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.

Back when "demonic possession" was a vehicle upgrade in the 3.5 dex it didn't lower BS. So I see this as a return to form.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
Lore is great until it is not. If lore is creating negative player experience then you must change the experience even if it goes somewhat against the lore.

Also, the irony of space marine fanboys complaining that a stat change from WS4+ to WS3+ "goes against established lore and statlines since 3rd ed"...

Marines were A1 W1 for HOW long exactly? And rapid fired at half range for HOW long?

Weird how that change was some fantastic return to lore, but this is a break from lore to make a certain type of unit more competitive for soulless tournament play...

literally the ONLY person I see complaining about this is the OP. no one else has an issue with it.

You've not been reading the thread then, as at least one other poster have argued against it.

It's a good change, now they don't have to compete with units that just hit much better than they do.

Well Scotsmans post is just one of the usual "someone dislikes some thing, they must be a filthy marine scumbag" hyperbole posts with no footing.

Again, I play chaos, I will be one of the people benefitting, I don't think bolter discipline or shock assault need to exist alongside doctrines. This isn't a jealousy topic.

Must admit its rare I agree with slayer but its clear the majority are happy to elevate all the engines to 3+/3+. I just don't understand how not hitting on a 3+ equates to "bad game experience", most armies have units hitting on a 4+. Should all the characters etc be downgraded to hit on 3's for consistency across the codex as well?

Must admit its rare I agree with slayer but its clear the majority are happy to elevate all the engines to 3+/3+. I just don't understand how not hitting on a 3+ equates to "bad game experience", most armies have units hitting on a 4+. Should all the characters etc be downgraded to hit on 3's for consistency across the codex as well?

Because 4+ is too random on what is on most accounts an elite army gameplay-wise. Eldar Guardian vehicles were annoying for this exact reason(before 6th) as you bought this expensive vehicle point-wise, but then it was just whiffing like crazy before getting turned into slag. For Death Guard it is even worse as Death Guard does not have the plethora of tools to work with and have these daemon engines to rely on.

Also, if DG is going to lose rerolls on Daemon Engines as is rumored(and based off SM and Necron Codexes) it means these daemon engines would be rather mediocre on 4+/4+, and that in turn would make them much less attractive in games outside of Open and Narrative. Remember that many of the 4+/4+ vehicles in the game are very often intended to be taken in squads(Imperial Guard Hydras are 3 in a squad if I remember correctly) as Heavy Slots are a precious resource, something that a lot of people seem to forget. I am not interested in running 6-9 PBC just so that precious 4+/4+ lore can be fulfilled. I want to play Death Guard, not weird-sauce Imperial Guard.

Now were there other solutions GW could have pursued? Yes, they could have doubled the shots on Entropy Cannons and the Volleyball Gun for example to give them more functionality, but then people would have complained about those daemon engines getting too much boost and the circle of life continues.

Also, the Myphitic Blight-Launcher was often effectively 3+ in BS due to their special ability that they are probably losing now. So there was a precedent for a 3+ Daemon Engine in the Death Guard codex even if it was a special rule. I also foresee that the MBL will lose their squad rule(that enabled the special rule) due to the changes we are discussing. Which is probably the main point of this all: BS 4+ is something that works on vehicles that can be put in a squad, but becomes cumbersome if you can't squad them.

 Eldarsif wrote:

Must admit its rare I agree with slayer but its clear the majority are happy to elevate all the engines to 3+/3+. I just don't understand how not hitting on a 3+ equates to "bad game experience", most armies have units hitting on a 4+. Should all the characters etc be downgraded to hit on 3's for consistency across the codex as well?

Because 4+ is too random on what is on most accounts an elite army gameplay-wise. Eldar Guardian vehicles were annoying for this exact reason(before 6th) as you bought this expensive vehicle point-wise, but then it was just whiffing like crazy before getting turned into slag. For Death Guard it is even worse as Death Guard does not have the plethora of tools to work with and have these daemon engines to rely on.

Also, if DG is going to lose rerolls on Daemon Engines as is rumored(and based off SM and Necron Codexes) it means these daemon engines would be rather mediocre on 4+/4+, and that in turn would make them much less attractive in games outside of Open and Narrative. Remember that many of the 4+/4+ vehicles in the game are very often intended to be taken in squads(Imperial Guard Hydras are 3 in a squad if I remember correctly) as Heavy Slots are a precious resource, something that a lot of people seem to forget. I am not interested in running 6-9 PBC just so that precious 4+/4+ lore can be fulfilled. I want to play Death Guard, not weird-sauce Imperial Guard.

