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.

 Castozor wrote:
how are we even going to let Eldar live up to their fluff on the tabletop when every marine has 2W?

Up all eldars weapons to D2. Also double their attacks/shots.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I think 4++ if they just move's a bad idea. go with 6++ 5++ if they move 4++ if they advance

That was my original proposal. Same as a Distort Field.

I'd suggest just to limit rules text and odd ball situation like artillary having a hard time hitting a stationary squad.

If the moved 5++, If they advance this is improved to a 4++.
It also avoids rangers having to pay points for a 6++ that will never benifit them.

Here I am hoping that GW had an idea as good as the posters here. The more you move the best your save would be great for Aeldari troops and bikes.

 Denegaar wrote:
Here I am hoping that GW had an idea as good as the posters here. The more you move the best your save would be great for Aeldari troops and bikes.

and i disagree, especially in conjection of it beeing a Invul which aeldari don't deserve. Invuls should be restricted to field generators, daemonic entities and stuff like that and not handed out like candy for moving slightly faster, especally considering that AA weapons and other weapons which didn't care for cover saves which once did a similar enough thing to represent that existed.

But then again GW decided it would also be a smart idea to remove cover saves so it's about the only other mechanic left to atleast get approximately close to such a mechanic...

I'm no fan of invulnerable saves for all is healthy for the game but right now with the systems we have what else do we do?

I'd also suggest that some things like forcefields etc wmshould actually be negative modifiers of the wound roll, but that tends to fall into issues with the 6's always succeed rule.

But if say flare shields Ionshields were a -1 to wound it would make them effectively as close to imune as GW will allow against the S5-7 spam combine it with a -1d rule for vehicals and it's going to take Heavy weapons against heavy armour.

Backfire wrote:

Basically, 2 wound Marines and Terminators are a response to vastly increased firepower of the armies. It is extremely easy to see that eventually firepower advantage will be restored, and then we need 3 wound Marines, and so on...

Slippery slope fallacy,

I'm fine with them having two wounds, but I also don't think it's going to matter that much for most of your average marines. I said this in the CSM thread and people lost it, but giving Chaos Marines two wounds is likely to actually make them WORSE. They're already over-costed to begin with, and when a CSM unit is killed, it is typically SIGNIFICANTLY, over-killed (being one of the few players left who actually uses real Marines in his Chaos army - I've seen this first hand). So now, CSM will be 20% more expensive, but will be just-killed, rather than over-killed.

In a meta where everyone was already geared up to kill 2W Intercessors, getting a second wound doesn't mean much unless you have something to leverage it. Plague Marines have DR, Primaris have a few ways to do damage reduction, etc. But regular CSM and Firstborn - they really don't. So that second would is not likely to make them THAT much more survivable, but it IS going to make them more expensive. Plus, marines get 2 wounds just in time for Heavy Intercessors to be a thing. A 3W unit in the troops slot with D2 guns ...

I just don't think this change is going to be the "thing" so many people think it's going to be.

Ice_can wrote:
I'm no fan of invulnerable saves for all is healthy for the game but right now with the systems we have what else do we do?

I'd also suggest that some things like forcefields etc wmshould actually be negative modifiers of the wound roll, but that tends to fall into issues with the 6's always succeed rule.

But if say flare shields Ionshields were a -1 to wound it would make them effectively as close to imune as GW will allow against the S5-7 spam combine it with a -1d rule for vehicals and it's going to take Heavy weapons against heavy armour.

2 things,
A: Gw should finally fething fix the bloody wound table a S3 weapon has nothing to do wounding anything with T6 full stop. Just as a S4 weapon has nothing lost wounding anything with S4+. Same for stuff like transhuman and votwl,they shouldn't exist, so long GW thinks only having one system for vehicles AND infantry via a T value so long this needs to happen regardless.

B: Reintroduce a propper cover mechanic, reintroduce jinking against ALL aircraft (real ones not just floaty tanks) , finally fill AA gaps for all factions, no seriously...

