed out that both TTT's batreps yesterday were incredibly close; Tactics the Necrons won by about 4 points and the Titans one they lost by about 4. These were obviously very experimental lists being piloted by people who are still learning the book despite having playtested it over a year ago. Marines on the other hand are still basically figured out, even with a new Codex. It's still the same core army and is still operating under non-FAQ'd/Errata'd Supplement books. So even then, the fact that both of those Necron games were that close points to the potential of the book.

Please remember that writing battle reports is these guys jobs.

When you playtested the damn book, it is not in your interest to put out a one sided battle report, and there is no reason to believe the version posted was even the final version.
Dont take stuff like this at face value.

Except they have one-sided battle reports all the time.

TTTitans also streams their Battle Reports live.

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
And I certainly won't be believing people like yourself telling me it's not great before it's even been released, let alone playtested. It took Necron community like a year to work out how to best play their 8th ed dex, and it turned into a highly legitimate tournament alpha strike threat when they finally got there. You'll forgive me if I'm quite confident that you have no idea if it's great or not yet. Even the best players say they don't know yet and that theirs a whole heap to unpack and test.

Possibly pedantic, but it partially took so long because on release everything was still too expensive. So the usual build only became viable in 2018's Chapter Approved. Doom Scythes went from 205 (I think?) to 150, DDAs went from 193 to 160. Admittedly I'm not quite sure in 2019 when it started showing up - and the number of people playing Necrons competitively had I suspect sunk low on the back of 18 months of being low tier.

Necrons are clearly improved, so its hard to take criticism of the codex that seriously. Exactly what's optimal will come out of playing and with an eye to secondary objectives.

As for Marines... yeah. Bladeguard remain just a bit good versus their other faction peers rather than explicitly meta warping (should be 40, 45 points), Eradicators meanwhile are ludicrous until every faction gets a 120-130 point unit that can comfortably delete way above its points cost versus a whole range of targets. At which point I'm not entirely sure what the meta looks like, probably the rather unpleasant world of turn 1 deep strike at the start of 8th.

Giving dreadnoughts quasi-serpent shields feels very Eldar 7th edition. It might be a good idea - and fluffwise sure I'd like to see dreadnoughts on the table - but why roll it out for the most busted faction in the game right now? The promise of "don't worry, everyone will get it" remains to be satisfied - I wouldn't put a lot of money on it.

 Bosskelot wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

I think it also needs to be pointed out that both TTT's batreps yesterday were incredibly close; Tactics the Necrons won by about 4 points and the Titans one they lost by about 4. These were obviously very experimental lists being piloted by people who are still learning the book despite having playtested it over a year ago. Marines on the other hand are still basically figured out, even with a new Codex. It's still the same core army and is still operating under non-FAQ'd/Errata'd Supplement books. So even then, the fact that both of those Necron games were that close points to the potential of the book.

Please remember that writing battle reports is these guys jobs.

When you playtested the damn book, it is not in your interest to put out a one sided battle report, and there is no reason to believe the version posted was even the final version.
Dont take stuff like this at face value.

Except they have one-sided battle reports all the time.

Feel free to link me to one for a new codex-off they've openly admitted playtesting for.

Remember in early 7th when most Eldar lists had at least 4 wave serpents or in late 7th when Scat bikes came out and were the most insanely broken thing 40k has ever seen to date, and some Eldar players claimed Eldar weren't OP if you ignored these units...
Deja vu.
Not up to date personally with the game at the moment as just getting back into it after a 3 year hiatus but the defence of these Eradicators is almost word for word the same defence used against Wave Serpents and later on - Scat Bikes.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

I think it also needs to be pointed out that both TTT's batreps yesterday were incredibly close; Tactics the Necrons won by about 4 points and the Titans one they lost by about 4. These were obviously very experimental lists being piloted by people who are still learning the book despite having playtested it over a year ago. Marines on the other hand are still basically figured out, even with a new Codex. It's still the same core army and is still operating under non-FAQ'd/Errata'd Supplement books. So even then, the fact that both of those Necron games were that close points to the potential of the book.

Please remember that writing battle reports is these guys jobs.

When you playtested the damn book, it is not in your interest to put out a one sided battle report, and there is no reason to believe the version posted was even the final version.
Dont take stuff like this at face value.

Except they have one-sided battle reports all the time.

Feel free to link me to one for a new codex-off they've openly admitted playtesting for.

Playtested over a year ago and haven't touched since.*

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:

I think it also needs to be pointed out that both TTT's batreps yesterday were incredibly close; Tactics the Necrons won by about 4 points and the Titans one they lost by about 4. These were obviously very experimental lists being piloted by people who are still learning the book despite having playtested it over a year ago. Marines on the other hand are still basically figured out, even with a new Codex. It's still the same core army and is still operating under non-FAQ'd/Errata'd Supplement books. So even then, the fact that both of those Necron games were that close points to the potential of the book.

Please remember that writing battle reports is these guys jobs.

When you playtested the damn book, it is not in your interest to put out a one sided battle report, and there is no reason to believe the version posted was even the final version.
Dont take stuff like this at face value.

Except they have one-sided battle reports all the time.

Feel free to link me to one for a new codex-off they've openly admitted playtesting for.

This is fun because you're deliberately narrowing the scope of any counter-argument far below your initial claim.

Claim: They won't show a lopsided battle report when they playtested the book because they'd make themselves look bad.

Counterargument: Sisters Vs. GSC post 9th CA was hilariously lopsided and they playtested both rulesets for 9th.

Your idea of a counterargument: Go through and find another case of two codexes being released on the same day that were both playtested by the same people and find an instance of the batrep being significantly lopsided.

This is like saying 'Ferrari makes the fastest cars in the world!' having someone else say "I don't think that's right?" And you coming back with 'Oh Yeah? Find me a track day on Tuesday in November 1994 in Edinburgh, England between 1 and 3 pm on a date that's a prime number where a Ferrari loses a race!'

It's a standard rhetorical technique. Demand an onerous amount or type of evidence that is largely meaningless, but when someone doesn't jump through the hoops, claim victory. Even if someone does, you can simply shift the rhetoric to a different even more onerous requirement of proof and claim victory still.

Poly Ranger wrote:
Remember in early 7th when most Eldar lists had at least 4 wave serpents or in late 7th when Scat bikes came out and were the most insanely broken thing 40k has ever seen to date, and some Eldar players claimed Eldar weren't OP if you ignored these units...
Deja vu.
Not up to date personally with the game at the moment as just getting back into it after a 3 year hiatus but the defence of these Eradicators is almost word for word the same defence used against Wave Serpents and later on - Scat Bikes.

True dat and just as pathetic. Also the same - wait for the Codex, wait for people to play with them wait for the FAQs, wait for Chaper approved, wait for the Rapture.....

We can but hope they sort our Eradicators 2 weeks after Dex.

The Dreadnought ignoring 1 damage could be quite powerful as well.