Now were there other solutions GW could have pursued? Yes, they could have doubled the shots on Entropy Cannons and the Volleyball Gun to give them more functionality, but then people would have complained about those daemon engines getting too much boost and the circle of life continues.

Also, the Myphitic Blight-Launcher was often effectively 3+ in BS due to their special ability that they are probably losing out on now. So there was a precedent for a 3+ Daemon Engine in the Death Guard codex even if it was a special rule. I also foresee that the MBL will lose their squad rule(that enabled the special rule) due to the changes we are discussing. Which is probably the main point of this all: BS 4+ is something that works on vehicles that can be put in a squad, but becomes cumbersome if you can't squad them.

Guard vehicles aren't a squad, they operate independently once on the table, so if you mean "high volume of models" that's different.

But as you say, there are other ways to increase their lethality (something people complain about) without just making them hit more. A bs4 model can be pointed to have the same equivalent output as a bs3, but that doesn't seem to matter.

I'm willing to put my personal opinions aside and just go with it, since there's little choice anyway, but it feels most people just want the engines to be "better" without questioning how or why, also without realising that will come with an inevitable points hike etc. reducing the gains.

Hecaton wrote:
Back when "demonic possession" was a vehicle upgrade in the 3.5 dex it didn't lower BS. So I see this as a return to form.

IIRC in 2nd Ed it was a buff to BS5 as Daemons were (on average) WS/BS5 compared to a marine’s 4, then daemons got a relative nerfing for the new edition.

Lore and stats evolve *shrugs*

Dudeface wrote:

Spoiler:

 Eldarsif wrote:

Must admit its rare I agree with slayer but its clear the majority are happy to elevate all the engines to 3+/3+. I just don't understand how not hitting on a 3+ equates to "bad game experience", most armies have units hitting on a 4+. Should all the characters etc be downgraded to hit on 3's for consistency across the codex as well?

Because 4+ is too random on what is on most accounts an elite army gameplay-wise. Eldar Guardian vehicles were annoying for this exact reason(before 6th) as you bought this expensive vehicle point-wise, but then it was just whiffing like crazy before getting turned into slag. For Death Guard it is even worse as Death Guard does not have the plethora of tools to work with and have these daemon engines to rely on.

Also, if DG is going to lose rerolls on Daemon Engines as is rumored(and based off SM and Necron Codexes) it means these daemon engines would be rather mediocre on 4+/4+, and that in turn would make them much less attractive in games outside of Open and Narrative. Remember that many of the 4+/4+ vehicles in the game are very often intended to be taken in squads(Imperial Guard Hydras are 3 in a squad if I remember correctly) as Heavy Slots are a precious resource, something that a lot of people seem to forget. I am not interested in running 6-9 PBC just so that precious 4+/4+ lore can be fulfilled. I want to play Death Guard, not weird-sauce Imperial Guard.

Now were there other solutions GW could have pursued? Yes, they could have doubled the shots on Entropy Cannons and the Volleyball Gun to give them more functionality, but then people would have complained about those daemon engines getting too much boost and the circle of life continues.

Also, the Myphitic Blight-Launcher was often effectively 3+ in BS due to their special ability that they are probably losing out on now. So there was a precedent for a 3+ Daemon Engine in the Death Guard codex even if it was a special rule. I also foresee that the MBL will lose their squad rule(that enabled the special rule) due to the changes we are discussing. Which is probably the main point of this all: BS 4+ is something that works on vehicles that can be put in a squad, but becomes cumbersome if you can't squad them.

Guard vehicles aren't a squad, they operate independently once on the table, so if you mean "high volume of models" that's different.

But as you say, there are other ways to increase their lethality (something people complain about) without just making them hit more. A bs4 model can be pointed to have the same equivalent output as a bs3, but that doesn't seem to matter.

I'm willing to put my personal opinions aside and just go with it, since there's little choice anyway, but it feels most people just want the engines to be "better" without questioning how or why, also without realising that will come with an inevitable points hike etc. reducing the gains.