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Denegaar wrote:
Here I am hoping that GW had an idea as good as the posters here. The more you move the best your save would be great for Aeldari troops and bikes.

and i disagree, especially in conjection of it beeing a Invul which aeldari don't deserve. Invuls should be restricted to field generators, daemonic entities and stuff like that and not handed out like candy for moving slightly faster, especally considering that AA weapons and other weapons which didn't care for cover saves which once did a similar enough thing to represent that existed.

But then again GW decided it would also be a smart idea to remove cover saves so it's about the only other mechanic left to atleast get approximately close to such a mechanic...

It doesn't represent them shrugging off the hit, it represents them being hard to hit because of their speed. That's why it's keyed off of movement, like a Ravenwing Black Knight's jink save, so it shouldn't work in cc (like Marv catching Kevin in Sin City. "Let's see you jump around now, you little..."). The only other way to represent that is with minuses to hit, and even if gw hadn't capped those, I'm pretty sure everyone would rather deal with an invul than that again.

Tycho wrote:
I'm fine with them having two wounds, but I also don't think it's going to matter that much for most of your average marines. I said this in the CSM thread and people lost it, but giving Chaos Marines two wounds is likely to actually make them WORSE. They're already over-costed to begin with, and when a CSM unit is killed, it is typically SIGNIFICANTLY, over-killed (being one of the few players left who actually uses real Marines in his Chaos army - I've seen this first hand). So now, CSM will be 20% more expensive, but will be just-killed, rather than over-killed.

In a meta where everyone was already geared up to kill 2W Intercessors, getting a second wound doesn't mean much unless you have something to leverage it. Plague Marines have DR, Primaris have a few ways to do damage reduction, etc. But regular CSM and Firstborn - they really don't. So that second would is not likely to make them THAT much more survivable, but it IS going to make them more expensive. Plus, marines get 2 wounds just in time for Heavy Intercessors to be a thing. A 3W unit in the troops slot with D2 guns ...

I just don't think this change is going to be the "thing" so many people think it's going to be.

I found that immensly funny, allbeit i am a bit and was more optimistic in regards to the additional W then you were, but you fundamentally have a point a CSM isn't just not worth it because he only has one W but also because neither the offensive output is there, nor the morale durability, nor the Traits available to it.
GW thinks it's fine therefore if CSM are only 1 ppm cheaper then Tacs, but even then that wasn't a trade you'd be willing to make realistically, exception if you intended to run a RC spam list, cultists might be bad and comparatively terrible to similar low ppm models but they are still the better alternative then CSM

Not Online!!! wrote:

I found that immensly funny, allbeit i am a bit and was more optimistic in regards to the additional W then you were, but you fundamentally have a point a CSM isn't just not worth it because he only has one W but also because neither the offensive output is there, nor the morale durability, nor the Traits available to it.
GW thinks it's fine therefore if CSM are only 1 ppm cheaper then Tacs, but even then that wasn't a trade you'd be willing to make realistically, exception if you intended to run a RC spam list, cultists might be bad and comparatively terrible to similar low ppm models but they are still the better alternative then CSM

I think where CSM leg up on 2 wounds is in melee and terminators. As it stands they need a new book. If GW can't stomach finally giving CSM the treatment of most other armies on traits, well...

2W might not be a big game changer for basic csm, but it will be for cult marines, Chosen, warp talons, etc.. And 3W terminators will be nice.

 skchsan wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The terminator was good for 1 eddition. I think it was 4th.

False. GK paladin lists DOMINATED 4th AND 5th edition. And they didn't have special stats. They had special rules.

A paladin isn't really a terminator. They have always had more wounds than a standard terminator not to mention psychic powers. Their domination was more tied to wound allocation shenanigans in one of those edditions. The other was being part of an extremely power codex which literally every build type dominated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
2 wound primaris was fine. 2 wound migdet marines is an insult to the primaris.

Good.

I hope every person who exclusively plays primaris has their feelings hurt.