It would help your argument if you could cite some actual lore that says that daemon engines are inherently inferior to other csm vehicles in accuracy instead of just bringing up their stats from previous editions, which as many have pointed out have changed from edition to edition for various reasons. Stats don't equal lore.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Spoiler:

 Eldarsif wrote:

Must admit its rare I agree with slayer but its clear the majority are happy to elevate all the engines to 3+/3+. I just don't understand how not hitting on a 3+ equates to "bad game experience", most armies have units hitting on a 4+. Should all the characters etc be downgraded to hit on 3's for consistency across the codex as well?

Because 4+ is too random on what is on most accounts an elite army gameplay-wise. Eldar Guardian vehicles were annoying for this exact reason(before 6th) as you bought this expensive vehicle point-wise, but then it was just whiffing like crazy before getting turned into slag. For Death Guard it is even worse as Death Guard does not have the plethora of tools to work with and have these daemon engines to rely on.

Also, if DG is going to lose rerolls on Daemon Engines as is rumored(and based off SM and Necron Codexes) it means these daemon engines would be rather mediocre on 4+/4+, and that in turn would make them much less attractive in games outside of Open and Narrative. Remember that many of the 4+/4+ vehicles in the game are very often intended to be taken in squads(Imperial Guard Hydras are 3 in a squad if I remember correctly) as Heavy Slots are a precious resource, something that a lot of people seem to forget. I am not interested in running 6-9 PBC just so that precious 4+/4+ lore can be fulfilled. I want to play Death Guard, not weird-sauce Imperial Guard.

Now were there other solutions GW could have pursued? Yes, they could have doubled the shots on Entropy Cannons and the Volleyball Gun to give them more functionality, but then people would have complained about those daemon engines getting too much boost and the circle of life continues.

Also, the Myphitic Blight-Launcher was often effectively 3+ in BS due to their special ability that they are probably losing out on now. So there was a precedent for a 3+ Daemon Engine in the Death Guard codex even if it was a special rule. I also foresee that the MBL will lose their squad rule(that enabled the special rule) due to the changes we are discussing. Which is probably the main point of this all: BS 4+ is something that works on vehicles that can be put in a squad, but becomes cumbersome if you can't squad them.

Guard vehicles aren't a squad, they operate independently once on the table, so if you mean "high volume of models" that's different.

But as you say, there are other ways to increase their lethality (something people complain about) without just making them hit more. A bs4 model can be pointed to have the same equivalent output as a bs3, but that doesn't seem to matter.

I'm willing to put my personal opinions aside and just go with it, since there's little choice anyway, but it feels most people just want the engines to be "better" without questioning how or why, also without realising that will come with an inevitable points hike etc. reducing the gains.

It would help your argument if you could cite some actual lore that says that daemon engines are inherently inferior to other csm vehicles in accuracy instead of just bringing up their stats from previous editions, which as many have pointed out have changed from edition to edition for various reasons. Stats don't equal lore.

Sadly I can't, I haven't held onto my historic codecies, but I'd love someone to find it as I'm not the only one remembering the same fluff explanation from way back when.

Evidently I'm in the minority and I'm happy to be. I just don't like the general acceptance of stat inflating stuff to make it better at random. There's not enough separation as it is and to strip it further in the name of making all options roll for the same number seems a bad choice.

Oddly nobody is pushing for increases on cultists, pox walkers or plaguebearers. Given the engines move to 3+, I'd hope their piloting daemons do as well.

I find this thread quite funny. I think it was more a twist of the setting to make CSM lose all of their Meltabombs or veteran abilities than turn the statline of Daemon engines into proper monsters.

 Baragash wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Back when "demonic possession" was a vehicle upgrade in the 3.5 dex it didn't lower BS. So I see this as a return to form.

IIRC in 2nd Ed it was a buff to BS5 as Daemons were (on average) WS/BS5 compared to a marine’s 4, then daemons got a relative nerfing for the new edition.

Lore and stats evolve *shrugs*

Yep, this.

There's no good lore-based argument against Daemon Engines not having a 3+/3+, and people in favour of it are not throwing fluff to the wind due to a desire for everything to be more powerful. Simple stuff.

Voss wrote:
But daemon engines are supposed to be impressive, not lackluster. And in a faction that's largely WS/BS 3+, that's exactly how they currently feel. Daemon engines are largely mediocre at best, and overpriced. Past time to change that.

Completely wrong. Daemon engines were always cheap bullet sponges in fluff, things that don't need fuel/ammo to work you send in first because if they got shot to bits, no big loss for your actually valuable, hard to replace CSM. Them getting this stupid buff not only flies in the face of 20+ years of fluff, but seeing they have other perks on top of 3+, they now make CSM and their vehicles look like useless chumps that are worse than mass produced tin cans that can be endlessly spammed out of any old forge. Why bother with 50+ years of training, hard to produce and maintain gear and seeking very rare, compatible aspirants for new CSM when you can just kill like a dozen men to instantly produce something much better?

 Jidmah wrote:
Single parts of a datasheet looked at in a vacuum are not related to fluff at all, because you can't represent an entire universe with D6 and mostly single digit stats.

Except people who don't like this change are precisely the ones who don't look at it in the vacuum. SM/CSM design was that they always had better stats than other units in the game and were only matched by elites such as aspect warriors, most dangerous tyranids, or best made necrons. Now with every clown and his uncle getting 3+ the marines should go to 2+ for parity (of completely lose both their game and fluff niche) - gee, do you see a tiny problem here?

It's WAAC crowd who looks at this change in vacuum and proclaims it's good.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
there's a surprising bit of complaining because Daemon Engines are getting a buff coming from very specific posters.

Funny, because it's the other way around - the tiny minority that was very loud in whining their leviathans are no longer autowin pay-to-own toys and taking them now has a tiny drawback (that is more than negated by increased CP) are now trying to drown discussion by shouting down anyone don't liking this unneeded, unfluffy buff and proclaiming it didn't go far enough anyway. I always like how SM players are the ones who want fluffy builds (and also the only ones I ever saw criticizing dumb changes their army got) but Tau/Eldar/CSM are always sour and claiming having 1+ stats across the board and D strength guns on everything is not enough...

Completely wrong. Daemon engines were always cheap bullet sponges in fluff, things that don't need fuel/ammo to work you send in first because if they got shot to bits, no big loss for your actually valuable, hard to replace CSM. Them getting this stupid buff not only flies in the face of 20+ years of fluff, but seeing they have other perks on top of 3+, they now make CSM and their vehicles look like useless chumps that are worse than mass produced tin cans that can be endlessly spammed out of any old forge.

I'm sorry this has managed to be completely wrong and flies in the face of... everything in the fluff beforehand.

Funny, because it's the other way around - the tiny minority that was very loud in whining their leviathans are no longer autowin pay-to-own toys and taking them now has a tiny drawback (that is more than negated by increased CP) are now trying to drown discussion by shouting down anyone don't liking this unneeded, unfluffy buff and proclaiming it didn't go far enough anyway. I always like how SM players are the ones who want fluffy builds (and also the only ones I ever saw criticizing dumb changes their army got) but Tau/Eldar/CSM are always sour and claiming having 1+ stats across the board and D strength guns on everything is not enough...

..Welp you've certainly got a chip on your shoulder for trying to bring this up here when it wasn't even being discussed beforehand.

Completely wrong. Daemon engines were always cheap bullet sponges in fluff, things that don't need fuel/ammo to work you send in first because if they got shot to bits, no big loss for your actually valuable, hard to replace CSM. Them getting this stupid buff not only flies in the face of 20+ years of fluff, but seeing they have other perks on top of 3+, they now make CSM and their vehicles look like useless chumps that are worse than mass produced tin cans that can be endlessly spammed out of any old forge. Why bother with 50+ years of training, hard to produce and maintain gear and seeking very rare, compatible aspirants for new CSM when you can just kill like a dozen men to instantly produce something much better?

Why did Mortarion bother with perfecting Plagueburst Crawlers if they are supposed to just be bullet sponges? Why even bother giving them heavy weaponry and not just make them puke flamer platforms?

Lore nerds seem to know very little about Mortarion. Hell, my knowledge is limited of him yet most of it goes against what you claim.

These hideous effects have made the Plagueburst Crawler a much-hated weapon of war. Enemies strive to destroy them at any cost

Woah, if these are just cheap bullet sponges without any value why even bother destroying them when there are other more dangerous things around?