Sorry to tell you this, but as a person that has an exclusively primaris army; my feelings were not hurt by this at all. In fact, quite the opposite. I think it makes a lot of sense for all space marines to have two wounds. I have a hard time believing the Belisarian Furnace doubles the health of a primaris space marine. I take the view that primaris are more resilient than firstborn but not so much that it can really be demonstrating in the tabletop game. Kinda like how Phobos pattern armor is lighter than Tacticus pattern armor but not enough to not get a 3+ save.

They are noticably larger. By a scale comparions - likely have double the mass of a midget marine. Going just by the models anyways. There are several diagrams I have seen showing size difference and it is pretty apparent one is MUCH bigger. I don't however see any reason why the bigger and larger version would have more melee attacks. I would expect them to be stronger and tougher. Ether represented by +Str or +W or both. 2 wound mini marines is literally just a ploy to get rid of stocks of models they aren't going to produce anymore. Since GW has learned pretty well by now - rules sell models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:
blanket +4 inv with possible buffs on the entire army? considering the ap hight in the game, this would make eldar more resilient then marines.

Eldar should all be faster / have better invune saves/ and deal more damage/ for less cost than marines. I've heard this one before.

2W might not be a big game changer for basic csm, but it will be for cult marines, Chosen, warp talons, etc.. And 3W terminators will be nice.

Maybe? They're still going to be costed through the roof for that extra wound with not a lot of ways to leverage it. I think GW is really over-valuing that wound in a lot of cases.

Tycho wrote:

2W might not be a big game changer for basic csm, but it will be for cult marines, Chosen, warp talons, etc.. And 3W terminators will be nice.

Maybe? They're still going to be costed through the roof for that extra wound with not a lot of ways to leverage it. I think GW is really over-valuing that wound in a lot of cases.

Possibly, but as Daedalus said, we need a new codex more than anything. The old one is being held together with duct tape at this point.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Tycho wrote:

2W might not be a big game changer for basic csm, but it will be for cult marines, Chosen, warp talons, etc.. And 3W terminators will be nice.

Maybe? They're still going to be costed through the roof for that extra wound with not a lot of ways to leverage it. I think GW is really over-valuing that wound in a lot of cases.

Possibly, but as Daedalus said, we need a new codex more than anything. The old one is being held together with duct tape at this point.

Without a doubt, I believe that a Chaos Space Marine codex has to be released before the end of year. They're one of the biggest players and most popular factions.

 Xenomancers wrote:
2 wound mini marines is literally just a ploy to get rid of stocks of models they aren't going to produce anymore. Since GW has learned pretty well by now - rules sell models.

Damn, and I thought GW tries to sell me the army I already own again by making Primaris better than Oldmarines.

And the second statement is - again and again - proven wrong by looking at the recent releases.

Possibly, but as Daedalus said, we need a new codex more than anything. The old one is being held together with duct tape at this point.

You guys aren't wrong in that, but I'm just going on history here. It's never happened before, so I'm not looking for it to happen now. Fingers crossed I suppose! lol

Darsath wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Tycho wrote:

2W might not be a big game changer for basic csm, but it will be for cult marines, Chosen, warp talons, etc.. And 3W terminators will be nice.

Maybe? They're still going to be costed through the roof for that extra wound with not a lot of ways to leverage it. I think GW is really over-valuing that wound in a lot of cases.

Possibly, but as Daedalus said, we need a new codex more than anything. The old one is being held together with duct tape at this point.

Without a doubt, I believe that a Chaos Space Marine codex has to be released before the end of year. They're one of the biggest players and most popular factions.

Well it isn't happening this year, unless you count Death Guard.

Tycho wrote:

Possibly, but as Daedalus said, we need a new codex more than anything. The old one is being held together with duct tape at this point.

You guys aren't wrong in that, but I'm just going on history here. It's never happened before, so I'm not looking for it to happen now. Fingers crossed I suppose! lol

What never happened? Csm being good? You not around for 3.5?

What never happened? Csm being good? You not around for 3.5?

I was. I just tend not to count it.

A broken clock and all that ...

With regards to Eldar and speed/evasions, the problem with this is that basically every edition that has had a mechanic like this, it ends up breaking something, and usually introducing some huge "have/not have" gap. Skimmers vs Non-skimmers in many editions, the awful Jink of 6th and 7th, etc.