Most Death Guard commanders use packs of these Daemon Engines(Myphitic Blight-Hauler) to fill the role that Havocs or Obliterators might in other Traitor Legions.

Wait, so Havocs are just bullet sponges? According to the lore Havocs and Obliterators should now be 4+/4+ if I am understanding the lore buffs here. Hell, by all accounts all space marine dreadnoughts should be 4+/4+ because that coffin of theirs certainly isn't their "natural state" as has been argued in case of daemon engines. I will not accept "but mah lore says they are highly trained!" arguments.

Seriously, all this "old lore" discussion seems to be based off a White Dwarf article written by an intern in 1980 that people are holding onto. The lore has also changed a lot in the preceding 30 years and being a canon-nerd that wants to cite some obscure out of print lore is not a good look for anyone.

I just don't understand how not hitting on a 3+ equates to "bad game experience", most armies have units hitting on a 4+. Should all the characters etc be downgraded to hit on 3's for consistency across the codex as well?

4+ to hit without any aid or rerolls on a single platform taking a whole heavy slot is a Wheel of Fortune. Your argument is also not a fair as cheap HQ(3+ would make them cheaper) can be used to unlock detachments or fill minimum requirements of detachments whereas a cheap single vehicle in HS is taking up a very limited and valuable resource slot.

I do not know if the lore people play Matched Play, but resource management is a thing in Matched Play and you have a limited amount of slots. If you have a garbage item with little to no return of investment taking a highly valued slot, such as the HS slots, you will not see them used. Points are not the only resource management in Warhammer 40.000 and people need to realize that to see the actual context of this discussions.

 Eldarsif wrote:

I just don't understand how not hitting on a 3+ equates to "bad game experience", most armies have units hitting on a 4+. Should all the characters etc be downgraded to hit on 3's for consistency across the codex as well?

4+ to hit without any aid or rerolls on a single platform taking a whole heavy slot is a Wheel of Fortune. Your argument is also not a fair as cheap HQ(3+ would make them cheaper) can be used to unlock detachments or fill minimum requirements of detachments whereas a cheap single vehicle in HS is taking up a very limited and valuable resource slot.

I do not know if the lore people play Matched Play, but resource management is a thing in Matched Play and you have a limited amount of slots. If you have a garbage item with little to no return of investment taking a highly valued slot, such as the HS slots, you will not see them used. Points are not the only resource management in Warhammer 40.000 and people need to realize that to see the actual context of this discussions.

Right, lets look at it this way, currently a forgefiend shoots 8 hades autocannon shots, hit with 4 for 135 points.

If you put it up to bs3 it hits with slightly over 5, assumingly logically the points will be near 175 to maintain output.

You could also make hades autocannons (only found on daemon engines) heavy 5. You now have nearly identical damage output with higher potential (so arguably better), but haven't changed the stat line of the model.

None of this requires a change to bs3, it would assumingly cost the same as a bs3 forgefiend with current load out.

Make a unit cheap enough and it will stop being garbage, almost universally. Points saved allows you to buy more elsewhere. I'm all for rules changes rather than points cuts though, but just going "meh bs3" is lazy.

Dudeface wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:

I just don't understand how not hitting on a 3+ equates to "bad game experience", most armies have units hitting on a 4+. Should all the characters etc be downgraded to hit on 3's for consistency across the codex as well?

4+ to hit without any aid or rerolls on a single platform taking a whole heavy slot is a Wheel of Fortune. Your argument is also not a fair as cheap HQ(3+ would make them cheaper) can be used to unlock detachments or fill minimum requirements of detachments whereas a cheap single vehicle in HS is taking up a very limited and valuable resource slot.

I do not know if the lore people play Matched Play, but resource management is a thing in Matched Play and you have a limited amount of slots. If you have a garbage item with little to no return of investment taking a highly valued slot, such as the HS slots, you will not see them used. Points are not the only resource management in Warhammer 40.000 and people need to realize that to see the actual context of this discussions.

Right, lets look at it this way, currently a forgefiend shoots 8 hades autocannon shots, hit with 4 for 135 points.

If you put it up to bs3 it hits with slightly over 5, assumingly logically the points will be near 175 to maintain output.

You could also make hades autocannons (only found on daemon engines) heavy 5. You now have nearly identical damage output with higher potential (so arguably better), but haven't changed the stat line of the model.

None of this requires a change to bs3, it would assumingly cost the same as a bs3 forgefiend with current load out.

Make a unit cheap enough and it will stop being garbage, almost universally. Points saved allows you to buy more elsewhere. I'm all for rules changes rather than points cuts though, but just going "meh bs3" is lazy.

Going to BS3 is lazy, but upping to Heavy 5 isn't?

Moreover, increased offensive output without upping durability, movement, or board presence should not be a 1-to-1 increase. Increasing damage by 33% should not be a 33% increase in price, because all the other areas haven't improved.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:

I just don't understand how not hitting on a 3+ equates to "bad game experience", most armies have units hitting on a 4+. Should all the characters etc be downgraded to hit on 3's for consistency across the codex as well?

4+ to hit without any aid or rerolls on a single platform taking a whole heavy slot is a Wheel of Fortune. Your argument is also not a fair as cheap HQ(3+ would make them cheaper) can be used to unlock detachments or fill minimum requirements of detachments whereas a cheap single vehicle in HS is taking up a very limited and valuable resource slot.

I do not know if the lore people play Matched Play, but resource management is a thing in Matched Play and you have a limited amount of slots. If you have a garbage item with little to no return of investment taking a highly valued slot, such as the HS slots, you will not see them used. Points are not the only resource management in Warhammer 40.000 and people need to realize that to see the actual context of this discussions.

Right, lets look at it this way, currently a forgefiend shoots 8 hades autocannon shots, hit with 4 for 135 points.

If you put it up to bs3 it hits with slightly over 5, assumingly logically the points will be near 175 to maintain output.

You could also make hades autocannons (only found on daemon engines) heavy 5. You now have nearly identical damage output with higher potential (so arguably better), but haven't changed the stat line of the model.

None of this requires a change to bs3, it would assumingly cost the same as a bs3 forgefiend with current load out.

Make a unit cheap enough and it will stop being garbage, almost universally. Points saved allows you to buy more elsewhere. I'm all for rules changes rather than points cuts though, but just going "meh bs3" is lazy.

Going to BS3 is lazy, but upping to Heavy 5 isn't?

Moreover, increased offensive output without upping durability, movement, or board presence should not be a 1-to-1 increase. Increasing damage by 33% should not be a 33% increase in price, because all the other areas haven't improved.

Heavy 5 is marginally less lazy, but doesn't involve stats changes. Agreed though on the defensive costs, it was napkin maths tbh.

And why are stat changes on models any worse than stat changes on weapons?

 JNAProductions wrote:
And why are stat changes on models any worse than stat changes on weapons?

Because if you start giving eldar increased toughness just to increase their durability you've altered what is their normal in the setting. They're suddenly tougher than a human, as tough as a space marine etc.

Increasing the bs on a daemon engine basically says they're innately going from being moderately accurate and somewhat capable of aiming when they shoot to as good as most armies elite soldiers.

Increasing a profile on their weapon allows you to increase the damage output via representing a hail of fire ala orks.

Edit: mathematically they can be equivalent, but it varies the feel of the unit if you will.

Dudeface wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
And why are stat changes on models any worse than stat changes on weapons?

Because if you start giving eldar increased toughness just to increase their durability you've altered what is their normal in the setting. They're suddenly tougher than a human, as tough as a space marine etc.

Increasing the bs on a daemon engine basically says they're innately going from being moderately accurate and somewhat capable of aiming when they shoot to as good as most armies elite soldiers.

Increasing a profile on their weapon allows you to increase the damage output via representing a hail of fire ala orks.

Really? I find degrading two points of BS and WS for being put in a mechanical body a little extreme. Only one point of degradation makes more sense-after all, all Heralds are WS/BS 2+, and who says it's not Heralds or greater in the Daemon Engines?

"Space Marines are tougher (if not better armored) than Eldar," is... I won't say CENTRAL to the setting, but it's consistently been part of it and is something that should be kept.
"Daemon Engines are less accurate than Marines, or even many Daemons" is not.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
And why are stat changes on models any worse than stat changes on weapons?

Because if you start giving eldar increased toughness just to increase their durability you've altered what is their normal in the setting. They're suddenly tougher than a human, as tough as a space marine etc.

Increasing the bs on a daemon engine basically says they're innately going from being moderately accurate and somewhat capable of aiming when they shoot to as good as most armies elite soldiers.