Likewise, while I can buy Eldar reflexes making them hard to hit in a fist fight, I dont see Eldar actively dodging laser blasts, supersonic shrapnel, automatic gunfire, artillery blasts, flame throwers, etc with anything near the same success. Eldar have been plenty powerful and capable without such.

For CSM's, given how much of an afterthought they seem to be, I wouldnt make any bets on when CSM's get an update. We've got what, 11 weeks left in the year? Possible, but seeing a new CSM codex before 2021 would be unexpected, to me anyway.

Ice_can wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I think 4++ if they just move's a bad idea. go with 6++ 5++ if they move 4++ if they advance

That was my original proposal. Same as a Distort Field.

I'd suggest just to limit rules text and odd ball situation like artillary having a hard time hitting a stationary squad.

If the moved 5++, If they advance this is improved to a 4++.
It also avoids rangers having to pay points for a 6++ that will never benifit them.

Which shouldn't happen unless the game moves to D8 or D10. As is you're just trying to make Eldar more durable than Death Guard if they get a plethora of Invul.

a_typical_hero wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
2 wound mini marines is literally just a ploy to get rid of stocks of models they aren't going to produce anymore. Since GW has learned pretty well by now - rules sell models.

Damn, and I thought GW tries to sell me the army I already own again by making Primaris better than Oldmarines.

And the second statement is - again and again - proven wrong by looking at the recent releases.

Nearly everyone has an army of little marines. You'll get no sympathy from anyone about having to buy models for this game. It's actually the most enjoyable part of the hobby for most of us. We like getting new toys and playing with them. Using the same models over and over can get boring.

On rules selling models. Some units have to be bad for other units to be good. They can always change their rules later and create a rush to deplete stocks. Much like other stores will use sales move inventory and clear up shelf space for new products. Who knows - it could just be an experiment to see if they have enough of a following to sustain a mini marine product list along side a primaris one and still be able to do everything else they want to do. I think it is a mistake though. I think most would agree MOAR MARINES is bad for the game. We don't need yet another option to play marines like a "mini marine codex" and a "primaris codex". Every marine kit they make is a xenos kit that isn't getting developed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Tycho wrote:

2W might not be a big game changer for basic csm, but it will be for cult marines, Chosen, warp talons, etc.. And 3W terminators will be nice.

Maybe? They're still going to be costed through the roof for that extra wound with not a lot of ways to leverage it. I think GW is really over-valuing that wound in a lot of cases.

Possibly, but as Daedalus said, we need a new codex more than anything. The old one is being held together with duct tape at this point.

is there a codex that isn't being held together by duct tape minus Crons and Space marines at this point? Every army needs their 9th ed codex.

Really wish GW would just release all the codex at once. That way with all rules available at the start of the edition we could maybe have a balanced game.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I think 4++ if they just move's a bad idea. go with 6++ 5++ if they move 4++ if they advance

That was my original proposal. Same as a Distort Field.

I'd suggest just to limit rules text and odd ball situation like artillary having a hard time hitting a stationary squad.

If the moved 5++, If they advance this is improved to a 4++.
It also avoids rangers having to pay points for a 6++ that will never benifit them.

Which shouldn't happen unless the game moves to D8 or D10. As is you're just trying to make Eldar more durable than Death Guard if they get a plethora of Invul.

GW won't go away from the D6 system

I'm not sure 1W T3 models with a 5++, are actually more durable than 2W, T5, 5+++ deathguard.

Karol wrote:
blanket +4 inv with possible buffs on the entire army? considering the ap hight in the game, this would make eldar more resilient then marines.

Not really, a marine has a 2-3+ save against bolters (depending if theyre in cover or not). A harlequin always can't get lower than 4++ without using stratagems. Harlequins also have less thoughness so more of these bolter shots will wound them. Harlequin vehicles also have the same toughness as a marine in gravis, with a worse save.

Darsath wrote:

Without a doubt, I believe that a Chaos Space Marine codex has to be released before the end of year. They're one of the biggest players and most popular factions.