Increasing a profile on their weapon allows you to increase the damage output via representing a hail of fire ala orks.

Really? I find degrading two points of BS and WS for being put in a mechanical body a little extreme. Only one point of degradation makes more sense-after all, all Heralds are WS/BS 2+, and who says it's not Heralds or greater in the Daemon Engines?

"Space Marines are tougher (if not better armored) than Eldar," is... I won't say CENTRAL to the setting, but it's consistently been part of it and is something that should be kept.
"Daemon Engines are less accurate than Marines, or even many Daemons" is not.

Not all heralds are 2+/2+, tzeentch is 3+/3+, but even then it seems slightly preposterous to suggest ever daemon engine is a herald or higher.

To be honest my opinions are my own, I'll get over it and just roll along with my engines hitting on a 2+ with rerolls, just like when scouts used to be 4+/4+ as they hadn't finished their implants and training.

Times change and the majority are happy with it regardless.

Fair enough-my bad on the Tzeentch Herald. I run Nurgle, so I never really look at that god.

But are you saying that it'd make more sense for a Plagueburst Crawler to be powered by a simple Plaguebearer than a Herald or something similar?

 JNAProductions wrote:
Fair enough-my bad on the Tzeentch Herald. I run Nurgle, so I never really look at that god.

But are you saying that it'd make more sense for a Plagueburst Crawler to be powered by a simple Plaguebearer than a Herald or something similar?

Basically, most fluff points to it being standard low ranking daemons plucked against their will when being summoned, so lowish troop daemons.

For khorne or slaanesh thats still a 3+/3+ but not for nurgle or tzeentch who are 4+/4+ on their more numerous forms.

Fluff sections aren't overly clear but I'm sure a herald would revel in being in the materium:

"Within the armoured shell of each Daemon Engine is entrapped a denizen of the Warp, a being dragged forth from the Immaterium against its will and nature, sealed within the machine by the unreasoning hatred for the material universe in which they find themselves; they seek only to shed the blood of its mortal inhabitants and to feast upon their unbound souls"

Dudeface wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Fair enough-my bad on the Tzeentch Herald. I run Nurgle, so I never really look at that god.

But are you saying that it'd make more sense for a Plagueburst Crawler to be powered by a simple Plaguebearer than a Herald or something similar?

Basically, most fluff points to it being standard low ranking daemons plucked against their will when being summoned, so low ranking daemons.

That isn't true.

 Marshal Loss wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Fair enough-my bad on the Tzeentch Herald. I run Nurgle, so I never really look at that god.

But are you saying that it'd make more sense for a Plagueburst Crawler to be powered by a simple Plaguebearer than a Herald or something similar?

Basically, most fluff points to it being standard low ranking daemons plucked against their will when being summoned, so low ranking daemons.

That isn't true.

OK, can you provide evidence to the contrary?

Dudeface wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Fair enough-my bad on the Tzeentch Herald. I run Nurgle, so I never really look at that god.

But are you saying that it'd make more sense for a Plagueburst Crawler to be powered by a simple Plaguebearer than a Herald or something similar?

Basically, most fluff points to it being standard low ranking daemons plucked against their will when being summoned, so low ranking daemons.

That isn't true.

OK, can you provide evidence to the contrary?

You haven't provided evidence for your assertion yet, though.

If anything, I'd say your quote actually provides evidence to it being a Daemon of power-it says "is entrapped a Denizen of the Warp," as-in, one. You really think a single Plaguebearer can provide a 5++ to an entire tank? Or a single Bloodletter the same?

I think there is an argument all armies will end up BS3+ one day. Mainly because as outlined players (not necessarily competitive players) hate whiffing.

Whether this is good or not is unclear, but its just a consequence of 5+ being an awfully swingy probability. Even like Guard and Tau are not cheap enough for the odds of a 5+ to hit.

Because you can't say "well 8 shots at BS 4 is the same as 6 shots at BS 3". I mean on averagehammer yes. But the normal distribution curves are not the same. You are more impacted by minuses to hit - and theoretically benefit more from bonuses to hit, but they are comparatively uncommon.

To an extent a skewed probability curve isn't bad if you've signed up for it. I'm not sure Ork Players like it - but from my perspective there is something to "I'm going to be unlucky a lot, but when I get lucky, I'm really lucky". This was summed up in Da Souped-Up Shokka - which perhaps unsurprisingly generated complaints from those who were on the end of it *when it worked*.

But generally most players - beyond the most superficially engaged - don't enjoy games they won or lost because they dice went "one of you is going to get nothing but 6s, and the other is going to get nothing but 1s".

The Scotsman often asks why people dislike "tough" lists - and I think its because of this. Its very annoying if all your stuff does no damage because the luck went that way. Its why I'm not really a fan of invuls and FNPs. There isn't a counter-play. Its just pure luck exacerbated by their all or nothing nature.

I mean that sounds silly - because its a dice game, its all about luck - but that's a still thing.

Why playing say a Castellan was soul destroying was that if your opponent didn't fail those 3++ (then 4++ as they became) saves, then you just lost. There wasn't an obvious trick you could to avoid this. You had to skew your list to be able to pop this abomination - and then not have your opponent beat the odds. Which at least to my mind isn't fun, and isn't really what 40k is about.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Fair enough-my bad on the Tzeentch Herald. I run Nurgle, so I never really look at that god.

But are you saying that it'd make more sense for a Plagueburst Crawler to be powered by a simple Plaguebearer than a Herald or something similar?

Basically, most fluff points to it being standard low ranking daemons plucked against their will when being summoned, so low ranking daemons.

That isn't true.

OK, can you provide evidence to the contrary?

You haven't provided evidence for your assertion yet, though.

If anything, I'd say your quote actually provides evidence to it being a Daemon of power-it says "is entrapped a Denizen of the Warp," as-in, one. You really think a single Plaguebearer can provide a 5++ to an entire tank? Or a single Bloodletter the same?

Well a single daemon gives a soul grinder a 5++ so sure.

Here's a fluff segment for blood slaughterers:

"They bear a clear resemblance to the greater Brass Scorpions of Khorne, yet Inquisitors and savants know not to rely on mere appearance when attempting to comprehend anything about the workings of Chaos. Brass Scorpions are almost certainly higher-order daemons of Khorne given physical, albeit mechanical, form by the rituals of the Dark Magi.

Blood Slaughterers, however, appear to be machines constructed for the purpose of binding a daemon inside their shell. Unlike the Brass Scorpion, the body of the Blood Slaughterer has also been observed to mount a containment vessel thought to contain the bound essence of a daemon of the Warp."

At worst a daemon engine has a random daemon of varying import stuck in it.

Dudeface wrote:

Oddly nobody is pushing for increases on cultists, pox walkers or plaguebearers. Given the engines move to 3+, I'd hope their piloting daemons do as well.

There are more demons that hit on 3's than demons that hit on 4's currently


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I find this thread quite funny. I think it was more a twist of the setting to make CSM lose all of their Meltabombs or veteran abilities than turn the statline of Daemon engines into proper monsters.

agreed 100%.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Oddly nobody is pushing for increases on cultists, pox walkers or plaguebearers. Given the engines move to 3+, I'd hope their piloting daemons do as well.

There are more demons that hit on 3's than demons that hit on 4's currently


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I find this thread quite funny. I think it was more a twist of the setting to make CSM lose all of their Meltabombs or veteran abilities than turn the statline of Daemon engines into proper monsters.

agreed 100%.

But are you happy with 3+ horrors and plague bearers?

That doesn't support your assertion.

Nothing there says the Warpsmith just plucks a random Khorne Daemon. It'd make sense that the more powerful the engine, the more powerful the Daemon you need-so a Defiler might have something halfway between a Herald and a Greater, while a Maulerfiend might have a more ordinary Herald.

And a Brass Scorpion, well, that's bound to have a very potent daemon indeed.

Edit: And I'd be fine with 3+ Horrors and Bearers. I don't think it's needed, but it certainly wouldn't break the setting or anything.

 Irbis wrote:

Except people who don't like this change are precisely the ones who don't look at it in the vacuum. SM/CSM design was that they always had better stats than other units in the game and were only matched by elites such as aspect warriors, most dangerous tyranids, or best made necrons. Now with every clown and his uncle getting 3+ the marines should go to 2+ for parity (of completely lose both their game and fluff niche) - gee, do you see a tiny problem here?

So you agree that demon engines should be 3+