Probably a very small window for this year. We still have all the other Necron / Marine kits, which will we bee a week or two. The other codexes will probably splash down together and then probably Sons of Behemat. December is usually barren for new stuff.

I imagine the book will come with yet more new kits.

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I think 4++ if they just move's a bad idea. go with 6++ 5++ if they move 4++ if they advance

That was my original proposal. Same as a Distort Field.

I'd suggest just to limit rules text and odd ball situation like artillary having a hard time hitting a stationary squad.

If the moved 5++, If they advance this is improved to a 4++.
It also avoids rangers having to pay points for a 6++ that will never benifit them.

Which shouldn't happen unless the game moves to D8 or D10. As is you're just trying to make Eldar more durable than Death Guard if they get a plethora of Invul.

GW won't go away from the D6 system

I'm not sure 1W T3 models with a 5++, are actually more durable than 2W, T5, 5+++ deathguard.

theyre not, its just eldar hate with no real thought behind it.

Personally i feel like they should have :

Invuln based on movement.
OR
More damage.

either keep their low damage (shuriken) but up their survivability OR up their damage but keep their fragility.
Obviously i'm talking about aspect warriors mostly here.

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I think 4++ if they just move's a bad idea. go with 6++ 5++ if they move 4++ if they advance

That was my original proposal. Same as a Distort Field.

I'd suggest just to limit rules text and odd ball situation like artillary having a hard time hitting a stationary squad.

If the moved 5++, If they advance this is improved to a 4++.
It also avoids rangers having to pay points for a 6++ that will never benifit them.

Which shouldn't happen unless the game moves to D8 or D10. As is you're just trying to make Eldar more durable than Death Guard if they get a plethora of Invul.

GW won't go away from the D6 system

I'm not sure 1W T3 models with a 5++, are actually more durable than 2W, T5, 5+++ deathguard.

It always depends on cost, but imagine you gave Gaunts a 5++ for free just because they moved super quick.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

GW won't go away from the D6 system

I'm not sure 1W T3 models with a 5++, are actually more durable than 2W, T5, 5+++ deathguard.

It always depends on cost, but imagine you gave Gaunts a 5++ for free just because they moved super quick.

It does depend on cost. A tyranid priced like an eldar that has a 5++ because they move super quick is called a genestealer, and I don't believe they're generally considered overly durable. Despite also being T4.

EDIT: And a fast T3 model with a 5+ invul save is called a daemonette. Although I don't think anyone is strongly advocating for the increase in eldar durability being free. Marines paid a couple of points for their durability boost. Eldar prices would need to be adjusted too.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I think 4++ if they just move's a bad idea. go with 6++ 5++ if they move 4++ if they advance

That was my original proposal. Same as a Distort Field.

I'd suggest just to limit rules text and odd ball situation like artillary having a hard time hitting a stationary squad.

If the moved 5++, If they advance this is improved to a 4++.
It also avoids rangers having to pay points for a 6++ that will never benifit them.

Which shouldn't happen unless the game moves to D8 or D10. As is you're just trying to make Eldar more durable than Death Guard if they get a plethora of Invul.

GW won't go away from the D6 system

I'm not sure 1W T3 models with a 5++, are actually more durable than 2W, T5, 5+++ deathguard.

It always depends on cost, but imagine you gave Gaunts a 5++ for free just because they moved super quick.

Who said it would be free? Obviously unit prices would have to be adjusted.

Daedalus81 wrote:

Darsath wrote:

Without a doubt, I believe that a Chaos Space Marine codex has to be released before the end of year. They're one of the biggest players and most popular factions.

Probably a very small window for this year. We still have all the other Necron / Marine kits, which will we bee a week or two. The other codexes will probably splash down together and then probably Sons of Behemat. December is usually barren for new stuff.

I imagine the book will come with yet more new kits.

They've already told us what books are coming out this year, as well as the first two for next year (although one of those we only know will be Xenos, no specific faction), and the non-cult legions, along with Emperors Children and World Eaters presumably, aren't any of them. No csm besides Death Guard for this year.